[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] w [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] good afternoon everyone I let to call this Tampa city council meeting to order at this time um may I have roll call Carlson here cat here Clint Dennis Henderson present viea he just said he was here okay I see him Miranda and Manis gaka here we have a fiscal qu Mr Shelby I know that two council members are going to be virtual this evening uh if they can um I see one council member okay um council member Clen Denon can you hear me and can we hear you most important I can hear you yes I can okay great um well I think what we'll do is we'll wait till councilman Vieira unless you just want to take the motion now um to include both council members to permit both council members clendenon and Vieira from participating remotely tonight can I get a motion we have a motion from council member have a second second council member Henderson all in favor I Mr Shelby a reminder to the council members and I'll have to repeat this when council member Vieira comes on uh please um make sure that when you vote um that your microphone is on and it's properly recorded by the clerk also that if you cannot be seen then you will have be assumed to have not been present so is uh difficult as that might be just know for quasi judicial matters um it requires you to be present to be able to render your decision thank you yes uh I I had a little hard time hearing Allan so I don't know if that's something we should fix now maybe testing two3 321 a little bit louder would be helpful testing two not you I can yell at you all right if cttv can raise the volume on council member Clint Denon all right thank you would you like to go through housekeeping yes sir all right go ahead sir all right same thas development coordination our housekeeping items tonight are um start with agenda item number 10 Rez 2447 this is a Mis notice and cannot be heard please remove it from the agenda what number was that again say it again 10 number all right we have a motion to remove item number 10 second from council member herch second from council member Henderson all in favor all right any oppos all right right agenda item number 11 Rez 2455 this has been requested to be withdrawn please remove it from the agenda move we have a motion from council member Miranda to withdraw item 11 second council member herac all in favor I any oppose all right all right agenda item number 12 RZ 2490 is a Mis notice and cannot be heard please remove it from the agenda do we have a motion motion from council member her second from Council mirand all in favor and that was for number 12 and then 13 agenda item number 13 RZ 24102 is a Mis notice and cannot be heard please remove it from the we have counc counc Miranda all in favor all any opposed anything else um then just as a reminder agenda items number one and agenda item number two will be opened together um once you close the hearing you will vote on agenda item number one and then two thank you very much yeah motion motion first do that huh you want to open did you open the hearings not yet have a motion to open all public hearings we have a motion from council member Miranda second from council member herac all in favor I any opposed um anything else Miss Wells thank you Mr chairman Kate Wells with the legal department wanted to take a moment to make a statement with regard to the penny litigation and City council's authority to consider these types of applications it's not something my office intends to do at the beginning of every hearing but with a lot of the questions that we've been asked with articles that we have seen recently we thought it might be worthwhile one last time to make a statement so as I have previously advised city council and consistent with the city attorney's representations to city council at the beginning of its meeting on Thursday December 5th it is the city's position that city council may continue to hear and make decisions on applications for rezoning as you know the Court's order and Liberty Hospitality versus the city of Tampa wherein judge Mo questioned City council's authority to make quasi judicial decisions is under review by the second district court of appeals until the second DCA rules on the appropriateness of Judge Mo's decision the Court's ruling is not final and in a hearing on December 3rd in a separate but related matter involving Liberty Hospitality judge Mo reiterated that her decision as a circuit court judge is never binding on anyone other than the parties to the case with respect to the presidential value or impact of her decision on others that are not parties to the case she said and I quote it certainly occurred to me that you know if I were a land use lawyer and I got a hold of this opinion that I might you know think that I wonder if this could apply to my clients and it certainly crossed my mind but I have to I just have to reject that to reinforce this point in an order issued more recently on November 25th in the Onyx and E litigation the court recognized City council's authority to conduct quasi judicial hearings by noting that the petitioner onx and East had their right to seek review of city council's decision through a writ of curari but did not two different Circuit Court judges two different opinions regarding City council's authority to act in a quasi judicial Manner and until the second DCA acts upon the matter before it the office of the City attorney will continue to advise city council that it may continue to hear and make decisions on applications for resoning with all that said each applicant and land use practitioner must independently decide how to proceed on behalf of their clients if an applicant wishes to continue their application to a future date when there may be less uncertainty the city would not object to a request for continuing thank you thank you very much all right uh yes if you could just recognize uh councilman Vieira is now yes councilman Vieira is online sir can you hear us and can we hear him please unmute yourself sir no we cannot all right uh just a reminder again uh council member Vieira um in order to uh uh be uh counting as participating uh you have to be uh visible on screen just so you know that when you're not visible the presumption is that you are not participating in the hearing just a reminder thank you thank you very much item number one Mr chairman yes maybe you ask those anyone after that reading if anyone want to withdrawal to a later date the beginning Mr Shelby uh council member brought up a point does anybody to ask if anybody wants to withdraw or do anything at this point after it's council's pleasure if you want to make that request is there anybody based on uh uh representations made by the city attorney's office does anybody wish to address uh a request to withdraw their case and a reminder Council and a reminder to the public tonight with regard to quasi judicial matters I do want to remind Council and the public of the rule it states no request for a continuance by the applicant or petitioner shall be granted at a quasi judicial public hearing after the applicant petitioner has completed its initial presentation unless upon determination by city council that it is necessary for purposes of procedural due process so I just want to bring that to the Public's attention and remind councel thank you thank you very much all right Mr Salmons go ahead yeah I'd like to ask the clerk to share please yeah we're discussing that Mr chairman uh for the for the purposes of the fact that you're hearing them both together and to spe things along we could swear in all the witnesses at this all right if there's anybody that's going to speak on anything this evening please stand raise your right hand and we'll swear you in and Mr chairman I haven't used this in a while but because there might be lengthy people coming in at the end of the meeting I'm just going to place a reminder up there that when you do come up please do just when you state your name just also remind and for the record that you have been sworn thank you thank you all right Mr Salmons number one ra Salmons development coordination presenting file number vac 23-30 the applicant is Cowboys and Pirates LLC the property address is 72 West Columbus Drive this is a proposed vacating request to vacate the alley lying north of Amelia Avenue south of Columbus Drive east of Glenwood Drive and west of North Boulevard this application was filed on September 11 2023 the applicant reason for application is associated with resoning and area development the alley was created by Subdivision plat the existing rideway is approximately 4,464 Square ft this is an aerial view of proposed vacating in yellow applicants properties in red this is plaid of Ridgewood Park Ali in questions here RightWay and mapping Atlas sheet showing proposed vacating in red the alley again Columbus and Boulevard North Boulevard this is an image of the alley looking North from Amelia Avenue and an image of the alley looking south from Columbus Drive staff has no objections to this SPAC request easement reservations are required by Wastewater too and too people's gas special conditions natural resources comply with chapter 27 regarding tree preservation and sight design Bry improvements placed adjacent to trees and vacated areas I'm available if you have any questions any questions thank you very much sir all right who next yes ma'am please state your name good evening Isabelle Albert uh with half I've been sworn in and I'm representing the applicant so um staff did do a good job at presenting um our request uh what we want to do is vacate uh this right away here and also uh during the review there was no objections from any reviewing agencies the Wastewater Department made some comments and in discussion with uh the engineer about how to address some of those lines that need to be redesigned and it just so happens that it's really affecting phase one and that is already under review and construction plan so that's being addressed during that time now the reason why overall while we're requesting this is because you're going to hear next a resoning uh to Unified plan and this was just to make the site better uh to design it and to provide better uh fluidity uh with the transportation and um you know just to allow us to be more flexible with the design to make it better designed and I'm here if you have any questions any questions for the petitioner I see no one is there anybody is there anything further for this if not I'll ask for public comment you're good okay is there anybody in the public that wishes to speak on item number one item number one and Mr Mr chairman that is for the public that is just the the Vaca the vacating not the resoning this is just for the vacating of the alley if there's anybody here from the public come on up Sir you're going to vote on them both at the same time we can wait we're going to take these as separate votes but what'll happen Mr chairman just so the public knows is we will hear um number one and then we will hear number two then we will close both okay at the time and then take the votes consecutively take the vacation first and then the reson let's just do it separately and allow for double the public comment all right if you want to speak on it number one is that I don't yes ma'am please say your name good evening Megan E2 address 25 09 North Glennwood Drive I'm also the vi um treasurer of the Ridgewood Park civic association so I've been part of these conversations my P personal property is adjacent to this um not the vacation but the property um itself and I have some issues with regards um first and foremost I'm sorry if we can forgive me yes sirry this is a coun Martin Shelby city council attorney is it council's pleasure to just take public comment on the vacate at this point so if you're here to speak on things related to the resoning then that'll you'll have that opportunity when n two comes up okay well I'm not sure how you guys want to play this out but the vacation of this area is concerning to us as Ridgewood Park civic association because the overall site plan well well with regard to the vacation and council's uh criteria to be able to weigh that issue if you want to speak to that this would be the time to do that so anything that relates to the VAC you can talk about it now and you'll have the 3 minutes um um uh on the resoning when item number two is taken that's count that's council's Direction okay uh we did meet with a developer as the Ridgewood Park civic association on um I believe it was um the 21st and through that conversation the only reason we met with them is because we did receive the resoning and also the vacation of this alley and during that meeting it was news to us that they wanted to actually change the site plan and use this vacation of the alley which will actually change the circulation of the site itself it also changes some of the property owners um along those areas or housing in that area so we were a little taken off guard by that um we work our best interest is to look out for our neighbors and the site itself and the circulation of that site so we have some concerns and I guess we can address that at the at the resoning component so but that's are my statements at this time I do want to make a note that for the resoning and for the vacation that my personal information that I was sent to you all was not included in the agenda packet for both this item and the other item and I did bring that to everyone's attention today in an email and earlier this week so I don't know if you have that information thank you very much thank you yes I'm just thinking it to myself and I'm thinking that uh that they got to understand that these two although they're separate they're both up for something that's going to happen there possibly and if you have any any any thought of your mind of not having the alley clo I don't know if that Al is being used I I assume it is but and garbage is being picked up there I assume that again I make an assumption on my part but if you feel because one is based on the other one and the other one is based with each other and two are make a component of one so if you have any doubt in your mind about any one of them you better speak about the alley and you have two of them if you have hearing one and hearing two and I'm not saying we haven't heard all the facts of it yet but I don't want somebody to say well I got left off cuz I forgot to speak about the Alle but chairman again I'm just saying if you want to speak on both subject they're separated they're not United Okay uh yes sir come on up please say your name hi my name is Tony monk I live at 257 North bwood Drive with my wife uh same house it makes the marriage a lot more convenient um I just wanted to take this opportunity since our information that we sent wasn't included in the packet but then the developer response was included in the packet that seemed kind of unfair so we made hard copies just so you have it for the record if I could inquire sir if you don't mind if I can Mr chairman sure um Martin Shelby city council attorney when you say included in the packet do you mean on the city's the city's website the agenda packet so our correspondence was not included in that full packet so we assumed that this Council never received it um and we outlined our concerns in that um so IT addresses the vacation and the resounding thank you very much is there anybody else that wishes to speak on the VAC vacating of the alley yes sir come on up please sayate your name my name is Nick Carter I live at 24 North Glenwood Drive I have been sworn in uh Glenwood Drive is obviously within rwood Park uh I'm here as a a resident a property owner and also the vice president of the Ridgewood Park civic association I think myself and my family chose to live in Ridgewood Park because of its proximity to to downtown we know it's an area that is going through a lot of regeneration and with that we expect to see development both both residential and Commercial some of that will be good some of that will be bad our expectation is that the the city council the elected officials will protect us from things that are are blatantly bad in terms of our association um we are not an anti-development association um we're very supportive of good development in terms of this particular development um the association met with the developer the initial plans uh we walk through with the developer and we were supportive of them um however this next iteration of the plans with the vacation of the alley behind Glenwood Drive is just simply something that the association and the residents cannot support the the alleyway itself is is narrow it was not intended for commercial vehicle traffic um there's going to be significant noise and pollution from the vehicles there's obviously a devaluation of property for those houses as well the houses were there before the plan development as I've said we are definitely not um anti-development um certainly there are some waivers being requested on here and the association you know has no issue with any of those waivers it's really the the use of the alleyway uh where we have the issue in terms of our residents to back onto the alleyway like most of us in Florida we spend a lot of time in their rear yards it's one of the great things about this community we have the weather to do that and if you could put yourself in their shoes and you've got commercial vehicle traffic running behind your house I would ask you the question would you like that I would suspect the answer is no um in which case we would expect fully that this application is denied I appreciate the time thank you thank you very much is there anybody else that wishes to speak wait we have one more person coming out yes the meantime I just wanted to make sure that um both council members Clen clend Denon and Vieira know that the packet we got was actually emailed to us so we did yeah receive it um so we don't have something that you don't yep I know it yes ma'am please say your name good evening Stephanie Pointer you'd think in the last couple weeks that when they got the continuance they might have cleared this up with the neighborhood I don't know because that was an accidental continuance because everybody knows that you're not supposed to have a continuance after you present so um and that's okay but I I would like to point out that um you have neighbors here who are saying they want the alleyway to stay open and for the developer to spend $573 because I seriously doubt it's changed since I had to file a vacation for an Alleyway um and then they get a whole bunch of extra square footage for free and the neighbors get nothing h i support the neighborhood thank you yes sir were you going to say something no all right anybody else if not you'll have rebuttal ma'am applicant sir please your name council members good evening William Malloy 325 South Boulevard Tampa Florida I have been sworn in um we're not in unsympathetic by any means to any neighbors's objection to what we're asking for I just want to point out very clearly so that we're all on the same page with this that this is what we're asking to vacate this is the only partial that would be directly adjacent or affected by that vacating I I mean I can't speak to traffic circulation in general in the neighborhood what the closing of that alley would do to that but I can tell you I driven that site probably two dozen times and no one uses that alley it is overgrown it's disused um I believe that our developer our client coming in making the improvements he would would actually better the situation for everyone thank you let me ask you sir if this were not to get approved vacated would it affect the development because it's it's under construction or part of it is because this is something that's coming it would not be helpful um it I won't say it's fatal but it would not be helpful the the land that the alley uh that how it's contemplated into our development it's integral right now uh we think it makes sense vacating it it makes sense for bringing the project together because the reason we are here together is tonight is to unify two different site plans um so if this were denied we well I'll I'll leave it at that it it is essential to our design all right thank you very much anybody else Mr Shel yes uh Council and to inform the public that the clerk has verified that the emails that were provided uh are in on base so I just want thank you for bringing that to the to our attention thank you very much if I can Mr chairman sure I might as well take the opportunity now to ask city council um to um receive and file all of the expart communications that have been available for public inspection um in City council's uh um in the U in the system thank you we have motion to receive and follow from council member Miranda second council member Henderson all in favor I any oppose and a reminder Council moving forward if you have had any verbal expar Communications please disclose them prior to the start of each hearing thank you thank you very much all right if there's anything else can I get a motion to close this is just CL uh yes sir council member Clint Denon what you I said motion to close motion to close from council member Clint second council member her all in favor I any opposed and councilman ver was that your voice yes I I guys I'm sorry we've had problems you're good we can hear you now whatever I'm I'm thank God good thank you thank you very much thank you to Brian yes sir thanks for being here virtually all right um the we have close of public hearing uh council member Miranda would you like to read item number one I I skip council member Henderson file number vac 2330 an ordinance being presented for first reading consideration excuse me yeah yes I'm going to hear the resoning is that not the case you're going to take them you chose not to you're going to hear them totally separately forgive me councilman for interrupting I forgive you thank you file number vac 2330 an ordinance being presented for first reading consideration an ordinance of the city of Tampa Florida vacating closing discontinuing and abandoning that Alleyway right of way located north of Amilia Avenue south of Columbus Drive east of Glenwood Drive and west of North Boulevard within the plat of Ridgewood Park Subdivision in the city of Tampa Hillsburg County Florida as more particularly described in section two here of subject to certain covenants conditions and restrictions as more particularly set forth here in providing for enforcement and penalties for violations providing for definitions interpretations and repealing conflicts providing for severability providing an effective date do we have a second second we have a second from council member Clint Denon and Mr chair may I speak to this before we vote go ahead sir uh I just want to explain my vote to folks from the neighborhoods that are concerned on why I'm going to vote way I'm voting um as many of you all know I've been a a major advocate of the street car expansion and our goal is to expand the street car up um Florida and then wrap it around around the ailia Columbus intersection and come back down Tampa street it's it's going to end up being a major um benefit to the community in a transportation Cor in order to facilitate and support that type of infrastructure Improvement we need to have these types of mixed use developments and and the increased density along these corridors so anybody that's that and generally within a full city block of these Transportation corridors could probably expect over the you know coming years to experience this type of change in those neighborhoods in that in that block and I know some of that change is painful but I think in the end the the added benefit of having this type of INF infrastructure within walking distance will enhance your property values and enhance your quality of life where you'll be able to literally live um carfree and be able to transition through Tampa Heights downtown Tampa Channel Side water Street into eore City along with the uh high-speed train that'll ultimately come into eore City and be able to get connected to the street car I think you guys are poised to be a really exciting area at the city of Tampa along with the extension of the Riverwalk on the West Side the great things are coming to the neighborhood and I think in the end you guys are going to benefit and so I'm going to support this vacation thank you very much anything else if not we have a motion from council member Henderson second from council member Clint Denon let's take a roll call vote Carlson no herch yes Clint Denon yes Henderson yes Vieira yes Miranda no and manaro no motion carried with Carlson Miranda and maniso voting no second reading and adoption will be held on January 9th 2025 at 10:30 a.m. and city council chambers 315 East Kennedy Boulevard third floor Tampa Florida 336 2 thank you very much item number two which is now the resoning which will give the uh the audience the opportunity to speak uh on this item go ahead sir thank you Sam Thomas development coordination agenda item number two is Rez 2512 a request toone 72 West Columbus Drive 2502 and 2504 North Boulevard and folio number 1833 55.5 from residential single family 50 commercial General and plan development to plan development for storefront residential um all commercial neighborhood uses um and then I just would like to provide one clarification that this case has not been continued before um and with that I'll turn this over to Emily with the Planning Commission yes ma'am yes ma'am please say your name Emily faen Planning Commission staff um and I have been sworn in um the subject sit is located within the central Tampa planning district and the W in the Ridgewood Park neighborhood it's also located um within the coastal planning area specifically evacuation Zone B uh the subject site is here and the surrounding area has a mix of uses commercial uses mostly along West Columbus and single family detached moving uh further south and east of no I'm sorry west of the subject site um they detached single family homes in a park uh and vacant Parcels are to the west of the site and attached um single family uses multif family um are to the east along with commercial uses again the subject site is here outlined in purple um the dark brown color here is the residential 35 future land use designation which also is present to the east of the subject site the remaining part of the subject site is under the Community mix ju 35 designation which is present along West Columbus Drive and finally the uh like orangish color is the residential T designation Planning Commission staff finds the request consistent with the density and intensity anticipated under the residential 35 and the community makes chose 35 designations due to the subject site being within a half mile of the Tampa Heights Urban Village which is directly across the street um and the site is also over 1 acre the site is eligible to use land use policy 5.1.6 this policy allows land divided by more than one plan category to proportionally weigh the floor area ratio throughout the entire site and permitted uses within each land use plan category can be considered anywhere on the site throughout through an approved PD zoning per General note 16 the applicant is utilizing the blending policy and they've indicated a blended F of 0.95 on the site plan while the Ridgewood Park neighborhood is primarily developed with single family detached uses the request supports policy direction that seeks to provide a transition from higher density to lower density single family areas the PD proposes three buildings varying in height from two stories to four Stories the highest structure is along West Columbus Drive and arterial roadway and a Transit emphasis Corridor and it steps down to the western and southern structures meeting the policy direction that promotes development that is sensitive to adjacent uses to minimize impacts to the surrounding area Additionally the request will be developed within the existing block and lot configuration there is an alley to the West that it will be one point of vehicular access which is encouraged by the comprehensive plan policy land use policy 4.4.6 um the comprehensive plan additionally promotes pedestrian safety and encourages commercial development that enhances the city of Tampa's character and Ambiance commercial development is encouraged to connect building entrances to public rights of way and provide sidewalk the PRD proposes 5 foot sidewalks and chain trees along North Boulevard and West Columbus Drive the proposed resoning supports comprehensive plans policies related to housing the City's population as the comprehensive plan encourages new housing on vacant and underutilized land the PD zoning would allow for development that is comparable and compatible with the anticipated development pattern under the residential 35 and CMU 35 designations which is consistent with the comprehensive plan that concludes my presentation you have any questions thank you very much any questions NOP thank you very much yes sir same thas development coordination um before we get started I do have a revised revision sheet that I would like to provide Council and the clerk with um I'll also put one in the overhead real quick just for the benefit of um council members Vieira and Clinton and I also have an extra copy councilman and clendon and um if you've been able to see this long enough just let me know or if you'd like me to leave it up for longer I can leave it up for longer before I get started thank you I'm good all right thank you yeah all right so we will get started with an aerial view of the subject site so you can see the subject site outlined here in red along Columbus Drive North Boulevard and West Amilia um west and south of the subject site you have a mix of rs50 and RS6 zoning um as Emily mentioned you mainly you have single family detached homes here to the north you have single family detached homes as well you have a pocket of commercial General zoning here along Columbus Drive in North Boulevard um once you cross over North Boulevard you're in the Tampa Heights overlay um within this portion you have a mixture of rm16 rm2 and rm18 Zoning districts so it's a mix of multif family single family attached single family semi- detached and detached homes it's quite a mix of uses over here and then as you go farther south um where you see this Ro that should actually say PDA it's the same PDA that you see over here that's the heights mixed use development that is on either side of North Boulevard so that's just to give you a quick orientation of the surrounding area so here is the site plan provided by the applicant um the applicant is proposing three structures 1 2 and three um that is a total of 52550 ft of um space that includes 37 units and 11,550 ft of commercial space on the ground floor um the commercial spaces are located along Columbus Drive on the bottom floors of these buildings and then along North Boulevard for building one and building two um building one is proposed to be 39 ft or two stories and it includes 2250 ft of retail on the for on the first floor and then it includes eight residential units on the second floor um a similar version of this was approved um under pdz 2330 and there are a few like differences with this so I would like to show the site plan that was approved for that just to point out those few differences to clarify for Council that while this is acting as phase two there are some minor differences between the site plan and the other site plan so this is um the old site plan that was approved for the site originally so just to walk you through the changes that are different I highlighted them on here um so one of the first changes is that this front set back along North Boulevard was originally proposed to be 5 ft it is now proposed to be 13 ft under the site plan that you're voting on today um the sidewalk along North Boulevard was originally proposed to be 6t is now proposed to be 5T the retail on the first floor has decreased by 210 square ft um and then Additionally you guys did approve this alley to be vacated on the rear so now there will not not be any parking off the rear of the alley and solid waste has been located to another um part of the site and then these residential accessory uses which is just storage has been relocated from here to the southern part of the site so I just wanted to go through those changes real quick so that you could get a visual on what the differences are between this one and the new one before you today so here is the site plan again so you can kind of see those residential use has removed here the alley has now been vacated and then the solid waste has been relocated to this portion of the subject site um let's see here so we'll move on to building two building two is proposed to be 63 ft or four stories and it includes 7,200 squ ft of retail on the first floor and 21 residential units on Floors 2 through 4 and then building three which is proposed here off West Columbus Drive and then the alley is supposed to be 39 ft or two stories and it includes 2,100 ft of retail on the first Flo and eight residential units on the second floor 83 parking spaces are required and 63 parking spaces are being provided access to the site is being provided from West ailia Avenue here North Boulevard here and then from the alley of West Columbus to the site there um I would like to point out that the applicant has done a really good job at activating the street front along the corner of North Boulevard and West Columbus Drive with the 13ft setbacks and proposed um dining receding area with the applicants and then they've also um proposed a pedestrian prominade here in the vacating vacated alley along West Columbus Drive which helps encourage The Pedestrian activity and activates the street front um so I'll go through the elevations now so here are the elevations for building one this is your East Elevation this is your west elevation this is the South elevation for building one and the north elevation for building one this is the north elevation for building two and this is the South elevation for building to here's your west elevation an East Elevation for building too and then lastly moving to building three this is your East Elevation your west elevation South and North elevation I'll walk you through some pictures of the site real quick the site is a little big so I do kind of have a decent amount of photos to provide you all with so this is looking East on ailia Avenue so you have North Boulevard here this is ailia this is the alley that's been vacated and this is uh phase one that's currently under construction this is looking um South so we were looking East before on ailia now we're looking South on ailia across from the alley you can see some of the single family homes in the rid of Park neighborhood this is looking North this is the vacated alley single family home and then phase one that's currently under construction this is looking North on the vacated alley Columbus Drive is up here here's the subject site this is looking South directly across from the subject site so this is the corner of North Boulevard and West milia Avenue so directly behind this photo is the subject site this is looking South on North Boulevard at the intersection of West Amilia in North Boulevard says looking towards uh the heights Mi use development and then this is the north Direction along at the intersection of West ailia North Boulevard you can see some of the new construction in the area and then the site that's currently under construction this is looking east across the way at the intersection so this is Tampa Heights overlay on this side of North Boulevard this is looking South on North Boulevard so you can have the subject site here and then this is the intersection of ailia and North bulevard down to the South and you can see some of that new construction that's happened in Tampa Heights this is looking east across North Boulevard you have West Columbus Drive here this is a brewery at the intersection there this is looking North at the intersection of Columbus Drive in North Boulevard so this is North Boulevard here this is West Columbus Drive this is looking West on Columbus Drive subject site is here and you can see it goes on down this is looking South down the alley that was just vacated so you have the subject site on either side of the alley there we're moving farther west along Columbus Drive we're getting closer to the alley that's going to be used as access the subject site is right here so this is looking Southwest down the alley that goes into rwood Park from West Columbus Drive so this is the alley that will be used for Access um you have a new uh single family home that's being constructed here off of the alley that they're using to load from and this we're further south down the alley this is the subject site here uh you have single family detached homes here so this is we've came all the way down to the end of the alley where it goes from Columbus drive to West Amilia that um was not vacated so you have the single family homes off of the West ailia there and then now we're looking back up north that alley that will be used so the subject site is at the end of this alley and that's where Columbus Drive is so I'll put the site plan back up development review and compliance staff found the request inconsistent um see the findings from natural resources and transportation development coordination did find the request consistent though um while the development proposes multiple natural resource waivers the applicant has proposed to accommodate all the required trees on site and meet the required Green Space additionally while there are single family detach Homes located west and south of the subject site the applicant has designed the site in a way that minimizes the impact of these homes and encourages walkability in an area the city that has seen significant Redevelopment and that is also within close proximity to the central business district notwithstanding staff's findings of inconsistency should it be the pleasure of council to approve the waivers as identified in the staff report and the application modifications to the site plan is shown on the revised revision sheet must be completed between first and second reading these revisions will not resolve the inconsistent findings I'm available for any questions any questions thank you very much sir applicant good evening for the record Isabelle Albert representing the applicant I have been sworn in 1,000 flash drive I'm going to go through these quickly because um staffed a very good job but you know the location of the site um this is the future land use that staff uh discussed this is the zoning and uh this is the location of oh sorry no the other way okay perfect thank you sorry about that um and this is the location of phase one um that you that was approved again just a request staff did a good job explaining uh the idea here when we started we had the phase one here and then uh later the applicant was able to purchase these two lots and had this is the vision that they had they wanted the buildings up to the up front with the parking behind it and um then because we had this little area here he's envisioning like a prominade and this is not just for the residents but this is for the whole neighborhood this the area uh with seedings and plants and everything he's the that's that's his vision here we first came in uh September 2023 uh very similar plan but we had an AIS here an access here and an access here we went through DRC comments and one of the comments that we received was from solid waste and solid ways had some concerns about maneuvering throughout the site with these all these tight corners and we looked at it and unfortunately we were going over a couple of spaces and curve cuts and so we were um already already having to re starting to redesign the the internal to make that work at the same time um the phase one is under review and construction and we received pretty harsh news from too saying that we had to be 16 ft from their from their lines and fortunately we have three poles in front of our property this is on North bivard remember we are at 5T setb now we have to push an additional all the way to 1 ft by doing that obviously it has a Domino's effect it's not the news that we wanted to hear so this domino effect was we had to move building one and two to the safety setback from the lines and then by doing that it moved building three but also by doing that building one I mean building two and three this distance in between was reduced which affected the radius axis radius so obviously cannot use that anymore for uh uh solid waste and they already had some concerns from the beginning and so there's a public RightWay here and they able to use that as their access for the the um for their for their trucks and this is designed as a oneway in and the access is going to be oneway in out there's no out it's only to enter in and uh then we had to redesign the internal drive to do this change but at the end of the day when we looked at this it kind of turned out to be a good setback because we are now able to provide this nicer you know Ambiance along the street this is the rendering the vision and the the elevations that you have with now we're able to provide an area out front that he originally wanted and then we have those residential on top we looked so um before Thanksgiving I received an email and a call from um Miss Alderman caly aderman who's the president of the association and she was like hey I saw this and can we can we meet with the rest of the association so we met with the rest of the association and there's one individual that you heard had some concerns about the access to to their Tred to explain the reasoning why we had to do that uh we received the the letter of opposition from the association and we Tred to respond to all the items that were uh depicted and I can go through them very quickly but we did look at a an other way to access the site so I asked my co-worker can you do me a vehicle tracking analysis of what would happen if we enter from North Boulevard so he provided this and then he showed me and I failed to tell him that I'm sorry but this here is actually a building and it's the underground parking it only has clearance of 14 ft and solid was need 16 ft so we couldn't do that so he tried from the north tried going up here and he could not make it could not make it work again with this tight turn we're going into these parking en lower and I I explained I said you know we're very limited this Paving area is what we can use for the solid ways a safe way for them to maneuver around in and out of the site and it does show from the traffic analysis that is the best way to enter the site and exit out here again this is a oneway in and only an entrance here but with all the the movements of the site moving there's obviously going to be some waivers and so you know we have uh buffer to buffer used to sorry used to use uh waivers we're required to have a 15ot buffer and we were providing 8T here heat here and then smaller here this is where the storage is and then the buildings over here and the uh UVA vua area we also have a waiver to the uh birth from two to zero that was a one concern that the association raised and we were able to regroup as a team we we said okay well you know what we can just do box trucks because those are those locals we see are pretty small so they don't need they're not the big delivery trucks or they're like the smaller Buck trucks we're committed to that no unloading within the alley or any of the public Street all of it has to be internally and internally we're going to have dedicated space for um loading unloading uh during off peak hours we spoke with staff about this some of these cannot be entered as conditions but we're I'm saying this on the record that this is what we're committed to we're also requesting waivers to parking now the city of Tampa as well the it they don't have a calculation for mixed use as such as this all than God the UL has this is Urban Land Institute they came up with a manual to specifically calculate what's needed in this kind of scenario and it came up with 62 spaces would be needed at your Peak and busiest time with the residential and the their retail and our site provides 63 spaces this brings us to staff finding although staff finding could not find it supportable because of the landscaping and traffic but they did find that this is a compatible development it's a good location for it it's um on two major uh uh boulevards and um Planning Commission had five pages of policies and how we do meet all those policies and you know the policy direction for the transition we purposely had the buildings along the front the highest one at the at the corner and then going down transitioning down to lower development we also have the policy direction to utilize the alley which is what we're doing going to improve this alley and then we also have uh policies for mix use development which is encouraged on mixus corridors and then Sam um did go through the uh changes to plan site plan although this is something that we would present a second hearing but we did go through that we did address all of these um and this you know addresses all the comments that we received the uh we met with staff to make sure that we were um answering and and and providing the the information they wanted on the site plan and they agreed that this is um what they that it meets what they were requesting although there is some opposition but there's also some support we have domain home here they're under construction uh they're building a house they are heavily invested in this area this is not their F first home in the area but they do love the fact that we have this development here at the corner and they also supported the uh improvements to the to the alley we also have Neo homes over here they are um we had discussions with them and they informed us that they can you move it up oh I'm sorry sorry thank you um this is Neo Holmes here they have um uh someone that they're really discussing uh closely to build a home there and that person reached out to us and they said you know we had some discussions and they the only ick they had was this one foot we are doing here and so we worked with him redesigned it and then just that's right we could do this so then we increased the buffer to 8 ft uh and then move this over sort of like a redesign discussion with us and we were able to accommodate them and also another great support is the Tampa Heights Association and I think and I love this as the last one it is the perfect quote of how I see this development and how we envision this development and we're very excited to see that they do agree um and they saw what we're looking for which is a solid example for smart midsize mix use it has ample ground floor retail it provides multif family which they not in the neighborhood it has that step down effect and then um so yeah I I thought that was a great one I'm here if you have any questions this concludes my presentation and if you have any questions U Mr Malloy or I are available council member thank you just one question are any of the 37 units set aside for affordable housing no that was not in our discussions but it's not something that I will not bring back to the table to to the client thank you very much thank you all right is there anybody in the public that wishes to speak on item number two yes sir please state your name y um Hony monk I live at 257 North Glenwood Drive I have been sworn in and I am a landscape architect an urban designer and a certified Arborist and uh the first 15 years of my career were in Land Development so we're very familiar with this type of stuff and we generally support everything they're doing there what council member Pinon said what the heights people said which that quote may have been from a year ago and we wrote a letter of support a year ago and I convinced my neighbors to support this went to our meetings and said y'all we got to support this it's the right kind of thing that we need at that time this connection didn't exist and this so our house is right here I drew my little archery that con nection didn't exist that's the thing that we had the most heartburn about um we think that the site could be reasonably redesigned it's not a technical issue that prevents it from redesigned it's a time and money issue you would have to redesign buildings you would have to reconfigure your site um they say unforeseen conditions there's a difference between unforeseen and unknowable nobody hid the Toco lines like your consultant should have known that there's an offset from a too power line line that you can't build a three or four story building up next to a too line you should know that you need to have a garbage truck come through um and so we if it weren't for this vacation and resoning we wouldn't even have known this and we would have woken up one day with a whole bunch of cars coming and going behind our house we're generally supported we just don't like the idea of all the people who are going to come here and enjoy this place and the 37 residents taking the most convenient way to get in here mean l literally right behind our house um we said yes in my backyard a year ago and we got the rug pulled out from under us and we only get three minutes and so we need your help I think that the Suburban style Land Development code doesn't really have the tools to deliver a good design but the PD does and we can both protect the neighbors quality of life and have good Urban infill Development but in order to do that we need the support from this Council and we think we can work with the developer um we want whatever concession we come to to be specific and enforceable and tied to the plan and the resoning so that it's not just a vague promise that we're going to do our take the utmost care as they said about our concerns with the impacts to trees to off-site trees um we think we can get there like like really positively we can get there all we got to do is work through this connection onto the alley find another way to circulate through the site and you'll have the support of the immediate Neighbors and I'll go again and get the neighborhood I'll try to convince my neighbors to support this and we can have a positive outcome so we hope that you'll give us time to have that positive outcome thank you thank you very much next speaker good evening megan2 2507 North Glenwood Drive I've been sworn in um you've heard me before um this is currently right my backyard it's my backyard is an extension of my home I do spend time in that area my question is how is the developer going to based on this drawing going to enforce the oneway into the alley for garbage only how does one enforce that I see residents retail people coming in through that way there'll be constant vehicle noise pollution um traffic safety issues things of that nature we have other neighbors that haven't been address they've sent letters that have access alley garages how is that going to impact them as people are flowing up and down this alley to enter to the development uh they've written letters as well so I have concerns for my neighbors to the South that have alley access garages they are not being taken in consideration um also what about the noise pollution traffic lighting safety um Quality of Life concerns this is a hardship for me personally but also as I represent this um the Rood Park Association um so how are we going to enforce this is my question how do you enforce a an alley that's supposed to be two-way it's a public alley and the developer saying it's just going to go one way how do you enforce it just for garbage is there a sign is there a gate is someone letting them in every morning or how many times are they coming what does this noise look like and there's also impact to a tree that is on our property that's a grand Live Oak now our neighborhood associate Association and myself included and my husband are concerned about the tree loss in our neighborhood and we started a tree initiative and working with the developers on that and trying to work with the city and keep Tampa Bay beautiful the impact of driving a garbage truck or multiple Vehicles over that area now will impact the roots therefore possibly decaying that tree that'll follow that's an impact on my my hardship and my neighborhood and my property value so um I just want to know how this is going to be enforced if you do approve this tonight and maybe put some type of you know I don't understand how this can happen and be enforced I just don't understand so I'd like to see some type of revision to this area we can work with them um but I just know that my neighbors will be impacted highly by this including myself thank you thank you very much there anybody else that wishes to speak on this rezoning yes sir come on up and please say your name my name is Nick Carter 24 North Glenwood Drive I have been sworn in I'm here my capacity as an an officer of the Ridgewood Park cific Association as well as a resident and property owner we've talked about the noise the light pollution again we are not anti-development we supported this development at the outset I'm surprised theel didn't put up a letter here from our association supporting it but that was based on the original design and it's fabulous that domain homes are supporting it they don't live in our neighborhood they have a profit motive it's fantastic that Neo homes support it with an apparent potential buyer once again that's not a current resident that's a developer that also has a profit motive again we live in this neighborhood we expect a quality of life Toco Poes have already been there is just bad design it's bad traffic flow they have access from Amelia Avenue they have access from North Boulevard we just heard if we raise a building 2 feet the garbage trucks can go through but the developer is unwilling to address this but would rather say to our neighbors our Association members sorry guys our bad but now we're going to put vehicle traffic on the alleyway that was not designed for that again we expect our city leaders to look out for the interests of the residents of the city of Tampa and the residents of Ridgewood Park we are more than happy to work with the developer to come to a resolution that meets everyone's want here I think this development is going to be fantastic and I fully support it not the access Through the Alley it wasn't designed for that and we ask that you deny that thank you thank you very is there anybody else that wishes to yes ma'am please say your name Sandy Sanchez I have not been sworn in is anybody uh has not been sworn in but is going to speak this evening please stand raise your right hand we'll swear you in yes obviously I had not planned to speak however I was here when this was first presented and I saw the enthusiasm of the neighborhood at that time uh for this project because they thought it would be an asset to their Community what you're trying to do that that alley is making it a liability instead of an asset Once you turn that into strictly a road is what you're actually making it is a road you take away the potential of that alley being walkable being able to be used by The Neighborhood they're fighting for their quality of life this is a lovely neighborhood that has a wonderful butterfly farm children go to visit it it's just a very nice neighborhood and they're trying to grasp and keep hold of their quality of life so I ask you to until they can change it to make it work and not use that Aly I ask you to deny this petition thank you very much is there anybody else wishes to speak on this item yes ma'am please say your name hello I'm lcy butel and I'm here on behalf of domain hommes and just want to provide our support for the multi-use um development and also the improved Alleyway we think it's going to be a great addition to also the heights but neighbors and other visitors that come to Tampa Bay as well we have several homes that are being built in that area and that neighborhood and we are in support of the multi-use project thank you very much anybody else if not we go rebuttal there's nobody registered to speak rebuttal applicant good evening again Council William Malloy 325 South Boulevard Tampa Florida and I have been sworn I we hear the neighbors um we understand their concern about the alley access um we've engaged I think as much as we can about this point and fundamentally it comes down to that alley is a public right away and I'm not saying that we have the right to put an arrow there and make it our driveway but I I think it's certainly worth consideration that it's an existing RightWay it's meant for Access for the benefit of everyone around it um you'll see on this my client's property is the benefit of the alley for this there's three single family homes here that do a but the alley and I I cannot say that a tra truck that wasn't previously going down that alley is going to go down that alley when this is developed but the way we see it the way contemplate it the way that we truly intend to structure this development is that allei be one way and refu only uh whether we have to do it by signage by tenant restrictions uh which you guys can't contemplate but it's something we're willing to do we're going to make sure that happens um and again I'd like to point out public RightWay there's nothing to say that a trash truck couldn't be using that alley today that's what South Tampa is trash trucks run behind houses in the Alleyways um to that point I again we understand there's a give and take here we feel like we've given as much as we can on this one um very humbly ask for your support and uh well and Miss Albert's got some more for you thank you it's not Isabelle Albert again for the record it's not like we just decided to do this and move it because we felt like it we went around and around and looked at everything and to redesign the site really is we have to do is flip everything over you put the buildings in the back and the parking in the front that is not what the client wants and that is not what the community wants they want a nice walkable pedestrian um mixed use development it's going to be bringing a lot to the community but safety wise the solid waste has to that's the only access they can do we've tried we we it's not like we haven't looked at other options but we have and with that I conclude our so let me ask you what what can be done between first and second reading regarding that access Mr Malloy mentioned signage you know whatever was um you know possible to to to do what what promise guarantee what can having heard the some of the residents that are living right there you know what can we do moving forward um I think that's really so we did meet with staff and there's things that we can include in things that we can't and I think I would be more comfortable having staff explain what we can or can't do legally on on this oh yeah I can just yeah perfect take off those arrows in the the's two way Mr no I'm just listening and I the alley has been brought up by both sides various times and I'm not trying to explain why I voted the way I did but let me just give you a comparison if there's an alley to be vacated on both sides of residential this party wants it a whole Brock and just one or two don't want it let's say it passes at the end of the day half the alley is given to one party half the Alle is given to the other party can you tell me the difference why is the difference when company between commercial and residential uh just before I get started I just do want to clarify that there's two different alleys here that we're discussing um this is the alley that we're currently discussing this one is not being vacated this alley is the one that was vacated um by Council so this is the one that um the neighborhood has brought up and that we're discussing now with the traffic flow and everything but the first one didn't have residential one site either yeah so um this alley right here this is the residential property that was abing the alley um the rest of the site was owned by the applicant so then I'm still asking a legal question why is it different between residential residential and residential commercial that the visiting party the other side doesn't get half the alley they they will get half of the alley in this case they don't get half the alley yeah they are yeah close how wide is the alley 14 16 ft 16 ft is the wi of this alley so the um applicant will get hat and then the neighboring property will I want to make sure that's that's part of the record yes sir so my question sir what can the applicant do between first and second reading what's allowable in regards to the concerns of the neighborhood there's not too much that can be done the applicant did reach out to me to discuss these being added to the site plan as conditions unfortunately one and three are not conditions that can be put on the site plan that we can enforce there there's no way for us to enforce that um this has added to the revised revision sheet of no unloading within the alleyway um and then in general also unloading on a public Street or within the alleyway is not allowed even if that wasn't on the site plan um there's not really much that we can put on the site plan that can condition this because there's really no way to enforce it um what about like do not enter trucks only or any kind of sign is that so yeah no no I'm just saying just for peace of mind and I mean the applicant can show maybe a sign on that they would place a sign here but this Alleyway there's no way they will this Alleyway will maintain a two-way Alleyway it's it's a two-way Alleyway it's open to the public what the applicant is saying which I think is kind of getting lost and it's not that they're trying to be deive on it or is that their site this is a one-way driveway it's only big enough for one-way traffic into their site this drive a right here so what the applicant is saying that if someone is coming in to access their site here from Columbus Drive they will be able to come in this way but no one within this development is going to be able to come back out and exit into the alley if that provides the clarification so they're not saying that the alley will be only oneway traffic they're saying that it's going to be one way traffic into that alley accessing their site um development or you're not going to be able to exit out of their site onto that alley and I'll let Jonathan Speak if you yeah Jonathan's got mobility department I think the confusion is we can just have them take off those arrows on the Alley because really the alleys are two-way I think they're just kind of showing the direction the way their truck was going to come in for solid way switch is fine they can do that I think just to clarify the concerns of everybody that Ali is two way we'll have them take off those the arrow here and here as a between first and second reading yes ma'am could you make it a oneway alley typically uh alleys are two-way Ty once in a while our traffic studies will look at making them one way but in general that's something we'd have to consider you know it's kind of hard to do to sign and all that stuff it's um we have done it in the past but typically it's let's say 99% of the time it's not not oneway they're just left as two-way but if it was made one way you could it would reduce the traffic it would help overall because people trying to turn right on Columbus Drive and come into that alley is going to be a huge problem so I I think that the one weighing of the alley I agree with um councilman Manel scalco makes a lot of sense yeah that might be something that's beyond this uh hearing at this point because it would have to be looked at and discussed and everybody that accesses it you know would have to be involved and on that decision and stuff it's uh might be better to leave it off this uh hearing okay MH C Mar no I I just you know and I speak about the neighborhood I'm just thinking how far back I go in my memory but I remember on the corner of uh Northwest that nice bright station that's there now with the pumps and all that it was derli there was a bunch of drug dealers and everything else there was a gentleman who set up a stand four metal poles and a little top and it took like a year and a half to get them out when they wanted to sell for this development to come in and he made his living on weekend selling garments hanging out from this little shed and uh that's how that started that's how that became what it is today so on the other side across the street on the east south area there used to be a drugstore at one time and Joe pra was the the pharmacist right next to the shop that has the the tires so all that is in my mind and this here is in my mind because I remember when the big one came in he had more pumps brighter lights this one went went straight down even though he lowered his gas by four or five cents a gallon they didn't want to stopped anymore want see there something new something exciting that's where they went and so that area has been changed on the west southwest area there was a building there for a long time with two stories at one time it was dered then became a church and became something else and now all that has changed also so that whole area has taken change for what I call anti-blight and something new refreshing to the people's eyes and that's why the values of that area has gone up there's no doubt in my mind if it would to stay what it was there'd be no value there not like it is today that's all Mr chairman thank you thank you very much anybody else Mr chairman yes sir councilman clinten a couple of things I guess this would be for the applicants um question for you it's interesting that the one thing that bothered me about this development the first FL in the first iteration of it was not undergrounding those utilities um why aren't you undergrounding those TCO utilities and if you did would that alleviate your issue with setback uh councilman William alloy in 325 South Boulevard I don't believe too gave us the option to underground anything they said those polls are what they are we would have happily undergrounded them um we wouldn't be in this position if we could have done that and why somebody brought up that there was the issue of not being able to go under that building because of two feet why couldn't you lift that building two feet uh to the if I understand your question why could we not take a trash trunk under the building I I if I understand Solid Waste requires 16 1/2 ft of clearance and we're providing 14 and you incapable of providing the 16 and a half I cannot say that anything is impossible but I believe the Delta there was fairly significant in terms of height and uh load bearing on the structure it was basically an engineering redesign to bring it up another two and a half ft is is there anybody in in utilities that are on are able to answer that too undergrounding question he's coming up same thas development coordination um unfortunately we do not have any staff from Toco to be able to answer that question okay all right anybody else is there any uh more rotal time on the clock if they need it all right is there anything else you wish to add okay we're good thank you can I get a motion to close have a motion close from council member her council member all in favor I any opposed Council Miranda would you like to read item number two I'll read it Mr chairman see where it goes public ordance be presented for first read consideration found number Rez 2512 owners resoning property General vicinity of 702 West Columbus Drive 2502 and 2504 North Boulevard and fold your numbers 18335 5005 0000 three Z and a five in the city of Tampa Florida more particularly describing section 1es from zoning districts classification rs60 residential single family CG commercial General and PD plan development to PD plan development storefront residential all commercial neighborhood uses providing an effective date we have a motion from council member an council member herac and the revision sheet is that correct with a revision sheet yes sir thank you councilman all right chair chairman men yes sir go ahead sir um May this is for Marty Shelby um I would like to um have a conditional provision added to this that between first and second reading the applicant comes back with an answer from too about undergrounding those [Music] utilities they are not noted well he can't see that yeah no well why don't we why don't we address let's get the record though do you motion to reop motion to reop we have a motion to reopen from Council member7 Council Miranda all in favor I Mr Malloy if the council wants to understand from Cho why we couldn't do that we are more than happy to provide that information we'll get it we'll get it to you between now and second reading is that so is that fine councilman clendenon he'll get it between now and second reading yes that that'd be sufficient I just I want to know that if I'm so on second reading so that if you know I I'll support this this time between this now and second time if there's a if there is you know not a good answer to that and you know I want to make it known that I might change my mind between now and second reading if there's not a good answer to that Mr Shelby yes counselor just would that uh documentation be provided by too in some form of fashion for the record or for councel as opposed to as opposed to verbally absolutely we'll get it either on by email Tio letterhead whatever we need to do it will come from too it will not be represented by me thank you is there a an amendment to this revision sheet yes okay proving second with an amend amended revision sheet we have motion to close from council member council member Miranda all in favor I also I am providing the clerk the corrected revised revision sheet made reference to correct the date to but it's dated the the 11th today's the 12th that's why the staff has asked me if this be corrected and this additions on the bottom is that correct you added more do have you articulated that uh same time development coordination I did um add on to the revision sheet that was provided to council today I crossed out the date at the top and changed it to 12224 and then at the bottom I added um a revision that the applicant will work meet with too to find out the feasibility of undergrounding the utility lines thank you I should know the date anyway um it's your wedding I know I should know the date uh so that was a little embarrassing for me um but I wanted to say that I don't know if there's a way but I would really love between first and second reading to find out the information to making that alley one way period D like one way that's my only interest that is that a request to the administration to transportation to do that to be able to report at second reading yes okay does okay is that part of would that be included um yeah well he agreed so he said second so yeah we're the motion we're just it's it's a switching of the Motions okay thank you all right so we have a motion from yes ma'am yeah uh for me you know I really appreciate the thoughtfulness of this project um it's on a transportation Corridor which is really important um along with you know some of the other concerns um stated here on the DI housing affordability is probably something that you could consider is 37 units is not difficult to designate four of them for affordable housing um and provide someone with an opportunity to live in an amazing space like this and I would like to hear that in your plans prior to Second reading as well okay we have a motion from council member Miranda second council member herac roll call vote this is including the revised revision sheet I see right correct herac yes GL Denon yes Henderson yes Vieira yes Miranda yes Carlson and manc no motion carried with Carlson and manisco voting no second reading and adoption will be held on January 9th 2025 at 10:30 a.m. in city council chambers 315 East Kennedy Boulevard 3D floor Tampa Florida 33602 thank you very much thank you very much item number three do we have enough seats for the folks coming up on four I okay is the second floor full not are there people on the second floor okay all right yes sir go ahead she she read it go ahead sir item number three Sam Thomas development coordination agenda item number three is Rez 2409 a request to rezone 4913 North McDale Avenue from residential multi family 24 to plan development for residential single family attached I'll turn it over to Emily with the Planning Commission yes ma'am Emily faen Planning Commission staff uh the subject site is located within the central Tampa planning district and the plaza Terrace neighborhood the subject site is outlined here in purple to the north and Sou south of the subject site are a mix of single family detached and two family like duplexes um to the west of the subject site is an apartment complex multif family and to the east of the subject site right here are two group homes and then further to the east of the subject site is St Joe's Hospital okay the subject site again is here it's in the residential 20 designation which you can see is to the north east and south of the subject site to the West is residential 35 and again this is St Joe's Hospital represented with the public semi-public designation the average existing density on this portion of North mcdill Avenue between West Louisiana Avenue and West Wilder Avenue is 9.75 units per acre based on nine sample sites if approved the proposed um development would be developed at 17.7 units per acre which is consistent with the density anticipated in the residential 20 designation the proposed project contributes to the diversity of housing types particularly in multif family areas where such diversity is encouraged the comprehensive plan also encourages the design and development of single family attached to include the orientation of front doors to sidewalks and streets the PD provides connections from the front doors to the sidewalk along the interial drive aisle and a crosswalk connecting it to the sidewalk along North McDale Avenue meeting this policy Direction the comprehensive plan promotes a residential development pattern consistent with the compact City form strategy with increased housing availability at densities that promote walking and Transit use this request supports this policy Direction due to the site being within proximity to Transit and amenities along uh Hillsboro Avenue the resoning also provides housing on vacant land to ensure an adequate housing Supply is available to meet the needs of campus growing populations Planning Commission staff requests the future land use designation be added to the site plan between first and second ratings overall the plan development is comparable and compatible with the surrounding development pattern and is consistent with the density anticipated under the residential 20 future land use designation and that concludes my presentation if you have any questions any questions or comments thank you very much yes sir Sam Thomas development coordination um agenda item number three we'll start with the aerial overview of the subject site in the surrounding area you can see the um subject site outline I have this upside down there we go that's better so you can see the subject site here outlined in red on North mcdell Avenue uh to the east of the subject site you have two plan developments um both of these plan developments are for multif family housing um and then along this portion of McDale North mcdill Avenue here you have rm24 zoning so you can see multif family developed here these Parcels here are developed with um single family semidetached units and then same to the South um as you move South of the subject site you have some rs50 zoning and then rs60 zoning over here and then further north it has um rs50 zoning too with single family detached units um but within the immediate pocket right around the subject site um you kind of have you have some more high density multif family uses um so we'll go on to the site plan that was provided by the [Applause] applicant so the development proposes one structure with seven units um seven single family attached units I do need to make a correction for the record on page one of the staff report it says that a waiver is requested to reduce the required parking from 18 to 16 spaces this is incorrect 16 parking spaces are provided and 16 parking spaces are required um so we'll now go into the design of the site um you have the front doors for the site for each unit here and then they connect to a sidewalk in front of the units and then with a pedestrian connection across the drive aisle to the sidewalk proposed on mcdill Avenue um vehicular access to the site is provided from mcdill Avenue here with an exit on mcdill Avenue at the Northern end of the site um each unit one or unit one through six can accommodate a or has a onecar garage with parking for one car in the driveway and then unit 7 has a two-car garage um the proposed Max height is 38 ft and 4 in um additionally I would like to point out that the um applicant did work extensively with natural resources to preserve um two grand trees on the site uh 68 in Grand Tree and then a 64 in Grand Tree um down on the southern end of the site um so development coordination and compliance staff reviewed the application and find the request to be consistent should it be the pleasure of council to approve the application and waivers um to the site plan as shown on the revision sheet um must be completed between first and second reading and I will possibly need to revise that revision sheet to include the planning commission's request um let me check to make sure that is not on there so I will I will revise that and the planning commission's request um to be changed between first and second reading as well and provide that to the clerk I'm available if there's any questions any questions I see none all right do we have a uh yes ma'am come on up oh yes I'm sorry I forgot to turn it over to she even reminded me before I left okay okay Aaron mayor development coordination I'm just going to speak on natural resources finding of consistency for this project um so Sam already talked about the site but you can see it's a very heavily canopy treed site um and to the north here you'll see there's a whole bunch of bamboo you'll see that on the next uh slide and it's outlined in green which note to self never use that color again on this let's see let me zoom out a little bit okay so this is their proposed site plan um I'm just going to point out the north is here on the left side of the screen and along the along the bottom of the page is mcdill Avenue so these two grand trees are right here in the southwestern corner of the site and the applicant has worked with us extensively to save these trees uh there are three preservation quality Grand Live Oaks on the site and one is is requesting a waiver for removal uh to remove that Grand Tree it's right here in this Red X right here they're going to remove that one um and there's two that are being preserved in the green circles um there is also another one that is not preservation quality that they do not need a waiver to remove so the applicant has provide a certified arborous airspade and pruning reports to show what sort of root impacts there are and um and canopy impacts it would take to construct this the yellow circle here is the protective radius of the tree so you they also gave a pink circle showing how far the canopy extends so there is some minor pruning but the impacts are not adverse and you can see here too there's a bit of Paving that they are showing in the protective radius and they have agreed to use alternate construction methods and they've also notched out their building to provide more of the trees canopy as well so this is just showing you the tree that they're proposing to request a w four it's a 34 in uh Live Oak worth rated C8 and Worth 16 uh mitigation trees and these are the two trees they are preserving so uh here on along mcdill there's a 64 in Grand Live Oak rated C8 you can see there's Resurrection Fern growing all throughout these trees they're yeah in very good condition um and this is a this well this whoop oops I think the 68 in is near mcdill and the 64 is just in a little bit um but they're both well rated trees so uh they have provided more than the required Green Space um more than double the required Green Space on the site probably mainly due to the fact that they're preserving these two Grands uh their used to use landscape buffers have been met or the width is even exceeded on all sides of uh the other uses and there is a waiver here just to reduce the 8 foot vehicular use area buffer that parallels mcdill to 4 feet so natural resources is in support of these waivers so just to work uh wrap up the applicant has worked with staff extensively to preserve these two grand trees uh on the site uh they notched the building provided arborous reports to demonstrate any adverse impacts which should be pretty minor um and they're providing more than double the required Green Space so if you have any questions I'm here you have any questions no thank you very much Mr Shelby yes if you can just if you want to do you want to place that into the record I'm sorry did you need this to I just want to be stated that we don't have one for Council though no no no that's fine if you could just for the record same Thomas development coordination um for the record I did update the revision sheet um I added updated 12224 and then at the bottom I added Planning Commission and under Planning Commission I added add the R20 future land use to the site data table thank you and you're putting that into the record yes thank you thank you very much yes sir please say your name applicant good evening Council Steve melini representing the petitioner um and we're happy to come before you and certainly happy to have the staff support on so many issues this project started out uh with site plans over six months ago uh and continually revising them to u to try to get to a point where it was acceptable on all all all sides there is a PowerPoint and I'd like to have that pulled up please there you go we have been found consistent there were no neighbors that have been contacted us regarding any concerns or opposition it's rm24 and we're requesting a PD it's a little less than half an acre as a location it's um north of Columbus it's uh it's near Hillsboro Avenue and and east of the airport there a better view of where this is located there's an aerial view showing you that this is surrounded by multif family uh there a more closely detailed and you can see the density of the uh landscaping and trees that are existing there we're proposing seven single or single family attached units the area is predominantly multif family and it's not in the coastal High Hazard area and it's not in a flood zone there's an elevation showing the proposed design of the of the units there's a perspective showing them how they'll how they'll look and again the height is being requested at uh 38 382 feet and you can see the driveways here in the units uh and the notched out building on unit number seven to accommodate the the um setback I mean the protective radius for the Grand Tree and then uh the reason that there are one car garages and then one car in the driveway is to uh accommodate the existing trees and tree canopies and we've moved this site plan around um just to try to accommodate that you couldn't and I know that there certainly you've had questions in the past regarding the use of PDs now this is an ideal application of a of a PD it allowed the site to be moved around to accommodate the conditions of the site as well as the to save the existing trees and you see the the driveway access is there and the exits and then the waiver that's been requested on mcdill is being supplemented with additional Green Space within the site and you can see that uh the land use is rm24 rm35 and and R20 is on this site so you have a higher density immediately to the West the seven units that are being requested are allowed by right you see the existing zoning and multif family zoning is surrounding it on the uh on the East sides and to the north and this is a picture of the existing site you can see that there are trees throughout it and again we've done everything we can to accommodate and protect them saving as many as we could there's only the one that being requested to be removed this is across the street so you can see that the multif family is typical for this area area uh we've worked very closely as as uh Aaron has pointed out with natural resources and we've done extensive work with them to try to save those trees and to provide the um the perious pavement where necessary to PRI to also allow for the percolation around those trees um and I already mentioned that the uh the garage and the oneway driveways those are really designed to provide additional green space but also to meet the code regarding the required parking areas and U note note two is incorrect as as staff has pointed out so we do meet the there's no requirement for a waiver and to reduce the the drive V widths are again to protect the trees and also to provide additional Green Space and transportation has has approved that and we requesting the one hazardous Grand Tree to be removed which as staff pointed out is a C8 condition but we're saving the other more uh spectacular trees on the site and now again we've reduced and redesigned the project to balance the transportation requirements versus natural resources and you know sometimes that that battle does not Faire very well but in this case we've been able to thread the needle and Achieve both the PD proposes a comparable and compatible um development it's found to be consistent by both the city staff and the Planning Commission and we're requesting that that you uh look at this and and approve that as submitted we have a number of criteria that will promote the efficient and substain sub substantive use of land and infrastructure and uh we've met that goal to uh encourage flexible and developments which reduce Transportation needs and preserve the natural resources we've done extensive work to do that promote the architectural features and elements we've been found to be consistent with that and um then the goals and objectives of the site within the residential 20 is designed to request that the applicant meet that we have met that and we are consistent it's 9.75 units per acre based on the 9 unit example we're we within the consistency of the R20 which would allow up to 20 units to the acre the comprensive plan promotes a residential development pattern consisted with the compact form of the strategy of the city and we've met that and the staff has pointed that out so um I think I don't think we have any more slides all right any questions I think that concludes our presentation and we'll be happy to answer any questions any questions thank you very much is there anybody in the public that wishes to speak on item number three we have nobody registered we have motion close from council member herex I have a council yes sir um for staff the use behind this I see the rear setback is 10 ft what is the current use or the and the Zoning for the uh use in the rear of this property what is the current use what is the current use for the rear of the property for the rear of the subject site same time as development coordination so behind what what what is behind this property I see that they're they're looking for a 10 foot set back on the rear of the property what is the adjoin in use here is a all right so the rear part of the property AB buts um multif Family on both sides I can show you a picture of that real quick so that you can have an idea of what that use looks like so this is taken from the back of the site looking at that multif family that's behind the subject site okay thank you that's good any other questions comments Vieira Glen Den it's a dumpster and a parking lot thank you very much much motion to close St motion close counc counc Henderson all in favor I any opposed council member Henderson you already read so council member her file number rez2 24-9 ordinance being presented for first reading consideration an ordinance resoning property in the general vicinity of 4913 North mcdill Avenue in the city of Tampa Florida and more particularly described in section one from zoning District classification rm24 residential multif family to PD plan development residential single family attached providing an effective date you have motion from council member herex second counc Miranda um roll call vote Clint Den yes Henderson yes Viara yes Miranda yes Carlson yes herac yes and Mano yes motion carried unanimously second reading and adoption will be held on January 9th 2025 at 10:30 a.m. in city council council chambers 315 East Kennedy Boulevard third floor Tampa Florida 33602 thank you so much thank you Council next is item number four good evening Stephanie Pope with development coordination agenda item number four is Rez 247 7 request to reone 4720 North Clark Avenue from industrial General to plan development for all industrial General Uses I'll turn it over to the Planning Commission yes ma'am please say your name Emily failen Planning Commission staff uh the SES located within the West Shore planning district the West Shore business district and the Drew Park neighborhood uh this is an area of the subject site which is located here outlined in purple um there are a a single family residential to the west and north of the subject site but the majority of the uses that surround the subject site are Light commercial and light industrial uses which are to the south east north of like North eastsh and this side of the in the west of the parcel as well this is the subject that again is represented with the light industrial uh future land use designation which does surround the subject site the PD proposes a 0.34 35 F which is below the intensity that can be considered under the light industrial future land use designation the request is consistent with the polic with policies that discourage industrial uses in close proximity to residential uses while the site is not surrounded by a residential plan category there are non-conforming residential uses to the north and west the PD is proposing a 5-ft buffer and a 6- foot fence to the north and west of the site which would be a buffer from those residential uses and given the existing development pattern Planning Commission staff finds the PD is comparable and compatible with the surrounding area the request supports many of the comprehensive plans industrial land policies which support opportunities for Industrial Development to accommodate employment generators for the City's population add additionally the request will continue to maintain industrial areas that provide for the manufacturing of goods Flex space and research and development compatible with non-industrial uses the Planning Commission staff requests that the F be added to the site plan between first and second readings and in conclusion the request is comparable and compatible with the surrounding area and it's consistent with a development pattern anticipated under the light industrial future L use designation and that concludes my presentation if you have any questions any questions thank you very much yes ma'am come on up please state your name Stephanie Pope development coordination I do have a revised staff report council member Council Carlson thank you I would like to make a correction to the record on page three of the revised staff report or on page three of the staff report it was stated that the applicant includes waivers for the south and east setback to zero feet which is an error in a PD the applicant does not need to wave setbacks the last review showed that Solid Waste was inconsistent the applicant was working with solid waste to resolve this inconsistency at the time the staff report was wrot it has since been confirmed with solid waste that the applicant can continue to use roll out carts and and solid waste is consistent a dumpster and autoturn are not required I have provided you with revised staff reports which reflect these changes I'll now start with the report we'll start with an aerial view of the subject site and the surrounding area the subject site is outlined in red on the west side of North Clark Avenue which is right here in the general vicinity South of West Osborne Avenue and east of North Lois Avenue the development pattern is similar to the north east west and south with industrial General Uses Northwest of the site right here is owned PD in 1997 file number z97 52 with an existing use of office services there are residential uses to the north and west of the site to the north east and south is IG zoning here is the site plan provided by the applicant there is an existing building on the site right here and the applicant is proposing the addition of a 5,000 square foot building a storm water Pond and removal of asphalt near the existing pole barn a 5-ft buffer and 6ft PBC fence is pres proposed to the north and west sides near the single family homes along with a waiver to request to reduce the required 15t landscape use to use buffer surface parking is provided adjacent to the existing building on site right here you can see the four spaces that are provided this is a photo of the subject site this is a view of the existing building on the subject site this is looking South on Clark this is looking east across the street from the site across Clark and this this is looking North you can see the existing single family home in the photo there I'll show you the proposed building elevations this is the East Elevation the north elevation the west elevation and the South elevation and these are additional photos of the existing building that is on site there there are three waivers requested as part of this application and listed on page one of the staff report to reduce the loading burst removal of one nonhazardous grand Live Oak and the buffers development coordination and compliance staff reviewed the application and find the request to be inconsistent with the Land Development code transportation is inconsistent due to the required loading spaces all other reviewers are consistent there are revisions that need to be made between first and second readings should it be the pleasure of council to approve this resoning I'm available for any questions any questions clendenon Vieira no all right uh applicant yes sir come on up please say your name um Steve melini representing the petitioner uh this is an addition to an existing warehouse and uh I you know I've discussed the issue regarding the loading burst with transportation and since this can you see that okay yes you can can you zoom out slightly there we go since this is an addition to an existing Warehouse uh there's there's no need for a high Bay docking station for it they they work on and they store exotic cars and they have to be able to drive in they're not going to be loading the cars off the back of a truck so and you know I hate that it ended up being an inconsistency just for that issue but I have talked to Transportation about it um we were found to be consistent by the Planning Commission staff and recognizing that this area is surrounded by warehouses and this is an addition to an existing Warehouse so we're not introducing a new use and we're are providing the U the protective radiuses as you can see from the trees and we we actually shifted the building so that that would happen and we're providing a retention area to accommodate any additional runoff for the for the building the existing building has no storm water treatment at all most of the buildings out there don't have storm water treatment so this will be an improvement and then we've also agreed to add the additional trees that are required to the frontage so that it will help to buffer the view of the existing Warehouse from the right away um we met the parking requirements the area is industrial for the most part I think the staff showed you some pictures I've got some additional ones to show you to give you an idea of this is existing existing warehouse and you see the lot in the back is is vacant and this is where the proposed addition would go it's surrounded on everywhere with warehouses this is a closeup view of the existing warehouse and then the proposed addition would occur in this area here the comprehensive plan encourages us like similar like uses we're not reducing uh industrial lands which you you frequently have to deal with reduction of of industrial lands this actually uh enhances that and and continues the trend and establishes that warehouse as a long-term use that would be established in that area with respects to promoting the efficient and sustainable use of the land we meet that the applicant has requested natural resources waiver to the removal of a non-hazardous Grand Tree however we're replacing the mitigation trees in the front where it would be appropriate to screen the the proposed new development with respect to promoting and encourage development an appropriate location this is a warehouse district and we're promoting and encouraging that to continue I know that you frequently get proposals in here that are taking industrial land and converting them to residential this doesn't do that it it preserves industrial use the site plan will allow for IG uses on the and the waivers requested for the following reduction of loading bursts as I said before it's it it's elevated but it's at grade and so the loading docks are would not be You' have to drive all the way around in the back of the building when you couldn't get there uh anyway to put in a loading dock the front building doesn't have a loading dock and that's where the principal use occurs and this is expansion request for that uh front building we're requesting the use the landscape buffer um from and establish a 6ft masony wall and a 5-ft buffer so we are providing for the buffers as as requested the subject is built and the site pictures with the staff has already shown you it's an ASB built site with respect to meeting the the land use codes uh the overall objective in development and Redevelopment to to stable and ensure the social and economic health of the city and this does that the Land Development regulations are existing future land use regulations shall be made consistent with a comprehensive plan is consistent with a comprehensive plan um the staff analysis showed that that this is an appropriate use and appropriate location and it expands an existing permitted use so as the Planning Commission has pointed out they found it to be consistent U certainly i' be happy to answer any questions you might have U but again this is an expansion of an existing warehouse and it does meet the codes as required with the exception of the loading dock I'll be happy to answer any questions any questions um so I see that the existing use and there's three parking spots I know a big problem in the St I me before parking SP the handicap spot and a big problem in this area is a lot of these businesses are utilizing public RightWay for parking and L parking on their own property um you're putting up a a new 5,000 foot building but not adding any additional parking how does this work with having I mean more than ding the size of the infrastructure and not and only having four parking spots we're not asking for a waiver parking it's able to it's it's a we're meeting the parking requirement the issue was the loading docks that we're not providing okay all right Mr melini you said this was a car repair or car Storage storage it's a storage so the parking would be inside the building thank you very much anybody else have any questions if not we'll go to public comment is there anybody in the public that wish to speak on item number four I see no one can I get a motion to close motion from council member her council member Henderson all in favor I counc no council member Carl If You Could Read item number four yes sir I move uh file number four number four file number RZ 2477 ordinance being presented for first reading consideration ordinance resoning property in general vicinity of 4720 North Clark Avenue in the city of Tampa Florida more particularly described in section one from zoning District classification IG industrial General to PD plan development all industrial uses providing effective dat and the revision sheet and the revision sheet I have motion from council member CL Carlson second counc Miranda roll call vote Henderson yes Vieira yes Miranda yes Carlson yes herac yes Clint denn yes and Mana sco yes motion carried unanimously second reading and adoption will be held on January 9th 2025 at 10:30 a.m. in city council chambers 315 East Kennedy Boulevard third floor Tampa Florida 33602 too thank you Council thank you item number five same Thomas development coordination agenda item number five is Rez 2494 a request to reone 4115 and 4107 West Spruce Street from plan development to plan development for residential multif family I'll turn it over to Emily with the Planning Commission Emily failin Planning Commission staff do you want me to zoom in more no I I just had a question for Mr Shelby a family member of mine lives at the apartment complex to the Northeast there right off the The Grid uh they have they're just renting but uh no Financial stake or anything am I good to vote on this can you be fair and partial and base your decision on the evidence in the record yeah absolutely they're yeah absolutely okay and they have no Financial State and you say they're a renter they're a renter that's thank you no I I um I do not see a conflict of interest and uh under the Florida law it's my opinion that you can participate and vote okay yes ma'am all right uh the subject sites located within the West Shore planning district the West Shore business district and Carver City win Gardens neighborhood uh the subject site is located here in purple and it's surrounded by a uh a mix of uses with Light commercial uses in multif family to the north and Northwest of the site and public uses are to the East and southeast of the subject site the site is also um located uh International plazas to the northwest of the sorry Northwest of the SES over here and the Tampa International Airport is further west outside of the aial again the subject site is here located in purple it is surrounded by the regional mixed use 100 future land use designation and this designation supports high intensity and density highrise res highrise residential major office and Regional serving commercial developments the proposed plan development supports many policies in the comprehensive plan related to housing the City's population as the plan encourages new Housing Development on vacant and under utilized land to ensure an adequate housing supply for Tampa's present and future populations the PD proposes a 3.5 F which aligns with the anti anticipated density under the regional mixed use 100 designation it is also consistent with policies promoting the efficient use of land and compact high density development near Transportation facilities and employment centers Planning Commission staff identified that the proposed building square footage of the site plan exceeds the maximum permitted by 1 square foot in order to comply with the maximum allowable F the proposed building square footage must be reduced by one square foot between first and second ratings the subject site is within a mixed use Corridor suitable for intensification and promoted residential mixed use retail service commercial and pedestrian oriented uses in these areas the PD proposes a residential multif family building oriented toward North Lan B Ard with sidewalks along North lemman Boulevard West Spruce Street and North Lois Avenue connecting the building to surrounding Services addressing mixed use related policies entrances are oriented toward and connect to 8ft sidewalks with shade trees walk up units are provided along West Spruce Street enhancing pedestrian connectivity the request is consistent with a compact City form strategy which seeks to promote housing and densities that promote walking and Transit near employment concentrations res residential services and amenities in conclusion the proposed development is consistent with the development pattern anticipated under the rmu 100 future land use designation and is comparable and compatible with the surrounding development pattern this concludes my presentation if you have any questions any questions thank you very much yes sir come on up Sam Thomas development coordination we'll get started with our aerial map per usual this is a highly urbanized area of the city this is located within the Westshore um overlay District uh north of the subject site you have Office Professional one zoning so you have a parking garage and then the Office Buildings you have a hotel here under the same zoning District to the south of the subject site um you do have a plan development for multif family and then you have another plan development here for single family attached um and semi- detached this parcel right here that is Zone CI is the westore Senior Center that's owned and operated by Boro County and then on the other side of leman's Boulevard you have um a postal office that is um under the CI zoning District um within proximity to the development or the proposed development you have multiple large scale multif family apartment buildings and then as you move north you have Boy Scout um Boulevard here and then further to the north you have International Plaza you do have some single family detached homes further away from the site here in the rs50 and then also on the south side of Spruce Street over in this direction we'll now go to the site plan provided by the applicant so the applicant proposes a 49399 ft multif family structure containing 410 um dwelling units the applicant is providing walkup units along Spruce Street here and then also walkup units um via sidewalks connected to the sidewalk here along North Lois Boulevard or North yeah North Lois Street um the sidewalks proposed on um Lois Spruce and liman's Boulevard range from 8T to 11 ft wide additionally along North Lois Avenue and West Spruce Street the applicant is proposing type 1 shade trees to provide shade and encourage um walkability there's also a proposed a small proposed um public open space here at the corner of North Lois Avenue and West Spruce Street um vehicular access to the site is provided from West Spruce Street through an existing curb cut um there are some additional existing private parking spots Offa West lemman um Boulevard in addition to the parking garage 513 parking spaces are required and 620 parking spaces are provided Additionally the applicant has coordinated with heart to provide an off-site um bus shelter bus stop and bus shelter improvements um to a nearby Transit stop on West Spruce Street um and then lastly the proposed maximum Building height is 95 ft or 8 stories so I'll show you guys the elevations now provided by the applicant Zoom a little bit more so there is the East elev Elevation that is the South elevation and then you have the west and North elevation so this would be the side that is facing that existing parking garage to the north of the subject site so now I'll walk through some pictures [Music] a little bit of a big site so I took a decent amount of photos so this is looking North on leman's Boulevard so those are those existing parking spots that exist there now this is the subject site here you can see one of those existing larger scale multif family developments um in proximity to the site this is looking East from lemman Boulevard this is the post office that is AC Ross the street and then this is looking south from lemman Boulevard at West Spruce Street this is the West Senior Center there so now we are along Spruce Street um this is leman's here you can see the subject site here and then there's a large storm water ditch that runs along West Spruce Street that you can very clearly see in those photos now we're looking West along West Spruce Street you can see the um other large scale multif family development that's south of it and this is the subject site here this is looking Northwest into the subject site this is the existing access on Spruce Street that will be used to access the parking garage now we're looking back east on Spruce Street towards lemman Boulevard you got the hillsbor County Senior westore Senior Center there we've moved a little bit farther so we were back over here now we're getting closer to Lois um Avenue where you can see the existing structure on the subject site looking a little bit farther west this is the intersection of w Spruce and Lois you can see um an office building and then a multif family structure on the south side of the subject site this is looking South across the street from the subject site at um the multif family and this is moved a little bit further in the inter down to the intersection of West Spruce um and North Lois looking South and then now we are looking North along Lois Avenue looking towards International Plaza this is the subject site here this is the existing parking garage for the Office Professional Building to the North and then you have another Office Professional Building there this is looking East internal to the site so this is not part of the site that's that existing op zoning to the north of it this is the subject site and then lastly this is looking west from the subject site this is North Lois um Avenue there so put the site PL back up oh I did want to mention that while there is vehicular access provided to the parking garage here there is vehicular access off of LeMans up here but that is for the solid waste and for the loading and unloading um I don't necessarily think doesn't it doesn't appear based on the design that this would be used for Access for people who actually live there to park in the prop garage um so development coordination and compliance staff reviewed the application and find the request to be consistent the development proposes a multif family structure in an urban um in an urban area of the city that is comparable and compatible with the built environment um should it be the pleasure of council to approve the application between and the waivers Associated modifications to the site plan as submitted on the revision sheet must be completed between first and second reading I'm available for any questions any questions thank you very much good evening Council Alex shayer 400 North Ashley Drive I have been sworn I am here um with the rezoning application on behalf of paradise Ventures Chris simmerman and Brad KS from Paradise are here joining us tonight our civil team is kimley horn Brandon msolo and Arty Centron are here from kimley Christian okendo from CBA to the architecture he's here as well Ricky Pica is of course our arborist and Landscaping expert he is with us tonight too and Steve Henry prepared our traffic study he is also here in the building for questions um I wanted to start with with a high Lev bird's eye view and Sam did a great job setting this up um I think it's important to view this request through the lens of the proximity um this is an area that's been characterized by I'd say recent multif family development you know since the early 2000s um and if you look at our site here outlined in yellow it almost looks like a missing puzzle piece um and a puzzle piece in land use terms is infill Redevelopment right um and that's what we want that's what the comprehensive plan has a h of goals and policies that encourage his infill Redevelopment um currently today two buildings on the site are office they were built in 1974 and 1975 um while office might have been a great use for this site then as you can tell from the plethora of cars in this aerial um it might not be the highest and best use today um so we are here this evening um with an application that we think is for currently underutilized land and we are hoping to give this site New Life um zooming out a little bit you know we talk a lot about how many people are moving here every day and if you look at this aerial I mean this site it's a great location to put housing right I mean we've got approximate access to 275 it's a half mile drive um down lowest to get on the onramp um close to Regional scale retail this is not in the coastal High Hazard area um and the site is also already densified this is rmu 100 um there was not a accompanying plan amendment that that exists today um so Planning Commission had a vision for the site to be highdensity multif family um so that's why we're here this evening to bring that to fruition so we are proposing 410 units um an eight-story building with a 95 foot height I won't reiterate everything Sam said about the site plan he did a great job orienting us um but I did want to put this back up there because I think it's important um to understand the proximity to Spruce into Lois because it has an effect on some of these waivers that I'm going to go through in just a second um and given this is in the West Shore overlay District both of those Street frontages have specific streetcape requirements um and I'll speak to those in a bit um not to skip to the ending um or the last chapter in the book but we do have a fully consistent staff report and I wanted to to shed light on that before I went into um a relatively dense list of waivers again this being in the overlay so we have one loading birth waiver this is to propose two 12 by 30s in place of a single 12 by 60 um so numerically Net Zero reduction there um just separating those out we have five what I would put into a bucket of Natural Resources SL Urban Design um the first two these will be familiar to you we have a tree retention waiver um this site as you can see um has a lot of antiquated Palms um 86% of the trees on the site are Palms um we are proposing to remove those but we are replacing um the required number of trees more than um on the site with the proposed development um as you can see those Palms are kind of clustered around where those buildings exist today um we're proposing to remove the scram Laural Oak um we have reasonable reconfiguration Alternatives that have been uploaded to the record for that and some of you may recall there's a specific requirement in the Westshore overlay to plant Bosque Elms like a specific tree species um in our coordination with the natural resources department and in the past projects that we've worked on in the overlay that is not really the preferable tree even though it's in code so we are requesting to wave that um just to replace with any other type one tree species it'll still be a shade tree um these next two waivers are inherently related and they are result of this picture that Sam had but that I also went out and took myself um to try to show just how large this storm water sale is adjacent to the site um this runs south of the site along Spruce um so because of this sale this renders the ride of way unusable um as you all know typically we'd place our sidewalk adjacent to the site in the RightWay we can't do that here um there's also a 5 foot wide maintenance easement on private property for this um so what we did was we shifted the site to the north we Consolidated that Northern buffer again adjacent to a parking garage a commercial use um and what we did was we took all that space in the front to to make sure that we were compliant with the overlay requirements um though on private property so we have an 8 to 10t wide sidewalk here um this shared sidewalk waiver is one I've never requested before candidly um we are proposing to periodically narrow the sidewalk to allow for the placement of these trees um within that same area um we also undulated the building as you can see here to make sure that we gave those trees enough room for canopy growth um so that's the end of of the waiver summary um you know all projects present with their own set of design challenges um this one was definitely not any different but it's not very often I get to stand before you guys with 10 green check marks and I'm really proud of this um so I think that staff's unconditional support says a lot to the creative work that this design team put in um to make sure that all concerns were addressed um so with that I am going to bring up Chris Zimmerman with Paradise Ventures he's going to speak a little bit about his vision um and his Outreach in the community hello my name is Chris Zimmerman I'm director of Acquisitions with Paradise Ventures uh we are the developer land owner here um and uh a little history on us we are traditionally a retail developer uh we've been in business for 30 plus years we've been headquartered in the Tampa Market uh that entire time we do most of our development vment in this market we love this Market um we love West Shore specifically uh we are Westshore alliance members we're other landowner uh West Shore land owners um big Believers in West Shore and we think that this design uh is is creative and considerate uh in a way that that marries well with the West Shore overlay criteria very proud of the design uh speaking a little bit to that that design criteria and specifically how we marry with the the neighborhood um what we tried to do is is capture sort of the in between uh between high density development that exists just to the north of us and the single family residential to the south of us we think we've got a design that that capitalizes on uh a very highly pedestrian trafficked intersection there uh the you know the 8ot sidewalks the shade trees um certain things that encourage uh the pedestrian traffic there and kind of blend with that single family uh as a buffer into the more high density to the north thank you very much thank you anything else no yes council member yes thank you I didn't hear about your community outreach oh yes I'm sorry uh so we we held a neighborhood meeting with um the Carver City uh homeowners association um tried to hear out some of their concerns uh wanted to get specifically a list of some of those concerns that we could go to work on and and try to start uh addressing um some of those concerns uh from traffic to infrastructure to parking spillover uh to cohesion with the neighborhood um walkability you know making making sure that it continues to feel like a neighborhood or maybe feels even a little more like a neighborhood than it currently does um some of those concerns you know are are real concerns and we tried to be considerate about uh you know incorporating solutions to those into of our design uh we think we we think we did a pretty good job at that um again we're we're pretty proud of this design and how it accomplishes some of that a lot you did we we held a neighborhood meeting with we held a neighborhood meeting with the Carver City Home Owners Association what was any result any results from any compromises or everything yes so specific concerns of theirs uh traffic you know uh neighborhood walkability cohesion with the neighborhood um a lot of those were incorporated into the design specifically you know the shade trees uh the 8ot sidewalks trying to be sure that you know we're we're solving for the neighborhood feel the walkability you know the safe walkability so then the neighborhood ever brought up anything about affordable housing or anything like that on a 400 something unit I don't recall affordable housing coming up no all right all right Council car did the did the neighborhood ask for anything that um would be reflective of the history and culture of the neighborhood not specifically um you know certainly uh a a an acknowledgement of you know of uh trying to continue to be cohesive and and be resp respectful of the history of that neighborhood um not a specific solution that was really kind of the onus was put on us uh you know to to try and figure out how to be thoughtful about that um affordable housing would have been impressive for Carver City and Lincoln Gardens 10% set aside that would be impressive before second reading if you need some help I appreciate yeah appreciate that anybody else all right anything further in the Pres presentation I don't believe so all right is May I Mr chair yes ver thank you very much yeah I I wanted to really Echo what councilwoman um Henderson said regarding Workforce or affordable housing some sort of component obviously we can't make that a condition but just given this area and the the uh protection that that that the community always wants for this area and that the neighborhood always wants for this area very very unique and special area in Tampa I I do agree with that sentiment again I know from a legal perspective before Mr Shelby or anybody jumps on this we can't do that so this has no bearing whatsoever in my decision but just from a policy perspective um I I think that would be very very very well taken for this community thank you anybody else all right public comment is there anybody in the public that wishes to speak on this item item number five we have a speaker coming up sir good evening Stephanie Pointer um this is where density belongs and I really think I mean here's the thing if every apartment complex that was built south of Gandy in the LA since the last comprehensive plan in 2016 if every apartment complex added five affordable housing units in the 80ish range or below um then we would have an entire housing complex full of affordable housing in numbers wise and if everybody takes five it gets it brings all of us up and it gets exposure and this is you're you're absolutely correct my kids went to Roland Park um for years and this is a very diverse community and um city council can't ask for um affordable housing but I sure help anybody else here for public comment do you need the botle applicant that's all for us thank you guys motion to close in fact before we close and I know the city's had plans for many years to widen Spruce avue make amendments and we're looking at moving what we have there solid ways to another location very shortly at a great cost of the city but yet I just got to have people to understand this this city is based on all different types of individuals different colors different heights different weights different looks different speeches different conversation and different incomes and somehow we got to house them all that's all I'm going to say can I get a motion to close Move Motion from council member Carlson second council member mirand all in favor I council member Clen Denon do you have the agenda with you I do but I also want to speak to the issue too before I before I vote um I understand that uh what the council my fellow council person were saying that you know in a we have we have a carrot approach to encouraging this type of development you know when when you you know undergrounding utilities bonus densities you know everything everything comes with a with a price affordable housing is also one of those options where they can where the developer can come in off offer affordable housing in in L of getting certain things I don't necessarily know it's I'm not necessarily comfortable you know feeling like we're negotiating that from the deis um so I I just that that makes me uncomfortable because again it's it's this is a commercial development these are for-profit companies doing business in the city of Tamp and quite frankly if you're familiar with the property that they're redeveloping this is going from Dam near blight because it's a really Antiquated old area and and fulfilling a housing you know we we have a need for housing in general and the growth of housing is going to lift all boths including the development of you know supply and demand you increase the the the supply and um you know hopefully will also supress some of the costs for people and we do have to House of all income levels in including market rate house income levels so that being said I think this is a this is a win-win for the City of Tampa and for that area in the development and what they're proposing here yeah again it's going from a zero to a 10 um as far as land use and and and something for a benefit for the not just people who will futur to live there but the neighbors that'll be living around it so we are on number five correct yes sir yes okay I move file number Rez 2494 an application uh of pb's Bruce West LLC request reson property generally located at uh excuse me I screwed that up on my phone let me start this over again again I move file number Rez 2494 an ordinance being presented first reading consideration and ordinance resoning property in the general vicinity of 4107 and 4115 West Bruce Street in the city of Tampa Florida more particularly described as section one from zoning districts classifications PD plan development to PD plan development residential mul family providing an effective date do have a second second council member herac roll call vote dear um before I vote May I say something yes thank you thank you very much yeah so I'm going to vote Yes on this um and and with regards to councilman clendenon's comments I agree 100% we can't make um additions or anything like that the reason I said what I said I want to explain myself is given this area uh given the historical nature of this area given this very unique area which is uh it's a it's a unique area and it's within a um within an area here near West Shore in the city at Tampa um that we I always believe and and we all do believe on city council that we want to protect its identity and historical character um so that's why I I followed up on councilwoman Henderson's comments because I I I know given her family history in this area I do pay her a lot of efference uh on this issue Etc so I agree councilman then and uh and whatnot but again it's from my view the 10 suggestions not the Ten Commandments I guess if you so with that being said I'll vote Yes all right we have a motion and a second yes yes council member Henderson yeah I I am never going to threaten a corporation to provide affordable housing um when you do your homework and due diligence if you even talk to westore Alliance um when I speak to them I um always have said to them um when they've met with me about some projects that are coming that um you consider all the neighborhoods so in their presentation they talked to beach park but they didn't talk to Carver City they didn't talk to Lincoln Gardens and these are within very close proximity and if you do your homework and you are thoughtful and and want to be good citizens um and show some level of corporate responsibility for a corridor that is a transportation Corridor that is close to so many businesses um as well as historically two black neighborhoods where there was once the sanitation department which we are now moving and a building a facility called The Stockade which was also the jail system so that's what was put into this community um when it was being developed um and they said this is where black folks can live but you're going to get a sanitation department and you're going to get a jail house so now we're getting 410 apartments on that same corner across the street actually that's the historical aspect of it so when new people are coming in um and develop velers I think it's thoughtful not necessarily a requirement but in being a good citizen if you really did your homework about a particular area it would be easy for you to in your wealth provide 41 homes that are affordable for folks to live there that's all I'm saying and I just wanted to help them out because if we don't ask or say something who's going to say something who's going to say something if it's not us and the community you know so and also that that when we look at the future development um you're right Carver City has been a wonderful secret for many many many years you can get everywhere in a few minutes Tampa Stadium the airport downtown it is a great Corridor for living and I don't want to stop that because that area is not necessarily blighted Al Allan but that particular um Mr Clint Denon but that particular corner um you know and that building that currently sits there um you know yes of course it can use some improvement and housing is a good thing to see so I don't want to make you think that I don't want to support that but it would be in all fairness to me and in good conscience that I'm going to ask every single developer every single time that they present housing to us are they providing affordable housing but it is not a threat thank you chair coun Mr Shelby and uh and thank you um Martin Shelby city council attorney and just for the record um the requirement for affordable housing is not presently in your code and not a criteria upon which you can base your decision corre thank you all right we have a motion in a second or roll call we are stated yes Miranda yes you said what was that Miranda pardon me what was that yes yes Carlson yes herat yes Clint Den yes okay Henderson yes and Mano did heier the first motion Carri unanimously second reading and adoption will be held on January 9th 2025 at 10:30 a.m. in city council chambers 315 East Kennedy Boulevard third floor Tampa Florida 33602 yes sir item number six same Thomas development coordination agenda item number number six is Rez 24107 a request to reone 203 South Moody from residential office 1 to plan development for residential single family detached and semi- detached um before I turn it over to the Planning Commission I would like to take a moment just to give a brief history of this case um it may be familiar to some of you all um this um application applicant keep it uh quiet in the room thank you go ahead sir um the applicant previously submitted a resoning application for um the subject site under R file number Rez 2388 the request to was to resign the property from residential office one to plan development to allow for residential multif family Town Home Development and four with of four dwelling units the case Was Heard by Council on April 11 2024 and was denied on August 27th 2024 the applicant submitted first section 27-15 A requested the zoning administrator to wave the required 12-month period before a new application for the same zoning classification can be considered before city council the request was approved given that the applicant changed the request um with the development proposal of residential single family detached and semi- detached containing three dwelling units and no waivers under the current resoning application before you today R2 24107 um and with that I will turn it over to Emily unless there are any questions any questions go ahead um Emily faen Planning Commission staff uh the subject sit's located within the central Tampa planning district in the South Howard neighborhood it's also within evacuation Zone C uh the subject site located here has commercial uses to the North and the east of the subject site but to the South and the west of the subject site you can see the uh residential development as well as you can to the north this is the future land use map of the subject site which is outlined here it's represented with the residential 35 future land use designation which is to the north east and south of the subject site the pink color here is the community mixu 35 designation and along counted Boulevard and Armenia Avenue the purple color is the um Urban mixed 60 both uh South Armenia Avenue and South Howard Avenue one block west and east of the subject sites our Transit emphasis corridors Parcels along this portion of South Moody Avenue between West Cleveland Avenue and West plat Street contain a mix of single family attached and detached development at a density of 16.33% [Music] existing mix of single family attached and detached and the adjacent office uses Planning Commission staff finds that the request will allow for compatible infield development the comprehensive plan encourages single family attached units to be designated with front entrances oriented towards neighborhood sidewalks through streets the entrances of unit units 1 and two are oriented towards South Moody Avenue meeting the intent of land use policy 9.2.6 sidewalks are provided to the detached unit enhan encing pedestrian connectivity along South Moody Avenue the request supports many of the policies in the comprehensive plan as it relates to housing the City's population as the 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 populations the request will also provide additional housing choices within walking distance of Transit the request is compatible with the surrounding development pattern and consistent with the density anticipated under the residenti 35 designation and that concludes my presentation if you have any questions any questions I see n yes Sam Thomas development coordination we'll get started with our aerial map a little bit so you have the subject site outlined in red here um on South Moody um development pounding surrounding the subject site is a mixture of uses um this is a rather dense um area of the city you have the South Howard Corridor here that um I'm sure you all are very familiar with um along South Moody you have a mix of Office business professional uses multif family um single family attached and semi detached uses um just to the South you have a plan development here that was approved for um 12 multif family units and then further south you have um the Publix's on West plat street that I'm sure you all are familiar with you can see some more um semi detach and attached uses here um multif family here so overall you have quite a variety of housing types here as you move further to the West you do have some single family detached and then same over in this general area as well so we will now go to the site plan provided by the applicant will zoom in a little bit more so the applicant is proposing two structures um for a total of three units along South Moody Avenue um you have two semi- detached units that will be fronting South Moody Avenue and then off the alley you have a proposed single family detached um unit um vehicular access to these two units is provided from South Moody you have a onear garage for each unit and then one parking spot and the driveway for each unit as well the front doors are oriented towards Moody and then for the single family detached you have vehicular access P provided from the alley it has a two-car garage the front door is oriented towards Moody but there is a pedestrian connection provided along the northern part of the subject site that connects to a sidewalk on Moody Avenue the sidewalk on mood Moody is proposed to be 5 ft um overall six parking spaces are required and six parking spaces are being provided the maximum Building height is proposed to be 45 ft and then lastly the applicant is proposing a 6 tall PVC fence along the northern property line and the southern property line um let's go through to the elevations now so here are your elevations for the semi detached units that will be fronting Moody and here are your elevations for the single family detached home that will be in the back off the alley I'll go through some pictures now so this is on Moody looking West directly at the subject site this is looking North on Moody you can see um one of the offices at the corner of Moody and Cleveland this is looking east across from the subject site so you can see um some of the semi- detached uses there and then office directly across from the subject site this is looking South um on Moody Street this is the subject site here this is also look this is looking Southeast on the subject site so you can see the semi detached and then one of those ers multi family apartment buildings that you typically see in the hide Park area this is looking West this is the subject site here this is the montauri school's parking lot the montauri school is directly behind the subject site on the other side of the alley so this is their parking lot this sign is related to The Mont school not this application so this is from within the moner school's parking lot this is looking North at the subject site on Moody Avenue is over here and this is um looking West towards the alley so the subject site would be over here outside of frame and then this is the alley that will be used to access a single family detached home this is looking North on the Alley towards Cleveland this is this uh subject site here this is looking East towards moody this is the back of the subject site off of the alleyway and this is looking South down the alleyway this is the subject site here and they have the montauri school over here we'll put the site plan back up development coordination and compliance staff reviewed the application and find the request to be consistent should it be the pleasure of council to approve the application um modifications to the site plan is shown on the submitted revision sheet must be made between first and second readings I'm available if there's any question any questions thank you very much applicant come on up sir please St your name good evening Council Steve M um the council admonished the the developer to come back with a more reasonable plan which was to reduce the density uh and we've done that by removing one of the units that was being requested to meet the code to remove the waivers and to increase theen Green Space um we presented that to the city staff they evaluated it read this read the um the Motions that were made and determined that by reducing the number of units being requested even though the land use designation is R35 which would allow for five units to be considered the three units are being proposed um if you would like for me to read that motion for you it um the motion was the most egregious issue was the Green Space going from 350 square ft per unit to 107 we now meet that code and we exceed it the Tampa City Council motion the green space requirement is now being met in addition the reduction of the density through the removal of one unit adds to the meeting of the refined area and uh they went on to say U this was the council's discussion both issues were discussed and additionally we were advised to come back with a less intensive development one that met the code and did not have waivers that were um affecting the site and we've done that the um we've increased the amount of Green Space all the required trees will be planted on site we're not putting any of the trees into the uh into the tree bank and we are as I said meeting the green space requirement all of the front doors that was another issue that was being requested for us to address they meet um the criteria facing the street of Moody and the standard according to the staff report says that we've met that criteria in addition to promote this encourage development where appropriate in this location and the council previously found that we did meet that criteria it was an appropriate use and an appropriate location however the waivers um were not acceptable and we've removed those promote the more desirable living and working conditions uh we've done that and we've reduced that so that it's a duplex in the front essentially and a single family uh structure in the rear the promote elevations are complimentary to the surrounding community and that's also been found consistent with the city staff we don't have to go through the review for the criteria for the for the waiver compliance because we're not asking for any waivers um but I will go through the issues regarding the compatibility of the site and is surrounded by office uses to the north and east and the in the west of the parking lot for monor school now the staff has also shown you a picture of the site and this is the South View so the property is adjacent to a parking lot there are no other properties over here that would be adversely affected this is a photograph an aerial photograph of the subject site here you see the parking lot here and Alley here and Moody is over here this also shows you the town houses and multif family here Offices here offices there um and down here you have other uh single family semi- detached structures so that that's basically going toward the issue regarding compatibility of the use in the area this is looking South um along the alleyway this is another view further south looking toward the property the subject property is to the right and it's showing you that we have have other townhouse projects in the immediate vicinity so we're not introducing an incompatible use in this [Music] area if I can get this to separate here this is a view looking directly across the street showing you the office on the right on the left side um and the subject property is directly across the street these are town houses again directly across the street this is a picture of the subject property you know according to the staff the Planning Commission for the city staff we've demonstrated that this is a change that would be U allowed to be considered by the city council we provided them with the direct motions from your previous discussions and we have addressed all of them this is a diagram showing you the um the green space is being provided two units in the front one unit in the back with the uh the garage is one enclosed for each one at 22 ft um that was another discussion you all had about regarding the widths of garages to make sure that they were compatible and you could open the car doors Etc and access them um and then this is the twocc car garages in the back that are 22 ft wide and again I'll State for the record that all of the tree requirements we met on site we've met the green space requirement we're not asking for any waivers City staff and the Planning Commission have both found it to be consistent and uh we've met the criteria that's established in the code regarding promoting and encouraging development were appropriate in location and again um this is appropriate considering the surrounding development and promote desirable living conditions and working environments that would be possible through the strict interpretation of the code and we've done that also I'd like to point out that we're um within the transit Corridor areas which is where previously the council has mentioned that you were trying to encourage development to occur so there are two Transit corridors you have both uh the South mcdill as well as the the Cleveland area as a consideration for Transportation uh that concludes my presentation I'll be happy to answer any questions any questions funden and Vier fund are North side or five your audio is choppy sir try again let me bring the phone closer to my foot uh the North and the and the South setbacks the north setback is five 5' 5 in and the south is 5' 6 in is that right yes and the adjacent usages uses are for the North and South the North side is an office the south side is a parking lot thank you all right anything else anybody in the public wish to speak on this item this is item six we have nobody registered can I get a motion close motion close from council member Miranda second from second council member all in favor I any opposed council member Vieira do you have the agenda to read item six if you'd like to go ahead sir yeah um I move an ordinance resoning property in the general vicinity of 203 South Moody Avenue in the city of Tampa Florida more particularly described in section one from zoning District classification r01 residential office to PD plan development residential single family detached and semi detached providing an effective date do we have a second second second council member Miranda roll call vote Miranda yes Carlson yes herat yes Clint Danon can't hear you Clint Danon yes yes Henderson yes viea yes and manako yes motion carried unanimously second reading and adoption will be held on January 9th 2025 at 10:30 a.m. in city council chambers 315 East Kennedy Boulevard third floor Tampa Florida 33602 thank you very much we're going to do item number seven after number seven we're going to take a short recess coun we have hours and hours of public comment yes we do at least oh at least two to three hours yes sir go ahead same Thomas development coordination agenda item number seven is Rez 2511 or request to reone 2705 and 2708 North 18 Street from residential single family 50 to plan development for store F residential all commercial neighborhood uses I'll turn it over to Emily with the Planning Commission thank you sir yes ma'am go ahead Emily failen Planning Commission staff uh the subject sit's located within the central Tampa planning district the East Tampa Urban Village and the north eor neighborhood it's also an evacuation Zone e uh this is the subject site located here and here um to the west of the subject site are single family detached residences facing 17th Avenue um in addition to a place of religious assembly and a mix of commercial uses and Commercial uses are ALS also located a block South along East Columbus Drive this is the future land use map again the subject site is here and here it is represented with the residential 20 future land use designation which is to the north west and south of the subject site as well as the East and the Orange is the residential 10 designation the comprehensive plan encourages the Adaptive I know something else always comes along Clen den and please mute yourself I'm glad that was all I said oh all right well sure are we to yes ma'am go ahead sorry uh the comprehensive plan encourages the Adaptive reuse of historic structures within Urban Villages as such the existing footprint of the structure is considered conforming with the future land use designation and the commercial component of their Quest is is exempt from locational criteria the comprehensive plan encourages providing a complimentary mix of Housing and services within the city's neighborhoods to meet residents needs the proposed PD meets this policy Direction by proposing a mixture of uses through adaptive reuse in an urban neighborhood the plan development is retaining a front entrance along East 17th Avenue and it connects to an existing sidewalk additionally the comprehensive plan supports providing a variety of housing options for Tampa's growing populations the proposed PD will provide additional infill housing on an underutilized lot overall the proposed resoning would allow for the development that is comparable and compatible with the character of the surrounding uses and is consistent with the development pattern anticipated under the residential 20 future land use designation and that concludes my presentation if you have any questions any questions yes sir come on up Sam Thomas development coordination get started with our aerial map so here's a subst site outlined in red on North 18th Street and East 17th Avenue and Owen Street um this line right here is kind of the dividing line between the yc2 zoning district and the B City local historic district and then to the north you have the rs50 zoning districts um directly east of the subject site on 17th Avenue this is a um set of quite a few semi- detached units um Direct across the subject site you have vacant land and then a um a church as you go down to this side you do have um another part of the subject site here directly next to it is a single family detached home and then just south of that um you have some multif family on North 18th Street um as you move to the east you do have um two other cigar factories in proximity to this subject site you have the L relo cigar Factory here and then you have the Perfecto Garcia a cigar Factory over here that is being converted into a multif family development um then as you move further south you have I4 and then you get into the heart of eore City here is a site plan EXC me Mr Thomas I'm sorry Mr Thomas is softspoken I have a hard time hearing if you want to chat please go downstairs and come back later I'm just going to ask one more time thank you my apologies I'll try to speak louder it's fine should be talking period thank you um so here is the site plan provided by the applicant um the applicant proposes um to reuse the for former cigar Factory um for storefront residential uses um the structure will include 3,400 ft of retail space on the first floor and then on the second floor they will have five multif family units um the second parcel to the east here will be utilized for parking surface parking the front door for the multi family structure um for residents to access that will be on 17th Avenue and then access to the retail will be from the rear back here so pedestrians will be able to walk and then make the connection there um back off of 18th Avenue um there will be two parking spots on this portion of the subject site you have a handicapped parking spot and then one normal parking spot the solid waste is also located here along with some bicycle parking let's see here what else do we want to cover um there are 11 spaces required and 11 11 parking spaces provided which is a mix of vehicular parking spaces bicycle parking spaces and motorcycle parking spaces so yes there are not 11 vehicle parking spaces on here but the motorcycle and bicycle parking count towards their overall parking requirements um the maximum proposed height is 35 ft which is for the existing building I will now go to oh and I did want to mention that this line right here that is a separation between the eore city local historic district and then what now you're in the East Tampa overlay north of that um let me show you some elevations before we move on to pictures so this is the west elevation of the existing structure this is the East elevation of the existing structure so this would be along 18th and this is the South elevation and this is the north so this is along 17th we'll go into some pictures now so this is looking South on um 18th Street so this is the multif family that I mentioned to you before this is Columbus drive down here this is the subject site here in the corner zo a little bit so now we are looking North here is the subject site here and then another portion of the subject site there 18th and then 17th here you can see some of those single family homes this is looking down an alley that runs back behind the subject site this is the subject site here on the other side of this alley is once you get into the yc2 zoning in the B City local historic district this is looking East um at 18th you got the multi family and then a single family structure across from the subject site we're now looking West on 17th here is a subject site here and then you have that vacant land and then the church over in the distance this is looking South at the subject site you have 18th and then 17th Street here this is those um semi- detached units that I mentioned directly next to the subject site this right here is looking back East here's the subject site the semi- detached units there and this is a long 17th this is looking North directly across 17th Avenue from the subject site we've moved back East down 17th back to the intersection of 17th and 18th this is the where the surface parking is going to be and now we're looking West back towards the subject site um you have the existing cigar Factory here and then where the surface parking will be located and this is looking North across 17th from where the surface par parking will be located at those single family detached homes and now we've crossed 17th and we're looking South towards the subject site from the other side of 17th Avenue so this would be looking South towards eort City I'll put the site plan back up uh development coordination and compliance staff reviewed the application and find the request consistent the proposed use of storefront residential and an existing cigar Factory is is appropriate in location compatible with the surrounding area and a more efficient use of the land in the existing structure should it be the pleasure of city council to approve the application and the waivers associated with it modifications to the site plan is shown on the submitted res division sheet must be completed between first and second reading I'm available if there are any questions any questions all right anything else sir yes sir all right applicant for item seven yes ma'am please St your name uh Bryce pen with half Associates here representing the applicant um and the owner and the applicant is also here if you guys have any questions for them later on so Sam did a good job of um explaining where the site is located zoom out a little bit so we can get the full there we go great okay um so the site is located at 2705 and 2708 northe 18th Street um in the East Tampa area you can see the scar Factory outline there and where the surface parking will be this is an older picture of the cigar Factory um it was first built in 1925 um and it was used first floor as the factory and the second floor is living space for the family um the site total is about .24 acres has a future Lane use of R20 and is zoned rs50 um as staff said it is located within the north eborn neighborhood of the central Tampa planning district East Tampa Urban Village and East Tampa overlay district and it also is within the National Historic overlay so the request is to rezone from rs50 to a plane development for storefront residential all CN uses um it's going to be a reuse of the existing building so the first floor will be about 3400 Square ft of CN uses and the second floor will be five multif family units um the R20 flu allows for an F of up to 05 and up to 20 dwelling units per acre but L's policy 5.1.7 allows for um the existing F of the structure to be considered conforming and this area here is just outdoor patio area the adjacent lot to the east will be used for surface parking um as Sam stated um it's not all vehicle parking it's going to have some motorcycle spaces and bicycle rack slots which are um added into the equation for parking spaces so we are found um consistent since we're providing 11 parking spaces when 10 are required for the site we are requesting waivers um first with the buffers for use to use and for the bua um as shown in green and um we actually received letters of support from the neighbor from south of the proposed parking area that they're in support of this and they're aware of the use to use buffer waiver um we are also waving General design standards for non-residential buildings within the East Tampa overlay since it's a reuse of a structure we're not redeveloping please silence your cell phone yes um since we're not building a new structure we're reusing the cigar Factory and also reducing the front yard set back to zero we are exceeding the Green Space requirements for the site um 724 feet of green space is required and we're providing over 12200 ft of Green Space um in the image shown we made some changes that are going to be um submitted between first and second reading to where the trees are located because we're working with Aaron and um we first showed trees a little bit too close together so we kind of space them out and rearrange them so um eight trees are required and we're providing eight trees these are Snippets of um letters of support received from the neighbors um as I stated the one to the south of the proposed parking area they're in support they're aware aware of the buffer waiver um and also the existing cigar Factory to the west of us wrote um you know a two-page letter of support and they're all on the record um we found we were found consistent by all reviewing agencies and we're also consistent with um all of the land use policies listed they're all about basically uh redeveloping and um supporting the Urban Village designation for redevelopment projects encouraging reab Rehabilitation of existing structures um and all of those and I believe that's it so I am here if you have any questions any questions all right anybody in the public wish to speak on this item this is item number seven we don't have any um anybody registered anybody to speak yes ma'am sorry please say your name di fente I have been sworn in and I just want to say thank you for the opportunity for allowing me to be here this project is not just a project it is family this my great-grandfather lived upstairs and downstairs we had 500 cigar rollers and this location is going to be 100 years old next year it's asinine that I'm doing this project but is my gift to the city I want to be able to give back to the to the city that gave me so much and I am honored to be able to be here and standing in front of you so thank you for the opportunity thank you very much and you're part of the applicant so that there's plenty of time left in the okay you're good you're good anybody else councel I just want to know why when she said 100 she looked at me oh well your birthday was 20 only joking I thought you your birthday turned 21 no it was recent I can answer that [Music] question all right anybody else we have a motion Clos from member council member Henderson all in favor I council member Miranda do the honors chairman file number 7 file number RC 25-11 owners being presented for first reading consideration owners read owning property General C of 2705 2708 North 18th Street in the city of Tampa Florida or particularly described in section one from zoning District classification rs50 residential single family PD plan development storefront residential all commercial neighbor use providing an effective dat we have a motion from Council Miranda second Council Carlson roll call vote Carlson yes herk yes GL cl cl yes Henderson yes viea yes Miranda yes M SC yes motion carry unanimously second reading and adoption will be held on January 9th 2025 at 10:30 a.m. in city council chambers 315 East Kennedy Boulevard Tampa Florida 33602 thank you very much yes just to understand that this is the same family got two buildings in eore City on 21st Street I I think between second and third that have done a marvelous job that remodeled one and built one just like the one to remodel years back and I just want to say you know there's nothing more important than family and what you're doing here because histor preservation is so important and as you see not everything gets preserved in 100y old building is not easy but uh you're investing in that it's your family's Legacy you're not crazy you're you're not crazy you're doing a great thing and we're we're glad to see projects like this so thank you very much we're going to have a 10-minute recess and then we're going to continue on to midnight no I had a big lunch starting [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] w [Music] [Music] oh [Music] [Music] is [Music] sh [Music] [Music] [Music] o m [Music] [Music] [Music] o oh [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] oh [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] n [Music] nah [Music] here Clinton Clint Henderson present Vieira here Miranda here and maniso here we have a physical quum thank you yes sir item number8 uh Sam Thomas development coordination agenda item number eight is Rez 2452 uh resoning request for 205 207 209 East Columbus Drive 2301 2303 2307 2315 North Florida Avenue 20 uh 204 and 206 East Amilia Avenue and folio number 19372 from residential multif family 24 and Commercial intensive to plan development for storefront residential all commercial General Uses and commercial parking um the applicant is proposing an approximately 247,000 structure of that um square footage 450 um 44,500 Square ft um would be consisting of retail um space I do have a revised revision sheet that I would like to provide for Council and the clerk and I do have um extra copies if any um one in the public would like to see the revised revision sheet um so I'm going to put the revised revision sheet on the Elmo for the benefit of the virtual council members and and then also because I want to talk through the revised changes that have been made since this case was continued from the November public hearing so on I went ahead and highlighted the proposed changes that have been added to this revised revision sheet since the last public hearing when this was continued um so on December 10th the applicant provided staff with newly proposed changes to be made between first and second reading should Council approve this request um the changes proposed by the applicant are not significant enough to trigger another DRC meeting and review by all staff therefore there is no new staff report from development coordination or the Planning Commission but I will go ahead and go over these changes with you so starting off um the applicant is proposed to step down the building from Florida Avenue in Columbus Drive to the single family homes located on the Eastern portion of the subject site off of North Morgan Street so on Columbus Drive in North Florida Avenue they're proposing seven stories or 89 ft this was originally six floors 89 ft then adjacent to the single family homes they're proposing three three stories or 35 ft at a minimum of 15 foot set back and then think of the layer cake or the wedding cake scenario once they get above 35 ft when they go to their fourth floor they will go up to 49 ft but at a minimum step back of 29 ft so you'll go up to 35 ft step back 29 ft and then they can go up to the 49 ft so due to the changes in the height and the layout of the structure this has slightly increased their unit count from 208 units to 21 units so due to the changes in the unit count they're also going to revise their um vehicular and parking calculations in the site data table to reflect those changes in the unit count um then lastly the applicant or not lastly but also the applicant has provided the parking um updated their parking calculations as well and reduce the number of parking because they were overp parked before they were originally proposing 350 parking spaces they are now proposing 320 parking spaces there're still while they're meeting the parking requirement and exceeding it so nothing's changing when it comes to them they're not lowering and going below what the required parking is um and then lastly the applicant is adding a note to the site plan stating that only a right turn in and right turnout will be allowed on Columbus Drive until the Western turn lanane is installed at the intersection of West colum or of col of Columbus Drive and Florida Avenue and at which point when that turn lane is added then they would be allowed full op operation and full access to go either left or right out of there um so with that being said I am available for questions if there are any questions and I would like to turn it over to Emily failing with the Planning Commission just for a quick um rundown from the Planning Commission and then after that we'll turn it over to staff unless Council would like me to go over anything from the last public hearing yes ma'am uh Emily fand Planning Commission staff uh we don't really have anything else to add from what Sam went over just to reiterate that the Planning Commission did find it consistent and as such with the last report and I'm available if you have any questions any questions all right applicant anything no yes ma'am question Mr chairman yes Martin Shelby City Council um this being a continued public hearing how much time do you need for your presentation I'll get it in under 15 minutes and this will be highlighting the changes just the changes correct go ahead say your name hello hello again it's great to be here to see you once more Nick Herring Executive Vice President with the framework group I have been swor in we are located at 1211 Northwest Shore Boulevard here in Tampa and that's zip code 33607 quick refresher on the location of our development we are at the corner of Florida Avenue in Columbus Drive this is an assemblage of nine Parcels totaling just about two acres and since I presented to you on November 14th we have made significant changes and we've done that through additional coordination with with neighboring Property Owners I have tonight to show you a major revision to the scale in the massing and that's particularly adjacent to the single family homes we've reduced parking as requested by this Council and I have further analysis in a proposed solution to share regarding vehicular access so to begin with massing during my November 14th present presentation I stated that in our view uh we had achieved compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood and particularly with the single family homes to our East but since then we've done far more we've substantially shifted the massing of this building shaving off multiple floors on that Southeastern Edge AB budding the single family and we set the building back as it rises now and this can be seen the diagram in the bottom left hand side of the page the Brown building on the right side of that diagram is the single family home there are three of them on our Eastern side we have made the these changes at the exact request of our property neighbors that added height now up to seven stories is uh lining Florida and Columbus that can be seen by the colored portions of the building on the site on the site plan on the right hand side of the screen and we've been told by other community members and City staff that additional height and massing on Florida and Columbus is desired so we're achieving that as well with this change the result is in East Eastern edge with a scale that matches exactly the arc's recommendation it's a 35 foot Max height at a distance 15 ft from the property line as was explained and a onetoone setback thereafter every foot We rise we set back another one foot and here's how it may look from ailia Avenue in reality that single family home is on the far right of this diagram recall that we're also building a 6ft masonry masonry wall on our shared property line for privacy this angle the southwest corner of Florida in Amelia gives you a better idea of that step down and massing again starting at seven stories on Florida Avenue stepping down to five mid block and a four-story tiered design adhering to the arc's recommendation on the Eastern property line This angle from the southwest corner of Florida and Amilia gives you a good view excuse me backing up um and here we are at the corner of Florida and Columbus now standing seven stories tall this intersection of two major arterial roads what once was and still is desired as the town center of Tampa Heights as I mentioned on November 14th we're proposing seven stories now it appears to be an even more dense an even more urban building deserving of this location as I mentioned so all at the same time we are achieving greater compatibility with our neighbors this change is a true win-win on the subject of parking we've reduced our total parking now by 20 spaces 330 actually is the total now we did that based on your feedback what we've adopted is actually the code minimum for the city of Tampa's multif family residential use on a per unit basis and that aligns well with our standards and our data for parking our market experience it allows for one parking space for each studio apartment one in a half for each uh one and two-bedroom apartment and two parking spaces for every three-bedroom that's illustrated by the chart on the right hand side but we are proposing far less guest parking than that same code requires we're proposing seven spaces or roughly 3% of our unit count the code minimum for multif family res itial would be about .25 spaces per apartment and that would be 46 additional spaces and what we're proposing so of course we aren't going that far and our retail parking is proposed at six spaces per 1,000 square ft of retail which is right down the Fairway among potential users for commercial or retail and you can see that by the chart here our proposed parking ratio is highlighted by the green row we believe our overall parking strategy allows for flexibility the parking demand for apartments is less than we anticipate and that's completely plausible and we have a retail or commercial user that requires a higher parking demand we have the flexibility to accommodate and the opposite is true as well of course so this parking strategy makes good sense in our view I have more analysis to share tonight regarding the vehicular access to the property and I want to begin with the Amelia Avenue entrance scenario not what we've proposed we've proposed an entrance on Columbus but this is what has been suggested this entrance is far less compatible with the neighborhood than a Columbus Drive access would be specifically this entrance would Route traffic to Morgan Street in conflict with drivers and pedestrians of course trying to get to and from the Tampa Heights Elementary Magnet School something that we want to avoid in additionally traffic would be funneled to unsignalized intersections symbolized here by the stop signs on the diagram and in some cases drivers are going to have to Traverse three lanes of traffic at Tampa Street and Florida Avenue which is not ideal for safety purposes the safer option is access on Columbus Drive we are routing traffic to signalize intersections as intended we're reducing traffic on the surrounding neighborhood we're of course reducing impact to the elementary school it's on the far right of the screen with the pink Square however to address the additional traffic that will be generated on Columbus we know there will be we're proposing some change to our access it requires a little bit of of background knowledge to explain our traffic study submitted to and accepted by the city it recommends 145t turn l for westbound Columbus Drive at Florida Avenue for today's traffic a turn lane that does not exist today not based on new development traffic but existing traffic it also recommends an additional length for our new traffic that could be generated but as a part of our development we're required to pay fair share of Mobility Mobility fees traffic impact fees of course for those or potentially other improvements at the discretion of the city that's how it works as a procedure here in Tampa we pay into the fund the city decides what improvements will be made this is a conceptual drawing of what that might look like the additional turn lane at the length specified biot traffic study that's 145 ft for existing traffic plus 50 ft for any additional traffic that we may uh generate these improvements are not uncomplicated they will be timec consuming if the city desires to carry them out and that is because the city will have to coordinate with the FD for Florida Avenue at this intersection there's also an existing heart bus stop at the Columbus Drive right of way that will need to be worked out so this is a timec consuming process but to reduce the impact of our traffic on uh Columbus Drive unless or until those improvements are made and in spirit of compromise we are proposing a ride in ride out access only so if those improvements are wa are made in the future we would like the flexibility to allow for left out left in but until that point we're proposing right in right out while that won't reduce the car count of course the traffic will flow more freely no doubt there'll be fewer stops uh fewer backups with this approach so we thought this was a good compromise I'd like to conclude with a brief overview of our efforts to date the different versions of our plan that we overhauled and then refined and then we overhauled all over again we started over a year ago and we proposed something like this it's a simpler more economical build it's got straight forward massing it's got a ventilated garage naturally ventilated and it's still interesting we we're excited to propose this it's it's got an elevated amen amenity it's got a strong presence on Florida Avenue but all the same we took feedback from the neighborhood and we proposed a major overhaul to that site plan that feedback encouraged us to fully conceal that garage envelop it in apartments rather than expose it to pull it away from our neighbors to create a residential presence on Amelia with walkup units and Courtyards to modify our Landscaping to expand our sidewalks to relocate our vehicular access to establish a commercial front on Florida Avenue to Anchor our prominent Corners with retail and we did all of that we said yes to all those things and then this plan was further defined and that's refined and that's uh there are many examples of that indicated by the blue circles on this diagram um we added an arcade we remained flexible and see and we said yes where we could but we did we did that while safeguarding our own interests and of course the development's feasibility our ability to move forward imminently and deliver on our process on our promises and that's what matters and of course a big change from November to today we reconsidered our compatibility with our neighbors we re-approached them in some very productive and thoughtful discussions over the last month and we reimagined our massing now seven stories in Florida and Columbus stepping down toward the single family we said yes once again to the arc recommendations and to the wishes of our neighbors and we were happy to do so members of city council I I'm grateful for you uh for listening I hope you find these changes compelling and I'm here to answer your questions thank you any questions yes ma'am can you be specific about when you said you talk to the neighbors um a few of them are here tonight they could attest to what I'm about to tell you we met in person multiple times we met by um Zoom when I was fighting off for cold I've met with uh and had plenty of discussions with them and emails as well text messages so the civic association not the civic association but our immediate Property Owners prior to and we explained in the last hearing we spent over a year coordinating with the thca feel that we have their recommendations their their desires and and we explained what we could do and we got as far as we could in accommodating their requests our Focus has been with our immediate Property Owners or immediate property neighbors over the last month thank you all right yes ma'am um I just want to say it's an impressive amount of changes without having to go back to DRC that was pretty amazing so yeah um really love the massing uh closer to the street I think think that's more appropriate for this area also really love the reduction in parking um but really appreciate the mass the reduction of mass next to the single family homes um just the visual that you provided really shows the difference and I appreciate that appreciate you thank you all right there anything else I want to ask for public comment public that wishes to speak on item number eight come on up say your name yes ma'am come on up please say your name yes my name is Moren AAL and I thank you for letting me speak again tonight I was here at the earlier presentation um and at that time I spoke as a stakeholder in Tampa heights ma' were you sworn in uh no let's do this because we had a lot of movement if anybody is going to speak tonight please stand raise your right hand and have yourself sworn in or we'll SAR you in yeah if if if you haven't us been sworn in yet but if you're new please stand upy you are to provide I do thank you very much I'm sorry for the interruption go ahead no problem um I spoke as a stakeholder owning three properties two blocks north from the proposed development and I shared with you some of the crazy um things we had like yoga studios being vacated for live shootings right outside and the reason why I believe having residential in this neighborhood is the first step to really reactivating a neighborhood um along those lines I ask you when you consider the traffic um the additional traffic challenges there is no better voice in this town than to get 350 new residents most of whom I believe will be educated and many will also probably be connected to work with the city and fot and get changes that they have been derel in following through over these many years and I am committed to working with uh getting that type of group together but tonight I also wanted to make a few comments from my professional business for 42 years I work with investors and my skill is helping them weigh rewards against the risks and I will tell you in the last several months we have seen um developers backing off from taking risks and what is the biggest driver of risk uncertainty so what does that mean today well uh in the US commercial real estate building uses a lot of products we are the largest importer of wood from Canada what has Trump threatened tariffs from Canada also we get 30% of our steel and 28 tons of cement from China there is no love affair between Trump and China basically what I'm trying to show you is that the cost the uncertainty in this environment is going to be very difficult to for any investor to move forward with with complete confidence so I think it's our job to try to help them through what they are about to um face and finally deportation we have a lot of uh construction workers here who run the risk and are concerned about whether they'll be able to re remain here and build the building I can close with that thank you thank you very much is there anybody else that wishes to speak yes ma'am please say your name Lee Wilson Versi 720 South Orleans Avenue uh we are I am one of the owners of the three houses that are AB budding the property and I was in a lot of conversation with Nick and I think that that the overall project I'm in support of I'm with conditions that I would like to see traffic um looked at very carefully and I think that retail on the bottom floor facing Columbus and Florida Avenue are very important the historic district is unique in the sense that we have that Corridor and another Corridor that make a Gateway and I think that it makes a statement if you have a building that's just completely um residential and I think it needs to be a mixed use and that's thank you very much yes sir come on up and please say your name good evening uh my name is Russ for Saji I'm a stakeholder were in the three houses with my wife that abut the uh development and um I'm here tonight to say that I'm in favor of the development getting approved the developer has um made some changes as Nick has articulated to accommodate two of the conditions there were more conditions but these two were particularly important to us um the they lowered the building height and stepped it back uh where it went up uh even higher uh where the building face abutted the three Bungalows and that was uh important uh to us and it it also showed some respect to the historic fabric of the neighborhood um the developer also U seems to have made improvements uh to the congestion of the intersection between Florida in Columbus by requesting the cities unused right of way along uh Columbus be used as a third lane a right turn lane to go north on on Florida that would I think save a lot of aggravation in that corner um in the congestion not all of it but they they seem to have taken the right steps to encourage the city and and we all encourage the city City to um lean on the um Mobility uh factors of the city and the the transportation department to move things along because this is a big development it's going to make a big impact um so those two conditions were addressed um and I believe as well as the developer can he can't force the city to use the right away or the County's road to uh coexist with the state department fdot owns Florida Avenue so there's all three municipalities or entities are all involved in solving that traffic problem um I don't know why it took them so many attempts to arrive at that uh um compromise but I'm happy that they did um as a small residential developer I know the the number of financial hurdles that they are are facing and there's many um but I ask city council and the developer to weigh the conditions that have been requested by the community all of them and use their best judgment to determine which compromises if any are needed to make this $90 million development a win-win proposition thank you thank you very much sir next speaker please say your name good evening Stephanie Pointer I hope the applicant understands that he got a Santa Claus gift when he got this continuance because he wasn't supposed to and I looked at the budding Neighbors when they did that when you guys let them make the continuance and said they're not supposed to do that anymore we quit doing that and nobody realized it and I was okay with that but I'm here's what I wanted to say what I wanted to say was these developers and we've had more developers this evening who have sat down talked to the neighborhoods and come come out with a better product theyve sat down with the neighborhoods and come out with a better product not all developers do that and I'm glad that these folks took the opportunity to go the extra mile and do the right thing by the ab buding neighbors because they're going to be the most impacted that I know Tampa height said that they had some reservations but they they could live with it so I just want to remind everybody that when developers meet with neighbors they're supposed to listen and learn and take that into account when they turn in their plans thank you very much have a good evening anybody else okay there's anybody registered uh applicant do you have a rebuttal do not thank you thank you very much I'm very happy to support this uh project I think it was a major improvement from what was originally presented and what came back I'm I am impressed uh with the with the changes council member Carlson yeah I just want to Echo thank you to the Developers for listening to the community and making the changes and so quickly motion to close Sor Alan I'm sorry Clint Den councilman I'm sorry yeah chairman man SC Clen Den here um question am am I correct in saying that the retail square footage has not changed no it retail there three units of retail I believe has the square footage changed for the commercial aspect St Thomas development coordination the commercial square footage has remained the same it's remained the same yes I guess I'm the only one that's kind of disappointed in that because it's an important commercial core I was kind of hoping they' come back with addal commercial on that on that inter yeah anybody else yeah I Echo that as well I um you know I'm disappointed um especially considering that it is um on that Corridor where that's what we were hoping for and when it came out initially it was only three units of retail space um one maybe about 3,000 ft and then I think two smaller ones um of course he did not mention affordable housing but he said that last week and he didn't come back this week or he said that a few weeks ago and he didn't come back with a changing that which again in a transportation Corridor that would be nice to see our business Community participating in affordable housing along with us but um the when I asked if you spoke to the community I received an I think all of us probably received the email from the Tampa height civic association indicating that there was no communication um between the first time that you came before us and today and um their concerns I just want highlight some of them publicly um which is pretty interesting or is this the time to talk about it yes okay um here we are there were four things in specific that they were concerned about parking should not be above the code minimum the primary vehicular Ingress and egress should not be fur from Columbus and Florida intersection such as an ailia and the current location is a serious concern for pedestrians bike safety which is definitely true there's a school right next door um so that is definitely a concern and then um the commercial use should um include more ground floor they were hoping that you would double the commercial space and then of course they also mentioned the same thing that I mentioned the developer should set aside 10% of units for for affordable Workforce housing um multiple developments of this scale in Tampa Heights um have been required or voluntarily of course elected to do so those are the concerns that were presented by the Tampa Heights um civic association who of course are the folks that worked very um hard on our um overlay plan and everything else like that Mr Rari of course is a developer you know those three properties that the city of Tampa moved I'm very familiar with um those those housing um housing units um but you know he's also a developer so it's kind of easy for him to get on board and support um the changes that you've made and I'll just leave it at that thank you very much and if there's anything else we have a motion close from council member herch do we have a second second wait one more second mencal can I can I ask the applicants something we didn't we didn't close it not closed yet oh I'm sorry yeah go ahead go ahead council member Clinton so for the app refence reference the retail space this this this may be a deal killer for me is it possible before the next meeting that that you guys could come back with the proposal for additional retail space make more uh compatible with that important intersection again we're thinking we're going to for to try to bring Transit up that Corridor and uh it's going to especially for development having those types of services in that areas um councilman Clint dennon uh uh I'm sorry to say no um we have pushed Envelope as far as we can on the square footage of retail uh it is simply what is feasible at this unit count a unit count that I mentioned uh barely works 21 given the operating cost of these developments the complexity of this building the change in the massing the architectural character the the use of brick the structured parking it adds up um additional retail on this development would mean additional square footage on Florida Avenue a high-speed Road it would be midblock retail that would present severe challenges to visibility and to access but with our current approach to retail uh we believe we've put it exactly where it needs to go in the right locations on the corners of our property and exactly the right quantity and we've given it the very best shot to succeed success to us will be occupancy it will be full it will benefit the neighborhood it will not sit unused and and vacant um and of course you know every additional square foot of of retail that we incorporate means less residential and we tip the scales on feasibility I talk about it a lot um and it's been mentioned tonight how sensitive the financials are on developments like these so we're remaining diligent about what we can prom promise I still I have to hold the line there um I'm sorry that's not acceptable to everyone um and we have to be careful about what we say yes to because of course we want to get it done we walk out of here and we want to get to work we don't want the approval to sit on the Shelf so that's where we're coming from I'm I'm empathetic with that I just I'm also sensitive to the fact that we are trying to put a a street car extension right right in front of your development and uh you know that that's that's an important element as well council member herch um do we have someone from Transportation still here yes we do oh he's hidden do you Happ to know um what the I'm sorry um do you happen to know what the speed limit is at Florida Avenue there that's what I thought I thought it's 35 around there isn't it I don't know off hand that sounds about right though yeah that's not High speeed Corridor I just wanted to make that clear was Columbus no florid Florida flid I thought it was 35 that seems about right so okay thank you I thought speed limit dropped on Tampa Street as you got to downtown and I know this guy I got I got a speeding ticket so before I got elected that was the last one I got but it it might be 40 I don't you walk no I walk fast and I was on the way to volunteer for a board meeting so anyways uh motion to close from council member herch is there a second s council member Miranda all in favor I any opposed council member Henderson yeah I'm okay council member her council member Carlson how do I read it read you read The Substitute ordinance not the resolution okay okay um move number eight file number Rez 24- 52 ordinance being presented for first reading consideration ordinance resoning property in the general vicinity of 205 207 and 209 East Columbus Drive 2301 233 2307 and 2315 North Florida Avenue 204 and 206 East Amelia Avenue and folio number 1 91372 000000 in the city of Tampa Florida more particularly described in section one from zoning District classification rm24 residential multif family and CI commercial intensive to PD plan development storefront residential commercial all commercial General Uses commercial parking providing effective date and that's the substitute second substitute yes substitute we have a motion from council member Carlson this is a substitute uh ordinance and a second from council member Vieira roll call vote that this one's a really hard one for me um it's better um sorry plus the revision sheet I'll add that in uh they did improve it but I'm still very concerned about the commercial I'm concerned about the walkability in the area and the fact that I understand Mr clendenon it is on your proposed street car but it's already on the number one bus line and that is the biggest bus line in the city I'm going to I'm gonna say yes but I'm really I'm really close to no and I'm gonna say I'm going to say no but I'm close to yes I really want to support this project I really want support this project I think you guys have brought forth a a a good product it's just not this is such an important Corridor such an important Corner we've got to get it right and like again with the number one with the proposed street car and the importance of this intersection to the neighborhood and as an entry point to the city of Tampa I I really want to hold out for something that really just hits all the right chords and I think you're almost there I think if you had just come in with a little bit more retail I would have been at yes and I hope maybe you could consider that between first and second reading but right now I'm going to be a no Henderson no Vieira yes Miranda yes Carlson can I say yes and Mano yes motion carried with Clint den and Henderson voting no second reading and adoption will be held on January 9th 2025 at 10:30 a.m. in city council chambers 31 East KY Boulevard thir Flor 332 thank you very much actually got an email I know this is better all right this is the last of sorry this is the last item of the night we have a lot of public comment so we just uh need to be patient and focused here we go go ahead sir Sam Thomas development coordination agenda item number nine is Rez 2467 or request to Res Zone 6322 South selbourne Avenue 6225 and 6241 South 6th Street from residential single family 60 to plan development for residential single family semi detached and attached I'll turn it over to Emily with the Planning Commission Emily faen Planning Commission staff the subject sites located within the South Tampa planning district in the in Bay South of Gandy neighborhood the site's located within Coastal planning area specifically evacuation zones A and B and a portion of the subject site is located within the coastal High Hazard area this is an of the subject site it's outlined here in purple to the West is a single family detached neighborhood to the South is mcdill elap Park to the West the East I'm sorry is South is Sky View Park and to the north this this parcel right here it is in a PD that is currently approved for both single family attached homes and neighborhood commercial but it is currently undeveloped this is the future land use map of the subject subject site located here to the north west and south of the subject site it's okay um to the north uh west and south of the subject site is a residential 10 designation and located to the east in little further south of the site is the res is the recreational open space with those two parks as mentioned the subject site is also within the mcdill Air Force flight path where development is limited to a maximum of 10 dwelling units per acre the propos density is 9.5 dwelling units per acre consistent with the density anticipated in this area however R 10 designation limits single family attached uses to specific locations typically on the periphery of established single family neighborhoods the site is accessed from a proposed 24t private driveway situated here in between two single family detached houses although the site is adjacent to a plan development proposed approved for single family attached commercial uses again that site is here um this site has Frontage along Interbay Boulevard which is a collector roadway which is here um okay given the sites only access is through a single family detached neighborhood the Planning Commission staff finds that the request for single family attached uses is inconsistent with the residential 10 designation single family attached uses on the site could adversely impact the character of the adjacent single family detached neighborhood to the West while the comprehensive plan encourages infill development where appropriate and its housing policy seek to provide an adequate supply of housing for present and future populations the site has the potential for AC accommodating single family detached that would align more closely with the character of the adjacent neighborhood lanus policy 9.2.6 encourages entrances for single family attached units to face a neighborhood sidewalker street and when not possible a dedicated path should connect unit entrances to a public RightWay reducing pedestrian and vehicular conflict as proposed building four does not have a pedestrian pathway for safe access to South selbourne Avenue Planning Commission has determined that this request is not adequately um address L use policy 9.2.6 should Council decide to approve the request Planning Commission staff recommends that the applicant provide a pedestrian connection from building 4 to South sborn Avenue between first and second readings the applicant is Seeking a waiver to remove Seven non-hazardous Grand Oaks Environmental Policy 2.7.9 emphasizes the importance of conserving protecting and maintaining the city's mature trees Planning Commission staff encourages the applicant to continue to work with natural resources to explore options for tree preservation overall the request conflicts with policies related to Neighborhood compatibility and the land seeks to ensure new residential product projects are minimally disruptive to adjacent areas and develop within the context of the neighborhood the request is inconsistent with residential 10 future land use designation and the proposed development does not adequately address design policy guidelines for the single family attached uses and that concludes my presentation I'm available if you have any questions any questions no thank you very much yes sir yes Mr Shelby Council Martin Shelby City C counc attorney uh for the record I I I want to address some email Communications that you might have received uh that raise an issue of whether the applicant has a conflict of interest in this matter I have made inquiry and it is my determination there is no conflict of interest that would prevent the applicant from having uh the city council hear this application uh city council is advised that because that issue is not relevant to the criteria upon which you can base your decision giving any consideration to that would be inappropriate thank you thank you Sam Thomas development coordination I do have a revised revision sheet to provide for Council cler I do also have an extra copy of the revised revision sheet should any member of the public would like to review that um I do want to put it on the overhead as well for our virtual council members page one very council member and vi just let me know when you would like me to flip to page two I'm good thank you thank you all right we will now get started with our Arrow overview of the subject site so here you have the subject site outlined in red you can see it outlined in red off South sbour Avenue and then the unimproved South 6 Street um to the east of the subject site you have Sky View Park further south you have mcdill 48 Park um north of the subject site you do have a plan development that was approved for um a daycare strip shopping center and 30 single family attached units um as you move to the West you have rs60 zoning um that is made up of single family detached homes you have rs50 here that's also single family detached homes and then in the general area to the north and to the West um you have single family detached homes you do have some rm16 zoning over here on South marale Avenue and that mainly consists of um small older single family semi- detached units there um and now we'll go ahead and move on to the site plan provided by the applicant so the applicant is prop um proposing five structures with 23 single family semi- detached and attached units um these are your attached units here and this is your semi- detached structure here um two units is semi- detached if you go to three or more then it's considered attached um the front doors for um all of the units Orient in tour um to an internal drive aisle um there are some pedestrian connections provided to um provide access to South selborn Avenue two parking spaces are provided um for each unit um and there are four guest parking spaces located here 52 parking spaces are required overall and 52 parking spaces are being provided access to the site is proposed from South selbor Avenue via drive a where there's an existing single family detached home home the maximum proposed Building height is 35 ft or two stories and there is an open community space proposed here um within the development so now I will walk you through um some elevations provided by the applicant so this is the semi- detached elevations and here is some elevations for the attached units these are also the same attached units as the first [Music] one right now we'll move on to photos so this is looking North on South sbour Avenue um the subject site um access will be provided from the house over here this is looking North on South sbor this is looking um West this is South southorn here the subject site is a little bit farther to the north this is to give you a context of some of the single family homes um this is looking Northeast on South sborn Avenue this is the single family home here that will be demolished to provide access to the site and there's just a bit better of a closeup photo of it this is the subject site here this is looking west across the street from South sbor so South sborn would be in the distance there's a park that is in the middle and then you have single family detached homes on the other side of the park here's a better view of um the subject site where the drive a will go and there is a head-on view looking East at the subject site this is one of the single family homes that bord a subject site to the north this is moving a little bit farther north to sborn Avenue so this is heading towards inter Bay Boulevard now we're looking South on sellborn Avenue um this is the subject site here so now we're going to move towards the internal portions of the site um usually I can give you directionals on these but the site is so massive when it's looking at the photos it was a bit difficult for me to tell which direction I was facing um but this is along the unimproved South 6th Street looking East um at Sky View Park this is looking down the unimproved um South 6th Street you have Sky View Park over here the subject site over here there is a storm water ditch that runs along South 6 Street so this is a view of that um storm water dish that runs along the improved sou six Street this is internal to the subject site um this is looking South to the um partial south of the subject site um this is where I start losing my directionals on which way I was facing um but this these are internal photos of the site to provide you context of the existing conditions on there this one I know we're looking North and Bay Boulevard is up here this side plan back up development coordination and compliance staff review the application and find the request to be inconsistent see the findings from natural resources development coordination and planning commission the development requests um a waiver to remove Seven non-hazardous Grand trees it requires 175 type 1 mitigation trees and 14 type 1 mitigation trees are proposed development coordination staff finds The Proposal with access going through a residential lot that is part of a neighborhood that was platted in 1925 and the number of proposed single family semi- detached and attached units is inappropriate and incompatible with the existing single family development pattern notwithstanding staff's finding of inconsistency should it be the pleasure of council to approve the waivers as identified in the staff report and the application modifications to the site plan on the RIS revision sheet must be completed between first and second reading um these revisions will not resolve the issues of the inconsistent finding um and with that I am available for any questions but I would also like to turn it over to Aon with natural resources for a presentation thank you very much okay Aaron mayor development coordination I'm just going to speak to staff's finding of inconsistency and uh on the overhead in front of you this is just a picture of two of the grand trees that we think with some minor modifications might be able to be uh preserved and I'll talk to them shortly so here's that wonderful green outline again of the aiel you've already seen it but you can see how dense the southern parcel is there are a lot of trees on that site here in this sideways U is a lot of the majority of the Grand Oaks I would say um and this is their proposed site plan I just want to orient you the north is on the right side of the screen here's the access road into the neighborhood uh I'm pointing out here with the red X's that there are seven um non-hazardous preservation quality Grand trees that are proposed for removal here you know they're scattered around the site kind of in this u shaped um now it is a U-shaped um and then they are preserving five preservation quality Grand trees on the site as well so there are a total of 12 preservation quality Grand trees on on the entire site there are some surrounding Grand trees as well but I'm not speaking about any of those um I do want to say too with the removal of these seven preservation quality Grand trees they're equal to 131 uh type 1 mitigation trees alone so pretty significant amount of Grands on the site um so here instead of going over every Grand Tree which you see me do sometimes I'm just going to talk about the two that maybe with some minor modifications could have been preserved uh so here is Grand Tree number 92 which is shown right here this you know a unit may have to be deleted to preserve this tree um but that one is a B5 a lot of the trees are rated pretty highly on the site a lot of them five or six of them are b-rated trees uh this is 38 in diameter and it's worth 16 mitigation trees here number 64 is a B3 rated tree and you can see it's right over the proposed parking um I kind of thought the parking could maybe with a different garage type be placed over here and then this tree could be preserved so that was just one of the thoughts that we had um just going to speak to the tree retention and mitigation now so this is the dark Moss arborist inventory and you can see these Grand trees are mostly here uh in this sideways U shape and so there the site does have a tree retention requirement of 50% of the preservation well a or C rated trees on the site uh the applicant is requesting a waiver to tree retention of 42% that's a weighted tree retention waiver so the site has 74 type 1 trees that are preservation quality and they are proposing to remove 63 of those trees uh so the removal of all type 1 trees requires 175 mitigation trees so here is the proposed planting plan and I do I will say the applicant is providing more than the required Green Space close to three times the amount of the required Green Space um and that is you know because they are saving these five grand trees on their site in this dark green shading is the canopy of those trees so no new trees can be placed there um but the site is removing 63 type one trees uh and there are 14 type one trees proposed you know just due to the amount of spacing you know you can't put a lot of these trees back so all where these number ones are shown that is where all the type one trees are going they're putting type two trees and the buffers um and a few type 3 trees and some Palms around the site so just to wrap up there is a waiver for the seven preservation quality Grand trees which we do not support uh they are preserving five preservation quality Grand trees on the site they have provided Isa pruning reports uh to justify no adverse impacts to the trees that are proposed to be preserved there is the tree retention waiver from 50% to 42% for weighted tree retention there are providing more than the required Green Space however the site overall is losing substantial type 1 tree canopy uh which cannot be replaced on site so there will be a m mitigation payment required at the time of Permitting and that's it if you have any questions thank you very much yep all right the you're good yes ma'am come on up to say your name uh good evening council members um chairman before the clerk starts the clock I'd like to um advise that I currently sit on the Planning Commission however I'm here in my personal capacity um as manager of Lane development and not in my role as a planning commissioner uh I have not spoken with Planning Commission staff on this issue um and I've been advised by Planning Commission councel that there's no conflict as it relates to my presentation council members my name is Alysa Sean and I stand before you not just as a developer but as someone who has called South Tampa home my entire life I'm a third generation Tampa native my mother my daughter and I were all born at St Joe's my grandfather Don Watson was a broker and developer in Tampa and helped make this city what it is even when we were back even when we were a small town today I'm honored to continue that Legacy this project is more than just following in his footsteps it's about securing the future of South Tampa for everyone I have been both an affordable and luxury housing developer in my career I've built many necessary housing units throughout Tampa and St Pete and here are some examples of those just quickly sorry this would be my first project with my own company this project is my commitment to the Future and to my city I'm asking you tonight to take bold transformative steps for those of us who can't afford a $3 million three-bedroom ranch style fixer upper this is about creating homes that are elevated out of flood zones and providing missile missing middle housing defined as diverse affordable housing options this is about solving real issues like flooding Hurricane displacement and infrastructure Decay this is our chance to build a futureproof South Tampa we're facing an unprecedented housing crisis our city is growing fast and the demand for housing is far outpacing Supply according to the Tampa Bay Times housing costs remain high fueled by the regions explosive population growth and a shortage of available units unfortunately and although I know some of us may want to we cannot control who moves here and how many people do so recent estimates Peg that number at around 100 people per day housing costs are driving inflation and the evidence is clear housing accounted for nearly 90% of the increase in CPI for July let me pause let that sink in almost 90% of the recent rise in the cost of living is directly due to housing that's a huge burden on every single person in the city when we fail to create new housing we're contributing to inflation and making life more expensive for everyone not just people looking for housing for new housing the average family now spends 42% of their income on housing the average home buying age today is 56 years old we know what happens when housing becomes unaffordable people leave families get priced out workers are forced to live miles away and the diversity that makes neighborhood special begins to disappear we're already seeing this happen at mcdill Air Force Base and with their personnel and this project was designed specifically to combat that issue for those families we cannot watch our community become a place only for the exceedingly wealthy this is a national issue it's not reserved for us I know everyone who isn't a fan of development has good intentions but if we look at cities like San Francisco we can see where policies resisting development led to skyrocketed housing costs and mass displacement I refuse to let South Tampa fall into the same trap we need homes elevated homes homes that are less than a million dollars homes that can withstand wind and storms home that will homes that will allow people to who have lived in this community for years to stay if we fail to act we risk losing that our home prices will be climbing and the dream of owning a home in South Tampa will slit beyond our reach is a map of the site I would like to talk to you about some project specifics now this property is landlocked without this proposed access there is no way to get to this property the city has already confirmed that this land cannot be accessed by Sixth Street which goes down here sorry I lost my place we went down the path of engaging an engineer and trying to engineer the site to make six Street work the city has told us that this ride of way needs to be retained for drainage for the neighborhood it's not a matter of of access preference it's a matter of necessity the property owners rights are at stake here and we have a chance to turn this land into something good for everyone this project will also help alleviate another critical problem we're all familiar with which is flooding I know it's probably confusing to hear that a development could assist with flooding but my civil engineer has guaranteed me that we have a cuttingedge storm water management plan that will alleviate the flooding problems not just for this site but for the Neighbors as well my civil engineer will speak about that shortly but he's assured me that this strategy will work the current state of this property also makes things dangerous for the [Applause] neighborhood homeless encampments have become a constant issue with fires breaking out threatening the lives of those nearby we can't ignore this the lack of infrastructure including fire access makes this property very unsafe for the Neighbors the situation is of particular concern to me because my daughter lives on this street part of the time with her father I'm not sure that you could find a developer with more interest in this in the way this site is developed than myself this development will eradicate that problem it will provide a safe secure and elevated community and it will eliminate the blight plaguing this site I specifically designed the site and hand sketch these floor plans to contain three to five bedrooms a piece this has been brought up as to be a concern by some of the neighbors but it was served is a huge benefit to others namely military families who need missing middle housing that can actually fit their children unlike the one to three bedroom town homes existing in the area currently I've also heard concerns about traffic let me assure you the traffic impact from this development will be minimal my traffic engineer can speak to that specifically with numbers in addition we will be providing two garage spaces and two driveway spaces per unit this is an addition to the code required guest parking that's more than four spaces per door I've also had three three separate meetings with the neighbors including one on site I've listened carefully to the community and made meaningful changes based on their feedback after hearing concerns about density we reduced the land area for the project and decreased the number of units from 40 to 23 we're also proposing one less unit than the comp plan category would allow we've increased setbacks to ensure privacy the setbacks we have now are the same setbacks these neighbors would have if we we were building single family homes we kept the height of these units to two stories with a rooftop deck we changed the configuration of the units to accommodate full walls on the back of those rooftop decks we moved the guest parking due to the concerns of one of the neighbors we asked the Neighbors which type of fencing they would like we removed the signage at the request of the neighbors we also did our very best to access this site from six Street including spending thousands of dollars in a month's time with our civil engineer trying to come up with something the city would approve of this project has been shaped by the voices of the community and I'm committed to keeping that dialogue open we've also worked very hard to preserve as many trees as possible while balancing ing neighbors requests for maximum setbacks and the city's request to be deeded an easement for storm water drainage so the setbacks are on the west side and the drainage easement is on the east side we've made Seven iterations to the design of this site plan based on feedback including a withdrawal and resubmittal when we took the project from 40 to 23 units we've been working on this for over a year we balanced tree preservation as much as possible with the reality of creating a liable community that would attempt to alleviate neighbor concerns and facilitate staff requests as it relat to this relates to the staff reports and concerns there are many Provisions in the comp plan and the code which which support the creation of missing middle housing and housing for the military thus making this project compatible with the surrounding area in fact the city's comp plan housing element which was recently revised and has has been applauded across the board has multiple V Provisions which support this project including 1.4.0 through 1.4.7 in addition our site sits at 11 ft above base flood elevation which is very high for south Tampa this project orientation and access to the site is not unique the town home community on West Wyoming Circle where I used to live less than a half of a mile from this site employs a similar neighborhood style single family homes surround that complex on both sides and across the street it's not uncommon to find single family homes next to town homes in the city it's what makes our city have character in fact I chose this project because I I believe it to be a fluid transition from the mixed use Circle Seas site to the north that has you as you heard retail and 30 Town Homes this project is an investment in South Tampa's future it will increase property values boost the tax base and provide much needed housing I've seen some neighbors voice concerns about a decline in property values but numerous studies consistently show that development increases property values even more so when infrastructure improvements are involved we have an opportunity to transform an underutilized unsafe and dangerous site into a thriving Community one that is elevated storm resilient safe and sized appropriately for the families of South Tampa this is not just about this site it's about the future we need housing we need smart responsible development and we need developers who care my Consultants will now speak to some specifics thank you thank you very much come on up and say your name as you each speak yes sir good evening Council my name is Jeremy couch with Tampa civil I'm a Prof professional engineer um through this process my team and I have worked diligently to evolve the design of the plan you've seen today as Alissa stated we've had seven iterations considering trees drainage public input and various access options one of those access options was to attempt to improve uh Sixth Avenue the unimproved rideway to our East um based on the width of it which is from 23 ft to 27 ft at its Norther wi widest part um there is not an engineering solution that we could have provided to gain safe access to the site in addition um this is a major drainage artery for the city and it's critical that it remain open for drainage uh at our neighborhood meeting uh many of the neighbors made it very clear to me that the separation between our buildings and their homes was more important than saving some of the trees on site which is why in our site plan you see the large buffer to the West please no interruptions while the speakers are speaking yes sir thank you sir um I'm sure you will hear a lot about drainage today I've analyzed the area and understand the problems that affect our owners to the West their neighborhood was built at a time before appropriate infrastructure was required it was built without storm water inlets piping and Grading many of the yards to the West are constructed below the road and their lot lines are the grading is too flat to provide adequate drainage to the east uh this project will do its part to help in two ways uh first um we will provide uh some additional piping along their rear yards so that if they can get the water to our property it can give be conveyed East further to the ditch on Sixth and then South into the recently uh excavated ated County flood project secondly we're going to provide the storm water department with an additional easement along 6th Street so that they can improve and better maintain that drainage Corridor um few quick things uh you know as I said we're going to be providing drainage for not just ourselves but to help with our neighbors as well uh it's my opinion that we'll help improve the flooding situation to our West for Everyone by providing these new pipes uh the elevation of our site is much higher than most areas in South Tampa and um transportation found us consistent thank you thank you who's next Mr P yes sir please St your name thank you Council Ricky Pica 308 East 7th Avenue with dark Moss I have been sworn um Aaron or Miss mayor gave a great presentation uh detailed presentation I'm going to try to jump straight to the waivers happy to answer any detailed component um if you if you have any questions this is one of the reasonable Recon options that I prepared as part of the analysis for to to promote Grand Tree preservation one of the trees that or two trees I we were proposing to preserve with this option one of them is one of the trees that that Miss mayor mentioned the challenge and this will be the theme with with my with my discussion is that when we were able to preserve these two trees with a loss of a unit then we triggered a solid waste issue with dumpster access and backup and a fire issue there so the second option prepared those two trees were no longer attempted to be preserved these two trees adjacent to the single family were uh elevated let's say to uh preservation status and then by shifting these units over we Pro this provided a additional buffer on the western side to the single family and this became the new site plan version this reasonable Recon concept the challenge was after DRC we were asked by staff to evaluate all the grand trees again relative to the proposed building construction um and when we did that in a 50-page pruning document the largest I've prepared to date the canopy pruning associated with these trees were impacted and that became our two of our seven that were requesting the challenge with this site both for Grand Tree preservation and retention is just the general scattered nature of trees on this site relative to the many contributing constraints of the site development drainage located in the Northwest where or Northeast where that would have been an easy place to avoid trees if this wasn't the place for a pond to go um and just trees almost dead center in the site that made a challenge I'll try to be brief Avail for questions uh if there are any happy to request them then thank you very much is there anybody else there's like 20 seconds left in the presentation all right thank you very much that that concludes the initial presentation at this time we'll then open it up for public comment I have three registered speakers I just want to get them out of the way first because it's easier suing we have three people online oh six people all right bring them on and then we'll swer them in Mr chairman yes just a comment uh ladies and gentlemen um certainly you have the opportunity to speak you have the opportunity to present evidence and to communicate um the facts and your opinion if you wish um but uh Please be aware of the fact that uh for whatever amount of time you have if you make your point and you communicate it clearly um that would be helpful if you uh don't use your full amount of time if you don't have to and uh as well as um uh if something is repetitive um then it doesn't really add anything new but you can certainly just abbreviate that if you can uh thank you for your cooperation and I by what I'm saying I do not mean to limit your opportunity to take the time that you need to make your case thank you all right you're bringing them on one by one we got to do okay all right so we'll start with Philip H Hampton and Jean Strow if Philip and Jean can raise their right hands and uh we'll swear you in if we can go back to the screen yeah there we go Jean please raise your right hand we'll swear you in all right do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you are about to provide is the truth and nothing but the truth yes all right Mr Hampton you go first and then we'll go to Mr Omar you have three minutes go ahead sir please say your name my name is Philip Hampton thank you councilman for allowing me to speak um some backgrounds I'll be brief I know it's late I'm a f tamper resident uh named after my grandfather who was the the first chief of staff at tamper General Hospital um I have a photo of him breaking ground at one Davis Boulevard um I was raised by a single mother who is one of five children she was uh the youngest she owns no property I have no future inheritance um I graduated from University of Central Florida in 2020 on a full ride scholarship and I've been saving up money since then to uh attempt the purchase a home but it has been uh very difficult for me um a couple of friends and I actually attended a city council meeting about a year year and a half ago it seemed we were the only individuals there under the age of 30 and we were also the only individuals who were really questioning councilmen in regards to uh what they were doing to improve the situation for firsttime home virus um we got really no no good answer that time um it seems for most older individuals who own homes already um they state they're in support of affordable housing uh but they seem also disinterested in the building of affordable housing if it happens in their own backyard um I don't know if this is because they believe the flate housing prices which seem to be already quite over inflated um but uh I really believe you cannot have your your cake and eat it too and if you want this city to continue to thrive um there needs to be the potential for young professionals like myself to to purchase a home um and my inability to purchase a home is not for lack of trying uh I've been you know saving up money since I graduated I've never left the continent I've never been to Europe I barely vacation in general and I have a high-paying job places me in the top 30% of earners in the country um despite this the bar for necessary liquidity to purchase the home in Tampa keeps continually moving just Out Of Reach for me and and thousands of other young Tampa professionals um so because of this I I thought it would be prudent that I I really speak out against any attempt to block the development of new affordable or even semi aordable homes um like the the one that's being reviewed uh right now so that's all I had to say thanks for allowing me to speak thank you very much Jean stroy you're next please unmute yourself not sure if you were muted go ahead and say your name she is now still muted all right well m r we'll come back to you we're going to start is there anybody else that you can bring over okay all right mrar we'll come back to you shortly we're going to start with the inperson public comment I know all right come on up please state your name m Mr chairman is this uh Miss portella yes part of the the PowerPoint I have I have a speaker waiver form and again um I'm going to call out um your name please acknowledge the fact you are here you will wave your three minutes and give give the speaker an additional minute please do make sure that your name does not appear on more than one speaker waiver sheet please uh Andrew Johnson thank you um I see I try to make out the first name it's uh accordino J thank you um Magda portella thank you Carmen y did I say it pronouncing okay thank you forgive me uh and Tammy Hazelton thank you five minutes for a total of eight please I almost wore a red turtleneck today by and I told my wife no I'm going to go Blue I'm glad I did so I can be neutral yes ma'am please St your name and you how many how many minutes eight minutes total eight minutes total we have a PowerPoint presentation yes it's here and they're going to bring it up okay Welcome to our neighborhood thank you my name is Astra portella good evening city council first I'd like to thank you all for allowing us this opportunity to speak tonight and explain why we are so opposed to this development my name is asra portella and I live at 6318 South selbourne Avenue adjacent to the proposed development I think to understand our opposition you need to understand the uniqueness of our neighborhood we live in what many people call the U the only entrance into and out of our neighborhood is via inbay Boulevard and we are located between heims and mcdill it is a small quate neighborhood of about 49 homes 44 which are single story homes it is fil filled with many large trees that create a beautiful canopy we have a Park area on selbourne that adds to the charm of our little Community where children play and people walk we have a generational neighborhood with some families living here for over 30 years we have families who all live in the same streets just houses away from each other and this is just a small window into our amazing neighborhood we are fortunate that so many of our neighbors have come together to support our community including adopting our Park this proposed development would negatively impact our neighborhood for many reasons you'll hear several of us speaking about those tonight with this proposed development the planned entrance and exit to 23 Town Homes is via our neighborhood and it will not only bring in more Vehicles increasing traffic but also safety concerns as we have no sidewalks in the neighborhood this development would bring on average 57.5 additional Vehicles onto our streets if not more since some of these units will have five bedrooms the vehicles entering and exiting the roadway for this development will also shine light into all surrounding houses planed developments in our immediate area will exasperate traffic not only in our neighborhood but also entering and exiting in Bay Boulevard com in Bay Commons has been approved and there is already a planed development in our neighborhood 6317 was previously rezoned as a PD for eight single family residents on about 2 acres of land almost the same acreage as the property that they are proposing to put 23 town homes on this year new owners purchased 6317 and they plan to if they continue with the original plan we are looking at an additional 20 vehicles in our neighborhood if this proposed plan development that we are here about tonight is approved our established neighborhood that we love would be completely lost another concerning issue for our neighborhood is flooding the US Department of interior us Geological Survey released the public regarding effects of urban development in floods it found that changes in land use associated with Urban Development affect flooding construction of buildings roads sidewalks Etc involves the removal of vegetation soil and depressions from the land surface and includes grading the land the permeable soil is replaced by impermeable surfaces that store little water and reduce infiltration of water into the ground this is exactly what will happen if this resoning is approved what we'll be discussing tonight is not due to a hurricane or tropical storm the issues we have are with our everyday run-of-the-mill rainstorms part of our neighborhood on South selbourne is prone to flooding all three properties that are developed are to are on the city of Tampa storm water advisory list due to the Natural slope of the ground in the area rainwater flows from the west side of selbourne Avenue through the park and floods out houses on the East before continuing to flow between these houses and and onto the properties of this proposed development from there two things happen the water continues to Head East to a storm water ditch traveling south to mcdill 48 and two water pools creating a pond on the south end of 6225 6 street according to the drawings however the retention Pond is located on the northeast side of the proposed development not to mention once fi dirt is brought into the site and the design flood elevation is addressed the issue of impacting the historical flow of water will be even more problematic in our meeting with the developer that we requested we stated our concerns however in the last set of resubmitted drawings they did not include any changes that address these very concerning flooding issues as a matter of fact they continue to call for a 6ot solid vinyl fence along the property lines which could disrupt the historical flow of water these pictures shown here are these pictures shown here are during a typical rainstorm they show the water flow and the amount of water the houses impact to deal with there have been times where we have had more water than these photos show for us personally we have had to mitigate the water to prevent it from entering our house by purchasing water barriers and sandbags locating them into to direct water around our house as suggested by the city the years of rain and drainage from the West have eroded natural paths in our yards to drain alongside our house to the site of this proposed development as we have no storm water no storm drainage system in our neighborhood we depend on having uninterrupted flow of water any disruption to this natural and historical flow of water could have devastating effects on many homes our other concern is that the construction of two 120ft long row of town homes along the west side of the plan development may act as a dam Distributing water to the areas to other areas infecting homes not currently seen flooding we do not understand that with something as important as addressing storm water issues it is not handled during this phase of planning there are no guarantees anything the developer does would not affect our neighborhood and any web search will provide countless stories where new development has caused flooding issues is there a better way yes yes there is as this is an essentially landlock property there are other options and uses for this land a mutually beneficial contract with Inay comments could be discussed to use their property as an entrance and exit with the property remaining rs60 with single family homes this would allow for reduction of density protecting trees more permeable surface and fit within the neighborhood fabric it would not interfere with the established existing neighborhood and it would not bulldoze down a home in the middle of our neighborhood for a lot full of asphalt for an entrance and exit we are not opposed to development but it needs to be responsible in the right fit our neighborhood is not these developers driveways her City of Tampa the storm water ditch at this location handles significant runoff from their surrounding areas since this property is on the storm water advisory list and takes not only our neighborhood water but surrounding water via the storm water ditch elap could purchase this property for conservation or storm water purpose and potentially included in tacd 48 the other option is that the city of Tampa purchased the property and includeed into Sky View Park as you know MacDill 48 was turned into a beautiful park there is only one issue there is no parking on site one of the entrances to MacDill 48 is right by Sky View Park purchasing this property could allow for reconfiguration of the park that would provide additional parking by the entrance by the end of all this speaking I hope that you see we have legitimate concerns regarding this development in our backyard our concerns Echo the findings of inconsistent by the city of Tampa from the traffic and safety issues to the environmental impact in flood we truly hope that you can help us protect our homes especially since other better options are available we request that this petition be Ned thank you for your time and understanding thank you very much yes Sor no no thank you yes sir I know you have a speaker waiver for him as well sir and no sir I don't so I understand I have three minutes yes sir please state your name sure hey my name is Alberto portella I'm an architect with portella associat Architects at 3207 West fero Avenue Tampa Florida 33611 and we have a continuation of the PowerPoint let's see okay we'll bring the PowerPoint back up and continue where we left I want to discuss tonight a two issues the privacy and building and building concerns buildings are indicated ated in the developer sub midle buildings are indicated to be two stories three levels with rooftop patios overall vertical Building height is shown to be a maximum of 35 ft however another dimension on the presentation is shows showns at 32' 4 in these two dimensions are next to each other making it on clear as to the actual height of the proposed buildings the drawings also show part of the building extending past the 35 ft height which is above the maximum height the developer has shown on their plans once the design based floor elevation established and I understand based on FEA is either 11 or 12 fet above the sea level a then the actual Dimension from grade to top of building could be higher than 35 ft I looked at the survey that was prepared by the by the developers and the topograph graphical information is anywhere from 11 to 12 ft so they're indicating they're going to raise the height of the buildings based on what they're saying they don't have to raise it if they don't want to the average child of the single story homes was of the developer development is less than 15 ft building um fenestration the color elevations presented today they show the pretty picture to the inside of the of the building of the property they don't show what the what the properties on the west of uh the property are going to see and it's basically a very flat elevation as you can see there the the proportion of the building the the little lack of a better word the Monopoly houses is is a the actual size of the of the houses the building in the back is what they're going to have as backdrop building one and building five facing the single family residents have a total of 44 windows seven sliding glass door and roof patios and of building four facing single family residences have five Windows one garage door balcon in the second floor and roof patios the building fenestration have a direct line of sight to the rear yard of the on story residence this will eliminate any type of of privacy the rooftop patios are facing towards the West overlooking the rear of the single family home homes eliminating the house privacy as well as potential noise issu especially and when residents are trying to sleep the site plan submitted shows the rear of building one and five aligned with each other however much sir thank you sir and did I finish how much do you I'm sorry I can give you 10 more seconds okay the this together with the height of the building creates a very disproportionate development to the established single family homes to the West the architectural features of such tall and large buildings are not in character with existing single family homes thank you very much okay all right next speaker pleas say your name sir do you have a speaker waiver for him um no go state your name go ahead Joseph marzzo and I've been sworn in uh evening city council uh my name is Joe marzzo um I live at 32 um 3220 South sbour Avenue thanks for giving me the time to speak to you tonight um I live one of the two properties directly next to the home that is proposed to be torn down paved over and turned into the driveway for the project I bought my home with my wife in 2018 and six years ago we could afford to do so and they're very passionate about affordable housing something we weren't able to do something we wouldn't be able to do again in 2024 with Rising housing costs insurance premium and interest rates you'd see our tiny pink home and think okay it's a 1979 concrete block three-bedroom house um 1100 square ft but our house is a home plain and simple ask anyone who visits our entire neighborhood is special it feels calm it's quiet it's friendly it's peaceful has towering pine trees Palms oak trees hundreds of years of Grand Oaks live here while the house has been Dream It's not been without issues as any homeowner would tell you we lost a lot in Hurricane Matthew in St Augustine in 2017 and part of our house hunting process in Tampa was to look for something not in a flood zone our house is not in flood zone but we have flood insurance just the same something a good storm will teach you months after moving in we realized in heavy rains our property would flood water would come into our doorway um of our laundry room and up to our front door we called the city to report the flooding and after many attempts uh we got staff from the city at Tampa mobility of storm water to come and see and we did get a reference number we consulted with members of that staff you know years over years to deal with deal with the flooding we were told not to mess with the historic flow of water we were advised to actually dig a ditch between our two homes our you know the home that's about to be or meant to be torn down um we installed the sun pump we laid gravel we directed water to the back of our property and we regularly use barriers to direct water flow to the back of our property it helped uh it helped for a while but but when new homes were built and new construction came to the area it got worse in heavy rains dumping even more water into our yards after years of failed attempts we managed to manage the water managing the water ourselves we hired a foundation repair and flood mitigation company to help us a year later and $99,000 the system works but still fails in heavy floods um I think there's a slide there that that'll show you some of the pictures at our front door where is the water supposed to go if the development is approved where does the water go when the development creates extensive impermeable surfaces we as a city are already overwhelmed this project is inconsistent and makes no sense on the property I strongly urge you to deny this resoning and development request thank you very much sir all right next speaker yes ma'am Michelle trayer thank you uh Stephen marazzo thank you uh Susan marazzo thank you Tanya Clark thank you four additional minutes for a total of seven yes ma'am please state your name hi there um I'm Maggie Trella and I live at 6320 South selbourne I believe we need to catch up on some slides we're starting with the the football field this was Alberto who ran out of time this just shows that the building stacked together actually create an entire football field this is the flooding outside of our front door my husband was referring to this is just a few weeks ago keep in mind we've spent over $99,000 mitigating flooding this is before the flooding the flood barriers are literally floating on our carport that's him standing in the water so as my husband Joe told you we've been dealing with flooding for six years and throughout this time I've been told and I quote as I've mentioned during our phone conversations we're actively working on alternatives to alleviate the flooding in your area that was Jun Lee from storm water who we worked with extensively for six years another quote unfortunately all of South Tampa looks like this after a big rainstorm the city is building massive storm water systems in South Tampa and sometimes can make small fixes but climate change and elevation hurt us Bill Carlson elevation hurts us climate change hurts us and overdevelopment the Wall Street Journal reported that quote Florida has built more new properties in high-risk flood areas than any other state since 2019 wired reported on Tampa being so vulnerable to Hurricane Milton that quote Relentless development only made the situation worse we just experienced the worst flooding in Tampa's history where thousands of homes flooded and ours was less than 2 Ines away from water intrusion a neighborhood just a half a mile north of us flooded due to to their soiles and retention plants over flooding we can't handle the water already the 23 town homes and our next door neighbors home to be torn down and paved are storm water advisory properties which as you know the city defines as land that quote experiences frequent localized flooding and may have other problems or requirements with storm water management this map here shows our neighborhood elevation there we go so the white is actually the highest then red then yellow then green then blue as you will see my house is in a baby blue and then you'll see the properties outlined in a darker blue note that the lowest elevation is baby blue per the City Senior storm water engineer our yard is a 1ot drop in elevation from the street right in front of us we a three-foot drop from selbourne and inbay and another three-foot drops behind our property to the east towards 6th Street meaning that elevation continues to drop behind us pity code the developer is not allowed to block historical storm water flow and cannot alter existing elevations that would inversely impact the neighbors however when we asked an engineer for Mobility about the developer bringing in fil dirt to raise the land to the required base flood elevation he said it's possible per FEMA the base flood elevation in Tampa is 10 ft we've been told numerous times from City staff that have all been extremely helpful that the water and flooding will be mitigated at permitting if the city can't mitigate the water now how can this developer do so with an additional 23 homes that create extensive impermeable surfaces where we're just supposed to trust them the developers who from the developers who from the beginning have been evasive and inaccurate in their planning from day one we have communicated to the developer multiple times that our biggest issues were access through our neighborhood concerns over flooding and loss of trees they've addressed none of these their plan destroys Seven Grand Oaks and tons of other trees including the healthiest one of the bunch an 83t Grand Oak with a canopy spanning three homes including mine that tree is right in the center of what would be their roadway they requested waivers to reduce the required tree retention from 50 to 42% we have towering Grand Oaks in the center of our Loop and what we refer to as a park or Green Space it's a space we as a neighborhood look after and let our children play in it's a space we've adopted through keeping Tampa Bay beautiful according to the city of Tampa tree canopy and urban Forest analysis South Tampa saw the highest statistically significant decline in tree canopy between 2016 and 2021 by 27.3% it states that t Grand Oaks are now to be considered quote rare the importance of these trees cannot be overstated they mitigate Urban heat reduce noise and air pollution increase oxygen and retain water the plans the developer has submitted don't even include the park or the trees in our neighborhood as if they wanted to make it seem like they aren't there in a meeting with the developer Miss e referred to our Park as a quote glorified median we pressed her that this space was important to us and in the next plan submitted was a note to make quote improvements to selborn I e widening the road removing our Green Space to accommodate for their increased car traffic our roadways are narrow having been built in the 1920s for 50 households if this plan is approved there would be at least 50 additional cars driving through our streets there would be a massive loss of tree canopy a loss of safety for those who regularly walk and play outside this plan does not provide adequate parking while there are six visitor spots as per code the driveways are not large enough to fit two cars without overlapping the sidewalks meaning every townhouse can only fit two cars these are five bedroom homes these people will be parking in our neighborhood in our park and in our yards eliminating personal safety the developer also told you tonight that we need elevated homes but at what cost are the homes already established at lower elevations the developer told you we need more affordable housing at our neighborhood meeting the developer said the cost of these homes would be $850,000 since one was that affordable and so I'm standing here tonight to ask you to deny this development approving this plan approves overdevelopment it reduces air quality increases noise pollution it causes loss of sunlight loss of privacy loss of safety it reduces our home values and benefits only one single land owner and a developer why does their ownership mean more than ours why does big money get a Payday when we've all been working our taals off for free for over five months to save our homes we met with the landowners twice who are also neighbors Mr and Mrs shachi of Sahar reality they told us conflicting information from the start I spoke with the developer of inbay Commons Jennifer Sher vice president of SSG commercial she advised me that they tried purchasing the property for Mr shachi several times and he was quote unreasonable greed and profit shouldn't win over the safety of residents of homes where we put our babies to sleep it shouldn't fall on us as homeowners to say this isn't right to have to work at this like a full-time job our neighborhood was built in the 1920s a small concrete block homes that were affordable to the everyday citizen it was built in and planned for us not for them this land is landlocked on the storm water advisory list and will cause the destruction of hundreds of trees this proposal is dangerous city staff has determined this development is quote disruptive inappropriate and incompatible with our neighborhood make them make this make sense somewhere else we are not a developers driveway we are the residents of alleron Park and we will do whatever we can to save our neighborhood thank you for your time and consideration yes ma'am please state your name oh you have a Michael Ryan thank you Loren Ryan thank you I see two names and that would be five minutes total please your name before I begin can I get the power slide pulled up yes which slide it's it's left up on the uh the heat map essentially the one that shows the the red to the and do I have control of it yes to move it have a clicker this clicker yeah okay did it Mo it's not working try a different direction okay okay thank you good evening council members thank you for the opportunity to speak my name is suan vales I'm the neighbor at 6324 South selbourne directly next to the home to be demolished for access point I am here to strongly oppose this project on the grounds that is invasive inconsiderate and incompatible with our little established neighborhood one of the key issues that cannot be overlooked in this absurd project is the adverse impact this project will have to our Green Space the developer has requested two waivers to bypass Tampa trees mitigation requirements these waivers if granted would lead to seven grand oak trees and many more jurisdictional trees destroyed this will result in the permanent loss of our tree canopy and with it the natural benefit these trees provide stormm water absorption wind buffering during hurricanes and much needed shade from the Florida climate though these trees mean nothing to the developer they mean everything to my neighborhood treescape and my current enjoyment backyard that's the tree to be removed the developer has request one of the reasons we purchased our 1920s homes to eagerly in the first place was for the huge grand oak trees that engulf the backyard however knowledge of upper plants have significantly reduced the shade in my backyard grand oak tree number 196 is one of the biggest and healthiest grand oak trees related to this project this beautiful and love tree spans several backyards this tree is required to be removed simply because it's in the way of their unorthodox jurry rigged road that our community has strongly and unanimously voiced against this Tre is removal along with too many other trees set for the chipper undermine City policies designed to balance development with environmental preservation additionally I despise the thought of being turned into a corner lot my home currently sits nestled in the middle of South sobor a next to two single family homes as it was intended and should stay my home was not designed to be a corner lot and receives absolutely no benefit and becoming one instead my husband I's current quality of life will be diminished significantly we will now lose privacy and have to deal with more noise pollution as our home will engulf traffic going by at all hours no one should have to be worried about when you purchase your home that'll be T transformed into a corner lot later down the road no pun intended please note that lane development has done absolutely nothing to mitigate our concerns or address our issues Miss Even held a single meeting with the community in the Summer where she gave no tangible answers to our questions they were not even compelled to answer the least invasive questions like the final Heights of the building after Basel elevation or how many bedrooms each unit would have colle itively as a community we voed our greatest reasons for opposing this project none of these reasons were heated with sincerity instead they're irrelevant to their plans or concerns this cannot be more evident than the lack of improvements made between this recal project and the fact that Miss eveneven proposes the highest volume and the highest height for this project and response to miss Stevens claims about our neighborhood being unsafe due to homeless activity this is laughable I find it very far-reaching my husband and I are responsible for the police calls made regarding this topic these homeless activities um have been few and far between in the three and a half years I've lived here only a single incident only a single or few incidents were involved and every time they were resolve swiftly by a call to the Tampa Police her development is not the solution despite these hindrance I enjoy my backyard still but with her development I won't anymore this is really is a beautiful gem that we all love there's such a sense of quaintness and Community feel here we have families Generations old that still live on our street and speak about his contribution to their memories with such Pride approving this development with set a troubling precedents the rs60 neighborhoods sing that established zoning and tree protection can be overridden for hide and seek projects and unsuitable locations it is Tampa's responsibility to preserve and protect communities like mine when parasitic developers come circling our doors if this is not stopped we will become another example of a community chewed up and sped out by the developers grief path for money I urge Council to deny this zoning request Tampa should prioritize responsible development that preserves character safety and environment neighborhood our neighborhood has come together and voiced our opposition for this project as can be heard through the 70 plus opposition letter submitted and the turnout tonight she does not have the community support anyone here tonight in support of this Terror plan is not part of my sellborn community and is not directly impact it it's easier to be for something when you're not the one facing the consequences thank you for your time thank you very much next speaker Josh Bolan 6324 South elbourne no don't all right uh good evening members of the council thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak tonight my name is Josh and I live directly south of the home to be demolished I'm here to strongly urge you to deny this application the only proposal get this okay the only proposed access to this development is through South Sone Avenue a narrow road that currently acts as an unofficial oneway and was never designed to handle the increased traffic from a highdensity town home development autoturn analysis clearly illustrates significant issues with this plan first the curb radius of the newly adjoined Road encroaches into both 6320 and 6324 properties as shown by the red parallel lines in the image temporary regulations require a setback of at least one foot within the property lines making this design non-compliant second the auto turn path uh shows vehicle Wheels entering the corners of neighboring properties and the Park area further demonstrating that this turn is not feasible or safe Additionally the aerial view uh highlights that South Sour's roads with uh vary between 14 and 16 ft the developer has suggested widening these roads to accommodate increased traffic but this raises serious concerns such changes would fundamentally alter the character of our neighborhood which thrives on the small scale charm widening the road would also bring it dangerously close to the protected Grand Oaks in the area trees that are critical to the neighborhood's environmental and aesthetic Integrity furthermore this would drastically reduce the permeable surfaces worsening the flooding issues that we already face the Planning Commission has determined that developments like this should be accessed via larger collector or arterial roads not narrow residential streets like selborne this street was designed for a small number of single family homes not a high density development The increased traffic volume inadequate turning radi for Emeral vehicles and lack of sufficient guest parking exacerbate the connect between the proposal and the existing infrastructure as a direct neighbor to the property slated for demolition this development would forcibly turn my home into a cornal lot Corner lots are less desirable for homeowners due to increased noise loss of privacy and lower property values in this case the new homes uh new axis Road would drastically increase traffic and activity along the side of my property eroding the quality of life I invested in when I'm purchasing my home our neighborhood is a sanctuary for tranquility and community and while we are not opposed to development it must respect and and enhance the community that joins unfortunately this developer has shown no willingness to collaborate with residents or consider alternative plans that prioritize sustainability safety and the character of our neighborhood we propose a simple and reasonable solution these partials should remain rs60 and access should come or should not come through sborn council members we urge you to prioritize the voices of Tampa's residents over the profit driven motives of developers please deny this application and protect the unique charm of sou SN I do want to have one last comment is the developer said that she reduced it from 40 units to 23 and that's not true um it was 40 units when she also was buying another property just south of it so thank you very much next speaker Andrew Robbins that I have been sworn G even council members my name is Andrew Robbins and I appreciate the opportunity to speak in favor of this project I'm a fifth generation tampen having returned to South Tampa after a decade of Naval service and Law School in Southern California my childhood home is a little over a mile from this site my parents have lived South Cy near B point for over a decade to be entirely transparent with the council I do not currently live in the neighborhood I live in an apartment and hide Park surrounded by three and $4 million homes which I will likely never be able to afford but when I do look to buy in perhaps 10 15 years the town homes Miss Cen is proposing will be a valuable option for me and people like me deciding to return to Tampa after living in San Diego and Los Angeles areas where nimbyism anti-d density and anti-development policy have long prevailed resulting in a severe housing shortage and all the Civic Decay which comes along with such a shortage I hope that my hometown's more rational approach to Urban Development and planning would mean there would be a place for me when I look to return to set down roots of my own Miss Evan's proposal is a sort of development which seeks to ensure just that that Tampa will continue to have the capacity to welcome or case welcome back enthusiastic members of this community who have worked hard to be able to live here as you can see from the renderings and plans this project will perform the delicate but crucial Balancing Act of moderately increasing density while maintaining and complimenting the character of the surrounding neighborhood council members if Tampa is lucky enough to continue on its current trajectory of growth and increased National prominence development is inevitable while the while the opposition May believe they can seal their neighborhood and Amber history argues otherwise the real choices to be made here are about the tenor and character of the change to come and about who we trust to affect that change we can veto change for now and later have developers from Miami or Atlanta elbow in and build carbon copies of projects designed to suit their cities or we can let Miss A careful and conscientious developer a Tampa native who volunteers her time on the city's Planning Commission and a mother whose daughter lives on the very street with this development would break ground we can let one of Tampa's own highly qualified native daughters shape how Tampa will look tomorrow or we can wait for something copy pasted from Bickle or Buckhead personally I trust Miss Even to get this right and I hope you will as well thank you for your time thank you very much next speaker yes sir please say your name uh my name is Ryan Tate thank you so much for having me I I sincerely appreciate the time I know you're all hired and I have an utmost respect for all you've you've gone through today um I I don't think I could do your job to be honest so thank you for your service um I uh my name's Ryan Tate as I said um I'm here as a retired Marine Corps veteran uh not out of choice but out of injury sustain and combat I'm a Tampa native my family's own Tape Brothers Pizza on Davis Island and off of westore Boulevard uh off of Howard we've had a a deepr rooted um involvement in this community since I was a child um I first met uh Alyssa sein when uh about 19 years ago when she worked for my family's restaurant as her first job and um I want to say that her character is impeccable uh her qualifications are unmatched as a developer and after nearly two decades of knowing her I've seen her unwavering commitment to this community and the the enhancement of it uh her character and morals are exceptional and I'll tell you her developments prioritize functionality Aesthetics appeal and Community cohesion making them places where families want to live and Thrive Alyssa has always approached her work with the utmost integrity and I know this project will reflect the same standards she brings to all of her Endeavors this proposed development is not just another apartment complex it is a critical solution to a growing problem for service member station at mcdill Air Force Base and I myself since being retired from the Marine Corps have dedicated my entire Adult Career to helping active duty service members reservists and Veterans I do it daily and the struggles that we go through are intense and the struggles that our service members go through and mcdill Air Force Base and their living challenges are unbelievable the workload that they are given the pay that they are given or that they earn for that workload is unbelievable all of us sitting in this room very blessed I will say that um I've been there before and and I don't want to be there again so moving on uh mcdill is not just an asset to Tampa it's among the most vital facilities in regards to the safety of our country and everyone in this room it serves as the headquarters for us Central command and US Special Operations Command the men and women station there are at the Forefront of defending our nation they deserve not only our respect but practical support to make their lives in the lives of their families a little easier one and two bedroom town homes which dominate much of the available housing inventory are far from ideal for military families these homes often need more space amenities and affordability that Ser service members with children or extended families need they also fail to offer the flexibility required for V uh for varying family sizes and Lifestyles thank you very much living close to the base is not a luxury for service members it's a necessity a shorter commute means service members can spend more precious time with their families thank you very much sir all right next speaker yes sir please say your name hello Council my name is Pete tra I'll say bless you now just in case I'm going to go listen from my office blow my nose I'm fine you're just fine okay um well Council I I appreciate everything that you do uh reintroduce myself again my name is Pete scha I'm actually the president of the uh Bayside West neighborhood association I'm I'm also a head coach at Poma Little League uh my children attend the elementary school at adom so to speak on the longevity of how long I lived here I think is defunct I think speaking to what we currently do in the community I think is a little bit more vital and important uh we've already heard from the city staff about everything being inconsistent we all are very aware and understanding of the crisis that we currently have here in Tampa with our housing we heard a $3 million fixer uper Ranch from the applicant I didn't know those existed here the average price home currently right now on Zillow and South Tampa is $438,000 they may not be luxury affordable Town Homes but they are much more priced in an area where we already heard some folks speak that they say they can't afford the reality of this is the project is poorly designed the project is does not fit the character of this neighborhood the project does not facilitate or achieve anything that we are trying to accomplish right now in the city of Tampa all this does is take a property that was purchased in 2002 and allow the owners to be able to get out with a little extra coin in their pocket I understand how late it is this evening I'm not here to take any more of your time but I appreciate the efforts and time you put into our city and we very much appreciate is not going unnoticed thank you thank you very much yes ma'am come on up did you have a speaker waiver I have one yeah for one minute he's coming he's coming rafino thank you one additional minute please hi my name is Rose Verano I live at 6313 South selbourne I have been sworn in I object to Res 2467 my husband and I chose South selbourne to build our home because of the beautiful Grand Oaks in the center and the absence of TR through traffic after living in three different locations in South Tampa two plan developments without shade trees and one home on a busy street sou South selbourne was a nice change the center air area with open land and trees separate two roads and homes this is a place where kids play and neighbors gather adding to the charm and privacy of our community during melting the grand oak trees in front of our home stood strong and lessen the wind impact that helped protect our home with noticeably less damage where the trees stood if the resoning is allowed 23 Town Homes priced at 850,000 K will be squeezed into land that is currently zoned for 8 to 10 single family homes one home will be knocked down to create a driveway to this development this driveway will Point traffic at our home causing headlights to shine into our Windows the current roads are not designed for heavy or two-way traffic the Builder has expressed possible plans to use the center open Land by cutting the healthy grand oak trees and property down on both sides sides if needed to accommodate the influx of vehicles the addition of 23 homes with four to five bedrooms easily adds 40 46 plus cars to our small community this doesn't account for three vehicle homes guest or delivery vehicles this development will most almost double the current traffic our community will unfairly become their driveway the height of these town homes with rooftop balconies looming over individual single family homes will be intrusive the property for this development is saturated after most rainfalls the adjacent land slopes down into this area raising the property overbuilding and Paving it is going to affect drainage this will cast water onto surrounding homes I had a similar situation years ago when rains were excessive it saturated the open land across from my home a development was built against the local residents's complaint for fear of flooding when a storm came that water had nowhere to go even were the improvements implemented to handle excess water the new and old homes were all flooded no one had flood insurance because it wasn't a flood zone this is a perfect example of what is happening now our neighborhood isn't a flood zone presently but this oversized development will create drainage issues we will suffer the consequences the current plan is is unrealistic and unfair to us the developers stated that they only build planned developments and they needed to keep the plan as is for financial reasons in one of our neighborhood meetings this single single family homes would fit the neighborhood and not destroy the community it would not overcrowd us with traffic or take away realistic privacy it would be better for drainage we don't want our community to become a driveway to an over exer size development giving access to more Vehicles than we currently have throughout our entire neighborhood now we don't want to lose our healthy Grand Oaks to accommodate more traffic please uphold the current zoning and don't allow this development to ruin our community thank you thank you very much next speaker yes ma'am please say your name my name is Sharon de Caris I live at 3216 West Victoria Avenue which is I called the bottom of a u Road you come in Maine Victoria and go out selbourne I have lived there since 1992 32 years ago when I moved there my neighbor jery lived there and Mike's my neighbor Mike his parents lived in the house he lives in now this area has been like a sacred area it's like a country area it's safe it has been safe you see p mothers with their strollers going on the road because we don't have sidewalks they they go on the road we have joggers that jog in that area parent people that walk their dogs in that area and as they do that they'll chat with the neighbors it's been safe now you talk about um okay the developer talks about she lives in South Tampa she does not live in our area she does not live where we live it's a nice neighborhood it's where people are not in everybody's business but they are there when you need them now you want to take away the road in like on sbor you want this road to come in for this development and go through this Parkway the kids play in that Park little Park area it's a beautiful little area we spent I don't know how many Saturdays just breaking up the leaves and the the branches and everything so the city can come and they took the leaves and that away but yet where I live they forget about that area I still have all my branches and my leaves out there so I'm just saying to you please do not let this development go through you know where they they go through that Parkway and you affect our neighbors down the road this is I say it's a nice neighborhood and I'd appreciate it if you really consider that the developer who says she lives there does not live in our area thank you yes ma'am thank you very much yes sir come on on up please say your name evening my name is Michael Haber and I live at 5801 South mcdill uh Avenue which is pretty close to where there where this uh development is I stand I stand in opposition to this development uh for for all the reasons that they've been talking about I spent 30 years in the military uh two branches of service Army and and uh Marine Corps Special Operations almost my entire career been on several battlefields um been overseas over half of my my uh uh service I I come here to mcdill to retire a few years ago I retired out of mcdill I bought a I bought a town home on mcdill La I retired here one thing one thing that hit me so hard coming back from overseas to live in the United States is I don't recognize my country okay I come here and we got I got 5G Towers popping up all over on my neighborhood blasting into my home now okay how did that happen Tallahassee all right the telecommunication companies they go tasse they give them fake studies they they uh and tah hassee gives in full rain over where they can put the towers as long as it's on a public property they can put a tower any you want they're putting them next to Schools they're putting them right next to houses goo go GMO bioengineered food ingredients how did that get into our food all right you can't go out to a restaurant without eating bioengineered food it's killing us Kennedy is going to deal with that when he gets in there um so I say this my main concern I I hear what they're saying and I agree with them my main concern is is the sprawl and the traffic that is bringing into South Tampa okay it took me an hour to get from the airport to my house a few days ago it used to take like 20 25 minutes now it's a fraking hour all right how many more apartments are we going to build on in Bay and and West Shore it needs to stop lastly the roads I've been in third world countries Tampa are some of the worst roads I've ever seen in my life how do you put a manhole will cover this deep into the into the ground so when your when your tire hits it it bends the rim who does [Music] that potholes who put fills in potholes like this or like this there are roads in South Tampa you're driving down a road like this stop the building fix the infrastructure fix the roads thank you very much no no clapping thank you very much yes ma'am five names Dan Doyle pres thank you uh Vivian Pritchard thank you uh Raven Sheridan thank you Livia Dell well close enough thank you Ron hemple thank you very much five additional minutes for a total of eight all right go ahead and please say your name Jessica Cuchi 6302 sborn I've been sworn in good evening city council members and fellow residents I stand before you United with my neighbors to oppose a development that threatens to destroy not just our neighborhood but our way of life you've heard from many voices and read over 80 letters expressing why this development is ill suited for our community but I'm going to focus why LAN development is the wrong developer for this project Lane lacks the appropriate experience imagination thoughtfulness in their plans and despite what you heard lacks any real interest in working with the existing community and addressing our concerns in late may we learned of the resoning request and saw a meeting with Lane to discuss our concerns as a community on July 30th we met with their team including Miss zebin the CEO who at the very start of the meeting asked the concerned neighbors gather to quote be nice as in her words it was her first one this admission only heightened our anxiety to this day Lane's website shows no current or past projects stock images lifted from other developer websites as Miss Sean said today again this is her first project during our meeting the information we received only served to exacerbate our concerns when asked whether single family homes were considered Miss cin simply stated no when pressed as to why her response was quote I don't do single family homes when asked if she had considered a less dense project again the answer was no when asked why no answer was given our neighborhood should not be an internship for an inexperienced developer with unimaginative and subpar plans when we reached out to the planning Comm Department to inquire about potential access on Sixth Street they stated that they had never seen a plan that involved tearing down a home for access route we even reached out to the developers of Interbay Commons who worked with and continued to work with the community to see if they would work with Lane on a shared roadway however they were so off-put by this project they said they didn't want to be a part of it our neighborhood was ploted in 1925 and is made for smaller single family homes and because Lane knows this inaccessible flood prone parcel isn't suitable instead of doing its due diligence and finding another site they decided to bulldoze their way in literally and figuratively the city's own resoning staff report describes the plan as quote grossly deficient and lacking thoughtful design and quote it fails to consider the adverse impacts on the existing neighborhood and natural elements it further highlights that the plan quote fails to address storm water management adequately and quote is inconsistent with environmental standards both of which are critical given the city's document flooding issues in our neighborhood this is the definition of lazy unintelligent and unimaginative development and as the staff report stated is inconsistent with the requirements for rezoning I could not have said it better myself the plan doesn't care about our neighborhood and neither does Lane development at the one meeting with the community Miss Sean stated that she quote thought we would like it and joked about us naming the project she even mentioned that she told her ex-husband to buy in to make make a profit this is beyond condescending and offensive as Lane has shown no interest in working with us ignoring our questions and concerns at the meeting we posed a list of questions the bulk of which went unanswered after the meeting Lee requested a copy of our original questions sent and writing along with any follow-up questions this was done on August 14th after this Miss sein approached the two homeowners directly neighboring the house to be torn down stating that she would only speak speak with them when they met subsequently she did not answer any additional questions about the plan she just asked again that we quote be nice and reiterate that accessing through sixth street was off the table since then we've tried to follow up to get answers and we're brushed off to this day the only modification made that reflects any of our concerns was to move the guest parking Inward and that was because the planning the city planning asked them to do so in fact the six revisions that she mentioned in total seven were all done prior to the community even being notified about the plan it's now December 12th and we still have not received any answers other than being told our questions were asked and answered even their request to delay this hearing shows their lack of consideration for the community weed the notice of the hearing the day we all returned from evacuating for the hurricanes and as we assessed our damage and helped our neighbors we prepared why weren't they ready the only logical reason for them to request the delay was to break our resolve and Grassroots momentum to which I say and I think you can all see they failed we're more determined than ever finally their plans are riddled with errors even untrained eyes like mine have caught including misplaced trees incorrect driveways and inaccurate and misleading depictions of our existing roadway and green space how can city council approve a plan that is inadequate and inconsistent for both potential and current residents do you plan on just going on faith will you be the ones on the phone with Citizens Insurance when claims get denied will you be the ones telling a three-year-old he can no longer play in his front yard now because there will be over 50 cars whizzing by 3 feet away will you tell a 70-year-old she can no longer use her garden because all the Sun and air have been blocked by this monstrosity towering over her home and what are you going to say to the people who will lose all of their property value and be forced to sell and move away will you say that you just wanted to be nice it's time to stop being nice and start being smart I am a capitalist and work with real estate developers Nationwide and I volunteer with Veterans for over six years I believe in conscious thoughtful development and understand that Tampa needs to address its lack of Workforce housing and environmental strain and have discussed these issues with mayor Caster to quote the mayor it is vital for our communities to be resilient by working together we can minimize the impacts of severe weather and enhance our Urban environment this project does not Embrace those values it exacerbates our vulnerabilities we cannot allow developers to proceed like Viking Raiders pillaging and plundering our neighborhoods and natural resources the proposed development is inappropriate incompatible and most importantly inconsistent per your own staff report therefore I urge you to deny the request to reone thank you for your time thank you very much no she like she said it's it's time to stop being nice so no yes sir come on up please state your name Mark tadesco and I live at 6319 South selbourne and I'm probably the oldest not the oldest but been there the longest uh I uh I got stationed to mcdill and uh bought a house on selbourne and uh because of the community in where it was uh the wife and I we've raised five children there that little Park area in the middle the kids always I mean that was their place to go those trees they climbed over and all well now I have seven grandchildren and that's their place to go those roads are single Lane roads in front of my house in the on the sborn if that um project is allowed to come through the traffic that uh the additional traffic because right now it's not that bad we we accustomed to the people who live there they they know to slow down they they see the kids and there are more and more kids now moving on into the neighborhood when I first moved in it was a military primarily military and there were quite a few families there in the interim it's kind of weaned off more to us older folks and now the younger folks are coming in thoseo the homes like I have now are about 400 and something thousand they weren't when I got it but uh the there she's saying that uh the some people who came up said the military you know they can't afford in that area well the reality is uh if they get a home like mine we're dying off so those homes are becoming available but the uh developers are taking them tearing them down and building the big two stories and charge them more money um the the price that they were quoting was 850,000 for a town home well even today I know in my day in the military we didn't get paid near what they're getting now but even with what they're getting now 850 is a tall order so that's really not an affordable home for the military but uh I'm saying deny it because my home my community is there and it's a healthy place for us to to raise our kid for me to raise my kids and now my kids come over with the grandkids and that's the kind of community I bought into and I'd like to keep thank you thank you very much Stephanie Pointer will you be the last inperson speaker that's the plan all right because I have six registered speakers after you have a speaker waver for thank uh Sandy Sanchez thank you uh Adrien laramy thank you Elaine Westbury thank you Donna dat Smith thank you and William Sheridan thank you five additional minutes for a total of eight my name is carolan Bennett I'm a lifelong resident of South Tampa when the the developers of Interbay Commons bought the circle Sea Ranch they tried to buy this property too but the owner wanted way too much for it even though they had bought it for a song they got this property at a bottom basement price because a property with no Frontage is practically worthless they paid a pittance for it and leased it to Circle sea for horse pasture now they are seeing massive dollar signs and want a big windfall at a huge cost to our city they could sell it for what it is actually worth and still make a profit and a builder could pay that reasonable price and build to code and still make a pop profit I first got involved in community work because of bad rezonings in the seven years I have been doing this this might be the worst resoning I have ever seen I've seen bad rezonings voted down by Council even when all the staff reports were consistent when there is an inconsistent staff report almost always there is only one but this plan is so bad three departments found it inconsistent development coordination inconsistent natural resources inconsistent Hillsboro County Planning Commission inconsistent this plan is so bad the revision sheet is one and a half pages long including storm water a good application has a few res revisions but this plan is so bad it needs 27 revisions that's definitely a record this plan is so bad they are asking for four waivers but it's actually 10 waivers if they wanted to remove one Grand Tree it's one waiver but they want to remove Seven Grand Live Oaks and not poor quality Grand Live Oaks look at these ratings these trees should be in a museum they should be bubble wrapped and given a a metal the forcefully worded natural resources report says the site is losing substantial type 1 tree canopy that cannot be replaced with the current design the number of tre trees provided is grossly deficient in comparison to the type one trees removed the development can only accommodate 14 of the required trees and must make a $56,700 tree mitigation payment well we all know what good that will do South Tampa is drowning in tree fund money but we can't seem to plant any trees that payment is worthless to us and then there's storm water when I went with the May when I met with the neighborhood I was confused when I saw a concrete lip at the end of a driveway while I was there we had a normal summer rainfall no big deal but when I left there was water gushing onto the driveway toward the house that's when I understood why they had that small barar there this property is on the storm water advisory list it is a terrible terrible terrible idea to pave it and remove the trees the applicant is not required to submit a storm water mitigation plan in advance the storm water department always finds zonings consistent they don't require a plan until the permitting stage no one actually knows how they can mitigate this this is a drainage area for the whole neighborhood the storm water report States this property is on a storm water advisory list the adjacent property drains to this site there's a reason that Millions were spent turning the mcdill 48 into storm water retention it's because this area is critically low-lying and flood prone development coordination staff says this resoning is inconsistent because it does not take careful consideration of the adverse impacts to the natural elements of the surrounding neighborhood the proposed access will disrupt an establish neighborhood and create a private road only providing a 3ft and 5-ft Landscape Baer buffer and a vinyl fence between the private road and the two adjacent homes this is an adjacent mix there is an adjacent mixed use project of attached homes and commercial but that project has Frontage on Interbay Boulevard which is a collector roadway and it is undeveloped with reduced underdeveloped with reduced density County staff says it's inconsistent because given the site's lack of access the planning commission has determined it is an inappropriate location of attached for attached uses this was discussed in both the DRC report and the DRC meeting that means staff told the app applicant a long time ago that this is inappropriate they went on to say staff finds it inconsistent with r10 r10 and it could adversely impact the character of the adjacent neighborhood the site has the potential for accommodating single family detached single family detached would align with the character of the neighborhood and can be considered they also found it inconsistent because the front door orientation violates the comp plan they make pedestrians cross a drive AIS which is unsafe their report says a dedicated pedestrian pathway should connect entrances to a public rideway which reduces conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles the applicant wants a waiver for that but Planning Commission staff recommends that the applicant provides a pro a pedestrian Connection staff also stated in summary the the request conflicts with policies related to Neighborhood compatibility and it conflicts with the requirement that new residential projects are minimally disruptive to adjacent areas in the context of the neighborhood it is inconsistent with the r10 land use and does not address design guidance for attached uses particularly the orientation of entrances and pedestrian connections to the public rideway the Planning Commission staff finds this inconsistent with the Tampa comprehensive plan I also want to say that um I was in I met with them on site the very first time they talked about doing this and at that time they were planning on buying not just that one parcel they were also going to apply buy this so when so when they talked they were going to buy this and this and not this little house so when they talked about that they reduced it from 40 Town Homes to 23 no they didn't the density is exactly the same what they did is this purchase fell through so they lost like I don't know almost two acres an acre and a half of land so the density is exactly the same and I told her to stop saying she reduced the density because that's not what happened she also said that the uh comprehensive plan the new one would allow this absolutely untrue I am intimately involved with the rewriting of the comprehensive plan I have been to so many meetings with the staff rewriting it the new comprehensive plan will categorically prohibit this no tow houses in r10 unless they're in an arterial or elector Road this isn't even on a local Road the applicant tried to negotiate access through Interbay Commons but the Interbay Commons people said no because they thought this was such a terrible plan but with a good plan maybe they could negotiate access and this site could be developed with 10 homes without a rezoning but it is not your job to figure out how to create profits and in fact you're prohibited from considering it the owner knew they bought a piece of property that was practic Ally worthless and they paid the appropriate Rock Bottom price which is what it is still worth it is not the city's job to help them make a fortune on a real estate deal thank you thank you very much Stephanie Boer last speaker in in person and then we're going to go to the six registered public speakers and that'll wrap it up we get a reott yes we got more people M the bottom okay this those go to count okay those will go to counsil after I take care of you excuse oh look she left it for me does she have a speaker waiver yes she sir does um Miss pointer has three names uh Mar Marshall sore thank you uh rain rain swore thank you and uh starts with a K and the second name starts with a d who Could That Be hi thank you how do you pronounce your name just so I know okay thank you I think that into this I think we're about done all right that's three that's a total of um 3 plus three is six thank you sir it's getting late at this hour I'm numerically challenged yes ma'am your name uh Stephanie Pointer um this project is what I have to agree with Caroline sorry what happened can we stop my time are you guys ready I thought I thought I was ready thank you for stopping my time you go no mine has writing carolan's does not um this this project is is I had to go look for a synonym because Preposterous was my favorite for this one um you know carolan said she's been doing this seven years and this is the worst plan she's seen um I've been doing it five and this is the crappiest plan and this is the least malleable developer ever she hasn't done squat for anyone this is the best neighborhood we've ever worked with and we've worked with some good ones but this neighborhood had it together they asked for reasonable logical amendments and all of them were ignored not only were the neighbors ignored but City staff was ignored look at that you've got a page front and back 27 of revisions okay let me tell you something this site plan is missing more numbers than a middle school cheating Mass students paper because I'm not kidding you I'm like look looking at this okay there is nothing on here that says how big the garages are there's no there's nothing on here that tells us how big the driveways are and look at this okay so the only way I can figure out how big a driveway is in this Joker is we've got this these um six parking spaces five or six parking spaces and they're 18 Ines they're 18 ft deep but when you go now the sidewalks are all labeled they're 5 foot sidewalks so 18 minus 5 is 13 13 okay 13 and wait wait we all know how big your cars are not even Charlie's little baby car will fit in a 13t driveway not even the smallest car in that parking lot out there give me a break we've got deficient driveways the entire project except two are deficient and you know what I wasn't going to bring this up but the developer said they had driveways to park in guess what they can't park in the driveway they can't even Park sideways in the stinking driveway okay so next um you know but if you look at these drawings and you look at them close they're all shorter than that 13 almost all of them are if you really look at it I mean I had to blow this up so I could see it here's the other thing I want to talk to you about this impermeable surface and I have had to call Mr Thomas today because you know this is my new jam in order to figure out the impermeable surface I had to add up the project site the I'm sorry the building site and the vehicle site right that equals 1.49 Acres that makes this project 61% impermeable now you're talking about a vacant piece of land which I know I know you guys should be mortified that homeless people have lived there you know how old that picture is that that play pin was on that property over a year ago when Caroline and I and Dana Gordon went to that property and walked that property that same garbage is still there from a year ago if it's a new picture or an old picture you tell me I don't know but that garbage was still there next the you know I I always wonder am I just stupid or do I not understand I really I really do but I'm glad that gentleman got up here that's the architect and he said which is it because here's the 35 foot mark on this line right and it goes all the way across oh wait there's something that goes above it now we all know that 35 ft is the limit but then over here we got 32 point 32 feet4 inches well and when I start adding these things up they don't add up again middle school math here middle school math I can't I have never seen site plans that were so goofy I'd be embarrass embarrassed I I mean really um South Tampa full everybody has said that everybody and you know what we didn't nobody came and complained about these six houses they're building here nobody you know why because they were building what they're entitled to build she wants to build 10 times more than she deserves to build and the only person here the only property owner here that's going to benefit is the owner of that property the owner of this property right here everyone else is going to be a detriment nobody wants it the only people who stood up here and spoke on behalf of this project are her friends she doesn't live there she lives in West sh yach Club let's get real here her daughter may live across the street oh wait is her H her ex-husband here to say that this is a great project he lives on the street what's he got to say about it you know what I'm sorry but we just have to go there um and and I want to remind everyone that we are under oath at city council when you get up here and you tell a story you better make sure that your ducks are in a row and that you don't have 62 seats out here full of people that heard you say something different $850,000 houses are not missing middle they're 2,200 square F feet and I'm just doing basic math you know me I like math 24 * 52 which is the size of all these houses in here okay all these houses if you do the math they're 24x 52 which is about 2100 Square ft give or take okay including the garage or not including the garage but the bottom line is I don't know who she thinks from mcdill is going to live in these houses because they can't afford it I'm telling you right now fourstar generals stationed at mcdill Air Force Base get $3,300 a month for for housing $850,000 which is what she said repeatedly thank you very much man' it's $5,000 a month thank you all right we go to our registered speakers we have Jean Strow will be our first person she's already sworn in you're you're still muted ma'am are you muted on your end Miss rire she is if you could unmute yourself all right we'll go back to M Strow Meer I have um Donna Watson raise your right hand Oh Donna Watson uh Tristan raise your right hand Bailey and Olivia we're going to swear you in do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give is the truth and nothing but the truth yes all right Donna Watson will be the first speaker on the list go ahead ma'am please state your name and please unmute yourself all right we'll come back to you Bailey wise you'll be the the next speaker please state your name hi this is Bailey wise I live at 3404 West Palm Myra thank you all for having me I will certainly keep it short and sweet as I know it's past all of our bedtimes um but just a little bit about me I grew up in Tampa born and raised I'm the oldest of five my parents grew up here as well um so they're also Tampa Natives and my husband went to University of Tampa so while not a Tampa native he certainly appreciates um the culture of Tampa and wanting to come back here so after growing up here I um went moved away for a few years to do medical training I lived in places like Charleston New Orleans so I understand a little bit about infrastructure housing markets kind of understanding hurricane impact and just the importance of those kinds of things when you're buying your first home or home in general um coming back to Tampa was incredible to see how much things have changed and projects like this are you know really what Tampa needs to continue to grow and to continue to have beautiful homes that are available for people to really raise their families be close to communities you know I work at Tampa General it's so it was so important to us when we were buying our home that we were somewhere close so I could get home to my kids and not have a long commute and having people now trying to get into the community it's it's incredibly challenging to to find homes that are big enough that homes that you can afford and proud to to live in um I have younger siblings as I mentioned three of which live in the Tampa area and you know while they're hardworking and have great um living it's difficult for them to also find home so this is a type of community that would be perfect for them um so with that I just I'm here to say that it's developments like this it's it's important to see the this type of growth and we really need to you know be focusing and coming together about how to fix the things that commun is not ping to them but kind of helping us move forward because we need more of these types of homes um to really continue to build and grow here in Tampa thank you very much all right Donna Watson uh I believe your I can hear your audio you should be good I'm thinking I'm thinking I'm hoping Don we can hear you go ahead you're the next speaker please state your name okay thanks can you hear me yes ma'am go ahead please St your hi I'm Donna Watson I'm I've um I've lived in South Tampa for 50 years and I live at 3114 West Price Avenue um I've been a certified flood plan manager for for 20 years and I believe that we need new uh elevated housing that can withstand future storm events personally worked with this civil engineering firm and um in the past and they're very reputable and throw over the over the project given the project description and based on the existing site the flooding situation this neighborhood would certainly improve if this project is completed the way it's been designed at a higher standard I also believe that because this project is so thoroughly planned it would serve to enhance and benefit the neighborhood thank you thank you very much all right our next speaker is going to be Olivia go ahead please state your name hi good evening uh my name is Olivia ve and I live at 3310 West Marlin Avenue um thank you guys again for the opportunity to speak tonight hear my perspective um I'm three generations deep as a Tampa native proud USF full double degree um and look forward to raising my family here um similar as how I was raised um more specifically I've been a resident in southy neighborhood for almost 5 years and super proud to live down here um I believe this application should be reviewed more as what can this do for our community versus what negative impact could this have on me a shift in perspective from thinking of the worst case scenario to a more realistic view of what this development could do to enhance our neighborhood I think is a positive way of looking at this um this will help serve Us by providing elevated housing outside of the flood plane that we all know is need especially after the trauma a lot of us have experienced over the past several months in my opinion there's a gap in housing options and I firmly believe that this application will fill that Gap currently you can't find more than a three bedroom or more home that's even close to reasonable in this neighborhood especially is new construction families looking to settle down here have to pay a steep price for larger homes whereas this application will provide three to five bedrooms and cost less than other new construction um my sister and her two young kids and her husband who's uh being stationed at mcdill is unfortunately unable to even entertain the idea of buying a home down here especially South candy due to the high cost and the low inventory of larger homes something that this development will solve for I have full faith that this developer has the best interest of its residents at the top of her mind especially being one herself I'm looking forward to seeing the development of this work and fully expect it to not only be a positive addition to our community uh but also something that we can stand behind uh I encourage you to approve this development to continue to enhance our community um thank you for time and hearing my perspective tonight thank you very much Tristan is the next speaker please state your name L go ahead sir good evening um I didn't come prepared with uh re speech or anything but as I listened to the commentary over the last hour or so I felt a bit compelled to write something down don't don't worry it's brief um so as I mentioned my name is Tristan mang I'm a first generation American I've been living in South Tampa for just over six years now I I work here I pay taxes here I want to grow roots here but as we all know housing affordability is in a crisis I'm newly engaged I'm an aspiring homeowner I've heard some commentary tonight about how the average price of homes in South Tampa is attainable perhaps for those with Legacy Equity but for most in my peer group that is just simply not true uh the only thing that solves this problem is more housing here we have an undeveloped site with single family attached adjacencies right next door it's landlocked makes obviously for a tricky access drive but with proper screening it seems like most of those negative impacts should be entirely mitigated I don't think the number of units in this development warrants the concern for safety through the adjoining neighborhood um I I don't think nism is the way here I General concerns around growth for Road and school impacts are toct all future development we might as well dissolve city council and wrap this meeting up early I heard some concerns about storm water which we know should be alleviated through proper civil engineering so I think I'll leave that there um I also heard a lot of attacks tonight on Alissa Even's character um lazy unintelligent unimaginative you know knowing Alissa for many years now I can assure you these character attacks are simply lazy unintelligent and unimaginative I think it would be a mistake for me to spend any more time here rebutting some comments from people who know nothing about the principles of the person standing in front of them uh turning this kind of back to the subject at hand here this is an undeveloped site plan for elevated housing here in South Tampa has single family attached adjacencies as I mentioned every development has a handful of issues that you can point to and take issue with and in my opinion this site is ideal for gentle medium density we need more housing to combat an affordability we need affordability to allow young people who work hard here to grow roots here and not in Pasco County with that I think it would be a mistake not to optimize the density on this site and to not improve this zoning I urge you to thank you thank you very much um do we have Liz jenne and Lauren Campbell on all right Jean Strow you're okay Lauren Campbell please raise your right hand we're going to swear you in do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you are about to provide is a truth and nothing but the truth oh can't hear her yes oh here you go can you hear me yes please state your name go ahead hi my name is Lauren Campbell I live at 701 Grand Court in Temple Terrace I am a uh previous resident the city of Tampa and hoping to be an a resident again soon um do a lot of work in Tampa downtown Tampa related to placemaking uh retail infil Urban Development trying to make our beautiful city a place that people want to live and uh I second what Tristan just recently said and that you know I think instead of looking at this Through The Eyes of nimm that we really need to look at this Through The Eyes of yes in my backyard I understand the concerns that people have in their neighborhood about changes and um I think that that is is a warranted topic to have a discussion about but the reality is is that Tampa has changed a lot the last few years and it's going to continue to change I want my children to stay here I know that a lot of people who live here currently want their children to be able to stay the only way that we're going to be able to do that is if we start providing reasonable and attainable options for housing infill development in neighborhoods that can support it like this one should absolutely be on the table and to combat the conversation about the idea that you know this one small parcel in comparison to the larger South Tampa area is going to you know be the problem solver for all of the issues surrounding sustainability and resiliency is is really just like I don't think that's a legitimate concern I think that as Tristan mentioned really great Engineers will figure out with really great City staff how to make it so that the site is appropriately taking care of the water mitigation issues but we really need to start building product that is truly sustainable and truly resilient to the real and Troublesome things that are happening in this state this is happening all across the state and for Tampa to continue to be a place that people want to come to and live in and pay taxes in we're going to need to start to create that info I hope that you guys will really consider taking Alyssa's project and putting it where it belongs which is on the table and and something that you guys will seriously consider she has a great project and I don't think that you should bow to a neighborhood who just doesn't want to see change thank you okay thank you very much Liz genuine you're on and please raise your right hand and we'll swear you in okay your wait can you see me we can see you it's dark if you could turn a light on but please raise your thank you all right please raise your right hand and we'll swear you in okay it's a right hand there you go do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you are about to provide is a truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you all right go ahead please say your name sure so my name is Liz uh jine um I was born and raised here in Tampa my um uh father was born and raised here in Tampa um we are in commercial real estate my um grandfather moved down here um in the um 60s and uh was an um uh architect who helped build the strad center among other things so um I first of all what um during Hurricane Helen um I lost where I was living and my brother and sister-in-law also lost their house on uh Davis Island so I think that that we need to consider we need your video on we can't see your your camera okay okay okay I'm sorry so um okay so uh so I think that we that we need to truly uh consider how important it is to be able to provide housing in in places that are not in you know the flood zone a or or or B and that that that are totally you know out of the flood plane and that are actually built very nicely and and that will actually increase the property values of of the same people who are complaining and again this whole um it's I I have never listened to something where people are getting so personal towards someone that that they know no that they know nothing whatsoever about and what I will lastly say is I want someone who is from Tampa like um Miss stepen who was born and raised in Tampa who has um who who is Raising her daughter in Tampa I very much trust um what what what her plans are and she has a vested interest in this community and I very much trust her because um un unfortunately to those who um oppose this measure what's probably going to happen is somebody is going to come in from New York or Boston or one of these other big cities and guess what they're not going to give a flying you know what about your Community Missin again has a vested interest in this community she's born and raised here I trust her I trust her vision and I and people like me who are right now living with my parents because said there's no place for me to live need options like this that are less than a million dollars that are actually wellb built and that are built up and so again I am disgusted by these thank you very much all right Jean Strow all right that concludes public comment thank you Brian and Marcus the T and I guys for getting everybody up and running we appreciate all your hard work all right that's it public comment is done uh we have rebuttle now yes ma'am go ahead state your name again and you have five minutes Alissa sein thank you all for the opportunity to speak I know this is a decision that carries a lot of weight I appreciate your time and your late night here um I'd like to address some of the concerns raised by the neighbors and first I'd like to have my traffic engineer speak to some of those concerns all right come on up sir please state your name Steve Henry links Associates 5 23 West Laural Tampa 33607 I have been sworn we did conduct the traffic analysis for the project and and part of what we've done is actually done counts on selborn see what the existing traffic is and we've looked at that and then adding the additional traffic to it and from the standpoint of selborn itself we feel that it is adequate to be able to accommodate not only the existing traffic but the additional traffic associated with this project okay thank you thank you very much sir as it relates to access I can honestly say that I understand that selborne access is not ideal we've tried everything we could to find an alternate access point but the reality is that there isn't one the city needs Sixth Street for drainage for the neighborhood it's important to note that selborne is a city street just like Wyoming Avenue that I referenced earlier with the town home development and it was designed to accommodate traffic the truth is that this project will be developed someday and no matter who does it whether it's myself or someone else access will almost certainly have to to be through selbourne Avenue my traffic engineer tonight has said that there are no other possible access points some neighbors have expressed concerns about preserving trees on the property I completely understand that however during our in-person discussions on site we were told that if we removed even one Grand Tree we would be opposed at this hearing it didn't start out well in terms of our ability to influence these Neighbors in any way that we felt like was meaningful so this has really felt like an uphill battle since the beginning and it relates as it relates to the sentiment for development on the site in addition we thought it was our highest priority to provide the requested setbacks for the Neighbors based on their written comments and priority list that they sent to us in spite of that we did all we could to preserve as many trees as possible we're just limited which is just which is the reason for the current reasonable reconfiguration regarding flooding I know it's a big concern and rightfully so as Jeremy mentioned flooding will actually improve not worsen with this development the pictures that Maggie showed earlier would look much better if we were able to develop this site this new design will be directly beneficial to the neighbors here tonight given the slope of the site currently sorry EXC me is currently prone to flooding however by grading the site appropriately we will create a safer environment for the direct neighbors and for everyone in the surrounding area more housing out of the flood planes means less vulnerability to flooding making making this development a critical step forward in flood mitigation for south Tampa I hope we've made it clear that we're trying to strengthen the infrastructure in this neighborhood not weaken it as Jeremy mentioned the property is on the storm water advisory list because the city needs that drainage easement and I'd like to clarify that staff referred to the right of way that everyone was talking about as a glorified median I was quoting staff when I said that we need more housing I'm sorry um I would also like to clarify that we did everything we could to accommodate the neighbors written concerns and I will go through them right now six Street access that's what they wanted the city said we can't do that my tra my um my engineer said there is no other possible access they want 6322 selborne to stay a residential home the site needs access they want the project to remain rs60 I'm not I'm not even convinced that a single family development would be functional or even possible on the site at all given the constraints they wanted a landscape buffer to remain we prior prioritized this and gave them the maximal maximum possible setbacks which accounted for a loss of some trees they wanted adequate prevention against flooding we did that we need more housing the demand is undeniable and we cannot simply wish away the challenges that come with the fact that people want to move here the comp plan addresses it the code addresses it and we don't accommodate if we don't accommodate it we will be priced out we have seen it time and time again San Francisco London Vancouver La Paris we can't accept the growth we can accept that growth is here and try to accommodate it sustainably and thoroughly or we can be priced out when we need to move I personally saw how difficult this was when I had to sell a home I bought in 2021 and look for another one in this market according to Rocket mortgage the median home price in South Tampa has increased 14% since 2023 in one year I've stated I have not stated a sales price as everyone has mentioned for these units because as someone else stated you cannot determine construction cost somebody else earlier in another project said that you can't determine construction cost today we don't have plans we don't have an approved project there's no way to figure out what they would what it would cost now thank you very much manam thank [Music] you council member her tag motion to close motion to close from council member her yes Mr Shelby yes before you do that if you have any questions anybody I and even the people at homec wait council member Clinton you have your hand up yeah when we close I'd like to speak we have a motion to close from council member her who was a second second from council member Henderson all in favor I and I I did want to speak it's up to you I I'll give it to clendenon first and then the her tag yes sir go ahead councilman clendenon you wish to speak um yeah absolutely I I wanted to start by saying I actually Echo some of the concerns I heard about this getting so personal and I you know we've seen this before um it isn't personal it's business and there's nothing wrong with someone coming in and trying to make money um on projects this I this is what you know people do but that being said I also want to Echo that um this is probably one of the worst projects that's been brought before since I've been on Council for you know the last year and a half plus um it's exactly the type of project that I actually ran ran my campaign to become a member of city council um advocating against the property is I mean the property is what the property is you just can't develop it at at the density that you're trying to develop it and I'm sure that there's the Sixth Street access if you had a single family house on this parcel you could probably have access on Sixth Street it's just you can't do what you want to do with it um it's and you know what we are we do need housing but there's lots of places in the city of Tampa to develop housing and I'm speaking to developer there it's all everybody everybody wants to develop on this really small Peninsula um you know with that we we really truly have overdeveloped over the years but we have areas in in in the mid part of Tampa and you go up in know around sulver Springs area and you know and there's there's lots of areas around the city of Tampa that that are per East Tampa that you can develop um it just all can't be in one place uh I think the neighborhood has has a right to object to this it is be very obtrusive it would change the character of this neighborhood in in a negative way um it there we clearly have issues with um with with water and and water retention and water flow in this area as it's been identified in the testimony that's been heard tonight and as and as much as I know the intent of the developer of bringing a good project and I and I understand that but this is the wrong place for it it's the wrong piece of property and and I'm sure somewhere else this would be a beautiful project and be well welcomed but not here council member herch thank you um I'm going to Echo what councilman Clen dennan said um we don't we rarely get properties that are considered um uh inconsistent from both the Planning Commission and um sta it's incredibly rare um and for the amount of reasons why uh unless anybody wants to do it um I'll make a motion go ahead okay um I moved to deny re24 d67 for the property located at 6322 South selbourne Avenue 6225 and 6241 South 6th Street due to the failure of the applicant to meet its burden of proof to provide competent and substantial evidence that the development as conditioned and shown on the site plan is consistent with the comprehensive plan and city code and the applicant's failure to meet its burden of proof with the respect to the requested waivers I also adopt all of the findings and all of the reasonings of the Planning Commission and city city staff reports specifically um that it doesn't work with land use policies 2 9.2.2 9.3.1 93.8 9.5.1 and 9.5.2 because approving single family attached uses on this site could adversely impact the character of the adjacent single family detached neighborhood to the west and land use policy 2.1.2 and um it's late so I'm not remembering shg policy 1.3.4 um the asite has the potential to accommodate other housing types such as single family detached uses single family detached uses would more align closely with the character of the adjacent neighborhood to the west and can be considered within its current zoning of r10 um Environmental Policy 2.7.9 policy emphasizes the importance of conserving protecting and maintaining the city's mature trees including those designated as Grand that possess preservation quality or historical significance onto the land um on to our staff um section 2 27-1 136 subsection 1 the proposed development does not take careful consideration of the adverse impacts to the on-site natural elements or the surrounding impacted neighborhood subsection five the subject site has 101 jurisdictional trees and the applicant requested a waiver to reduce the required tree retention from 50% to 42% the applicant also proposes to remove Seven nonhazardous Grand trees and requires 175 type 1 mitigation trees and subsection six the immediate area is characterized by an established residential single family detached neighborhood that was platted in 1925 a public park and vacant land um additionally um the waivers uh the are are extensive um uh the request to remove seven non-hazardous grand oak trees as shown um and the request to reduce the required 50% tree retention to a wooded lot over 1 acre to 42% weighted tree retention um and uh the other two re waivers to request to allow front doors to face internal drive aisles um uh both of those so uh those are My reasonings if anyone wants to add to it okay Mr Shel uh just a question with regard to the waivers did you want to uh site that section of the code oh I'm so sorry the waiver standards in section 27-1 139 subsection 4 apologies um in Council Mr chair yes sir Mr councilman Vier can you guys see me because I think my camera is out oh wait wait yeah nobody we can't see anybody right now yeah I'm having the same issue I'm I've got a spinning thing on the camera so do I Alan okay good I I thought yeah because um we can't vote right unless if you see us of course that's had to happen right now should I talk should I should I talk while they're fixing it yeah go ahead councilman Carl yeah I just I just want to say you got all the things that I put on my list and and I just wanted to remind everybody that you said at the beginning that you accepted you you highlighted some of the record from the Planning Commission and staff but that you accepted all of their recommendations so all of it now is on the file yes Mr Shelby okay uh councilman Vier councilman clinten do you need to be before we vote we need to see but is there anything that you wish to say um I don't I mean I I well I I was going to say yes sure I mean I obviously plan on um voting for the denial I think this is one where again like councilwoman herac said will we have staff in the city or um Planning Commission coming together for the same opinion this is one where with all due respect I think the applicant's trying to fit a size 42 waist into size 34 pants right here and uh just the words don't fit the picture so to speak um I I plan on voting to deny if I'm able to be seen councilman clennon you are you already you already spoke your piece Mr chairman I already spoke and I've got the same spinning camera still I mean maybe we should try to log off and log back in my I'm going to suggest Council if I can Martin Shelby city council attorney what they has sat through this entire hearing they sound like they're prepared to vote there's a technical issue now if it means spending a few extra minutes to give them the opportunity to get online uh I think we should do it they can hear what we're saying in the meantime except when they log off they will not so I don't know what council wishes to do um Madam clerk do you have any contact with TNI at this point as to what's happening I I I'll call Brian um I'll see if CTV is having the same issue yeah it's a cttv issue as well I think we can go ahead and vote is there anybody just the five of us is there anybody in support of this project up here we got to take a v okay we got to take a v we have a motion from Council if I if I if I can if I can let me just hear for the purposes of the record does the applicant have any objection to having the parti partipants you can hear them but you cannot see them do you have any objection to this could you please state that on the record no if you can come up to the microphone so it's recorded I'm sorry no okay thank you we have a motion from council member herac we have a second from council member Carlson correct roll call vote Clint Henderson yeah what was that he cannot vote he yes he can well yes he can yes he can he's audio and there's no objection from the applicant they might come back on here take it yes denial ver yes for the denial thank you Miranda yes Carlson yes herac yes and Mano I didn't say anything officially for oh I'm sorry Henderson and manc yes motion carry unanimously thank you very much good tonight all right we have new [Applause] business all right um we're still we're still in the meeting please quiet we're still in the meeting thank you very much new business councilman Miranda council member Henderson um this under my fingertips pleas yes I would like to make a motion U that we discuss an ordinance pertaining to um the Channel Side residential district uh to discuss noise um in our April 25th meeting Pro Workshop April 24th Workshop we have a motion from council member Henderson second council member herac all in favor here you go else ma'am no that um also thank you for the toy donations for um Walton Academy we're still collecting until next Friday before I go next Thursday but appreciate you very much for that to the staff council member her okay um I originally made this motion on September 5th 2024 after our discussion on the renewal of the University of Tampa lease and plant Park lease but it did not make it into the minutes so I'm making the motion again um I moved to have staff appear for an in-person staff report on January 23rd 2025 to present on areas of the West Riverwalk where the easements are still under negotiation and to include a map showing areas that will be closed and the hours that they will be closed we have a motion from council member herac second from council member Caron yes ma'am I thought it was out no I'm talking about the entire Riverwalk we do not own it all we right now we're still trying to uh do easement agreement agement no for the whole thing okay so there's different parts that still apparently don't have easements that have been approved understood thank you Motion in a second all in favor I any opposed yes ma'am uh and then I make a motion to bring forth for approval on December 19th 2024 at our next regular meeting theou between Hart and the City of Tampa for the expenditure of funds in support of the route one fairf free pilot as previously allocated in the fy2 budget we have a motion in a second all in favor I I any oppos yes to be clear on this that it's a onee motion it is a it is a onee motion and I just want to be clear that may require it be waved I just have to take a look at I have to take a look at these so to include a waiver yes two I'm going to take something off the agenda if that makes a difference well no it doesn't make a difference in this case this is by the way this is the last meeting before the end of the year yes it's very important that this get through and also just a reminder Council that uh council members of Vieira and clendenon are not participating in new business I just want to make sure that's reflected in the in the minute I'm sorry what oh you are it nope can't hear him audio my motion we have a motion by way I'm here as well we have a motion from council member tag we have a second from Carlson this is including waving the rules all in favor I any oppos you want to do it by roll call and take everybody in or not no we have had I think we have five we're good council member Henderson thank you so much yes I need a motion um requested by the Planning Commission to remove TPA 2413 and TPA 246 from the January 30th 2025 at 501 adoption public hearing we have a motion you have a second second from council member herac all in favor I council member Carlson yeah I have four short ones hopefully um see if you guys get up or down one of them is the the Jackson house is on the uh agenda for December 19th and you all asked me to reach out to them I emailed the person who emailed us and and offered to let them speak I did not hear back and so I figured let's give them one final final chance and we also need to free some things so I would like to move to continue the item regarding the Jackson house from December 19th to February 20th get the Jackson house foundation one final chance to respond with a renovation plan we have motion counc January I looked at the January uh and it's full so so that gives them two months instead of council Miranda all in favor yes the other one is that um City there are tree cutters going through neighborhoods chopping trees and Grand Oaks and they're dumping things all over the streets and they're saying they're either City of Tampa or FEMA if they're FEMA that means they're City of Tampa um I would like to make a they're not too I would like to make a motion to ask staff to immediately stop any tree cutting projects currently being done by the city or contractors except for those required for the immediate health and safety of residents and and to ask staff to report back to Council on January 23rd as to why trees were cut who ordered it why they ordered it and how much tree cutting was done we have motion from Council I'm going to support the motion but let me tell you something I believe most of that's done by people who just want to get rid of a tree somebody's coming they hire somebody to cut the tree down they say went down by the hurricane but I'll support the motion motion from Council Carlson second Council herac all in favor I any oppos yes sir um uh um hope was here talking about yellow brick row and you guys know you talked to her um I'll throw this out and see what you guys think motion to ask legal staff to return on February 20th with a draft ordinance that will prohibit parking meters in the yellow brick rad area what was that I could hear I couldn't hear it sorry motion to ask legal staff to return on February 20th with a draft ordinance that will prohibit parking meters in the yellow brick row area I figure if we propose this maybe Mobility will will uh propose something that's less restrictive but this is a way to at least get them to pay attention to it because they're not so far so here's the thing thing we went through this exact thing with ebore city ebore city did not lose one business because of this I asked the eor Chamber of Commerce they lost no businesses I understand that this is difficult but just like that we have to give it a shot before we do something this this I mean we have a parking considerations we have in the city of Tampa but but we can't go on keeping it free no but I I want to for the for the media I know we're speaking up to ourselves but for the ones that are still listening we got to tell them what's going on because we haven't explained it we just okay well they added they added parking meters um to Franklin they have parking meters everywhere else in that part of Tampa Heights and they're adding the problem is my opinion is this they've been using it up for free for a long time because they didn't have people would come they have they had empty spaces now they don't have any empty spaces because the growth is coming out there and the problem ex esates if you don't have a meter they're going to stay there eight hours for free pretty much that's what I think is going to happen so there's a school there uh The Woodworking school where are the students supposed to park and how do they pay for that I mean they can park on the other side of Florida which is still free no it's not on the other side of Florida the other the east side of Florida is all still free on street parking there's no parking on Florida in that on the other side of Florida there is neighbor in the neighbor yes cuz it's legal to do that oh my okay yeah just just two quick things um one this is an area that is still developing it's not it's it's not like e where there's people in traffic it's still developing but the other thing is that um hope went hope also lives there and her little kids are there as she testified this morning and what she didn't say this morning she went through a year or more two years of of dealing with permitting on it um guo know I both had to deal with Carol and Carol had to fight to get permitting and I I don't understand why mo why Mobility is not trying to to accommodate this in some way but um all right we have a motion from council member Carlson do we have a second I second second from council member Henderson all in favor before I I vote Yes I would like them to come here mobility and tell us what's going on yeah I speculating this side the other side and we're in the middle yeah it's better for them to come instead of legal staff can we just get a briefing on the project instead of a motion for the okay I'll I'll that's I'll I'll change my motion to have mobility and legal staff return on February 20th change my second on February 20th um to discuss the possibility of prohibiting parking meters Andor accommodating residents draw we'll second in that one all right so you still second you're going to Second the new one yeah I'm second the new one okay we have counc Carlson second Council Henderson all in favor Mr Shelby can I I was just going to ask I know that Mr clendenon is on is Mr Vieira on yes I am okay because I suspect you have new business is that correct I'll get to them well I I I have one Marty I was in a that that I have to make but I can ask somebody to make it for me I this is not a qu this is not quasi judicial if you do roll call votes Mr clendenon and Mr Vieira can participate okay well he still councilman Carlson still has the floor yeah just one last thing um before one or two of you or three of you join I I get all kinds of complaints about downtown traffic and especially how it backs up to hide park or all the way down Bayshore I presented solutions to the mobility department the spp people are presented Solutions the the the lightning people have prevent the the Harbor Island people have presented Solutions the biggest complaint and and and we pulled them before Council two or three times the biggest complaint is that there is a plan that they aren't following uh correct correctly and it and what they're doing is arbitrarily shutting down streets and sending people in the wrong direction the other day I was at the arena and I tried to drive north and instead they redirected me and sent me back to the arena again and and again I don't know what to do to get the attention of the m ability Department to fix this or follow the rule of law so I would like to make a motion ask legal staff to return on February 20th with a draft ordinance that will prohibit downtown roads from being closed or diverted except on a temporary basis with city council Advance approval any second on that where I live State nobody moving they can't leave the problem is that the problem is that is that they problem um like you get on Tampa Bay Boulevard on MLK from 3:30 to 5: you cannot move coming uh from west to east you can't move until you pass Nebraska Avenue okay can I change my motion I I would like I would like to make this is like this is like the third time I've done it but I'd like to make a motion to ask the mobility staff to return on February 20th to explain why their um downtown traffic plan is not being followed as alleged by downtown Property Owners we have motion from councilman Carlson second counc all in favor any oppos thank you council member Vier do you have new business uh yes sir thank you excuse me I have to do this on the uh racial reconciliation uh committee which met this week um I moved to ask that city council bring back a resolution at next week's meeting restating that resolution 2024 344 um to correctly reflect the date of August 2025 by which this committee will present its recommendations to city council this gives the committee an additional six months as requested we have Motion in a second from council member herac all in favor I any oppos roll yeah well wait let's do a roll call vote Motion in a second roll call Henderson yes viea yes Miranda yes Carlson yes herac yes sanon yes and manao yes motion carry unanimously all right what's next thank you Council no the rest I'll do next week for purposes of time thank you Council yeah mine mine is not really business but I want to kind of to bring up something that I I will bring to business at a future meeting and it's kind of timely but it's not timely and it's about uh the city of Tampa United Healthcare um I actually experienced one of these denial things that we you know we keep talking about uh has been in the news recently and then when I brought this up I found out this is something relatively common uh from other city employees so I'm I'm planning on not asking the uh City to uh the department to come back to the council with a report on United Healthcare their denial programs and when that contract is due and I I wanted to bring that up tonight just on so that they know that I'm I'm looking and they can be that you're you're going to make a motion at a later date I'm gonna make the motion at a later date but I just want to let them know that I'm looking at that and to expect uh expect the business to come up and the phone calls all right thank you very much I'm going to make a motion I've handed the gabble to council member Miranda uh I'd like to make a motion to present a commendation offsite to the family of D Wilkins uh who passed away recently impact magazine at Tiger Bay I mean you know really wonderful person so I just wanted to do that offsite I don't have a date um but I'd like to present that to the family motion by chairman men C second by chairman of the C CRA a second I was going to get to it I'm a little slow at this hour this Henderson Henderson yes all in favor the motion please signify by saying I I oosse passan can I get a rece so Move Motion from council member Henderson do we have a second second from Council Carlson all in favor all we are adjourned [Music]