►
From YouTube: TCC PM 2/9/23
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
B
B
B
B
A
A
D
E
C
C
We
are
supposed
to
have
had
a
commendation
of
presentation.
However,
the
people
that
the
presentation
was
going
to
be
given
to
the
combination
was
going
to
be
given
to
were
unable
to
make
it
so
agenda
item.
One
is
now
off
of
our
agenda,
so
if
we
could
Mr
Hussein,
shall
we
go
through
the
agenda
at
this
time?.
G
Sir
Zane
Hussein
development
coordination
first
to
clear
the
record
agenda
item
number
three:
that's
file
number
Rez
22-107
is
requesting
a
continuance
from
today
to
9
23
to
March
9th
2023..
The
applicant
is
here:
okay,.
C
H
Good
evening
councils,
Steve
mcelany,
representing
the
petitioner
this
this
application
went
back
to
the
city
staff
two
weeks
ago
and
because
of
that,
it
was
not
possible
for
us
to
to
notify
and
get
back
to
you
on
an
appropriate
time
and
date.
So
we
worked
with
the
staff
and
they
are
in
support
of
us
requesting
the
March
continuance.
C
C
F
H
Well,
the
DRC
identified
what
the
changes
were,
that
they
were
requesting.
We've
made
those
changes
and
we
will
be
ready
to
go
forward
in
March.
Okay
and
you
understand
them.
H
F
I
J
Yes,
Council
lashon
doc
development
coordination,
I
believe
the
180
day
was
was
granted
at
the
last
request
for
continuance,
but
it
would
apply
it
is
beyond
the
180
days.
Thank
you.
C
K
K
K
C
I
So
I
can
get
clarification.
Are
you
the
property
owner
for
this
property
ma'am?
Yes
and
you're,
saying
you
don't
want
to
continue
with
what
your
representative
Mr
michelini
is
doing.
He
never
told
us
anything,
so
you
haven't
been
conversional
Mr
quickly
from
point
from
last
year
to
now
what
the
process
is
or
why
you're
why
he
comes
before
us
or
anything,
no.
I
If
you
don't
mind,
I
think
maybe
Mr
McLean
his
client
may
need
to
go
and
discuss
what's
going
on
and
then
come
back
and
precision
it,
because
maybe
she
isn't
clear
on
what
the
process
is
with
with
her
agent.
H
H
D
H
C
G
G
D
C
F
C
G
L
Good
evening,
Danny
Collins
with
your
Planning
Commission
staff,
have
been
sworn
in.
Our
first
case
is
in
the
central
Tampa
planning
district
and,
more
specifically,
it's
an
East
Tampa
Urban
Village.
L
Here's
an
aerial
map
of
the
subject
site
in
the
surrounding
properties.
This
is
East
Columbus
Drive,
here
standing
at
the
northwest
corner
of
North
Morgan
Street
and
East
Columbus
Drive,
the
closest
Transit
stop,
is
approximately
four
blocks
to
the
southeast
of
this.
L
B
C
L
L
Republica
de
Cuba
and
East
26th
Avenue,
the
subject
side
is
not
located
within
an
evacuation
Zone.
The
closest
public
recreation
facility
is
Burrell
Park
located
a
thousand
feet
west
of
the
subject.
Site
here
is
the
adopted
future
land
use
map.
As
you
see,
the
subject
site
is
located
here:
it's
surrounded
by
the
residential,
it's
recognized
under
the
residential
10
designation
and
is
surrounded
by
the
residential
10
designation
on
all
sides.
The
planet,
commission
staff
reviewed
the
application
found
no
adverse
impacts
to
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
L
L
This
portion
of
North
11th
Street
between
East
26th,
Avenue
and
East
28th
Avenue,
contains
Parcels
recognized
under
the
residential
10
designation
and
are
being
utilized
for
detached
single-family
uses
this
segment
also
or
this
segment
is
also
developed
at
a
density
of
5.49
dwelling
units
per
acre,
the
PD
proposes
a
density
of
5.47
units
per
acre,
which
is
comparable
to
the
existing
density
in
the
surrounding
area.
The
Planning
Commission
staff
finds
that
the
request
is
comparable
to
the
to
the
development
pattern
and
surrounding
area.
L
The
four
proposed
attached
single-family
units
are
not
adjacent
to
the
public
right
away,
but
via
hero
access
to
the
units
is
provided
from
North,
11th,
Street
and
an
alley
the
applicant
is
provide.
An
internal
pedestrian
connections
will
help
which
will
help
improve
The
Pedestrian
experience
by
ensuring
pedestrians
can
access
the
sidewalk
along
North
11th
Street.
In
conclusion,
the
request
will
maintain
the
civility
of
an
existing
area
while
expanding
opportunities
for
housing
choices
in
the
central
Tampa
planning
district.
L
The
request
is
comparable
and
compatible
with
this
portion
of
the
ebar
Heights
neighborhood
and
is
consistent
with
the
long-range
development
pattern
encouraged
under
the
residential
10
future
land
use.
Designation.
Based
on
those
considerations,
the
Planning
Commission
staff
finds
the
request
consistent
with
the
goals,
objectives
and
policies
of
the
city
of
Tampa
comprehensive
plan.
That
concludes
my
presentation
available
for
any
questions.
G
As
you
see
the
property
right
here
outlined
in
red,
it
is
encompassed
and
surrounded
by
all
residential
single-family
detached
homes,
and
these
are
all
zoned
rs50.
As
you
see
to
the
north,
you
have
East
28th
Avenue
to
the
Southeast
26th
Avenue.
If
you
go
to
the
east,
you'll
have
a
Devin
Street
and
if
you
go
out
to
the
West,
you'll
have
North
Nebraska
Avenue.
G
G
These
are
broken
down
by
the
Luts,
the
square
footage
per
lot,
the
building
coverage
per
lot
and
the
setbacks
per
lot.
The
site
at
the
current
time
is
vacant.
The
maximum
Building
height
is
at
proposed
35
feet.
The
vehicle
or
access
to
the
site
will
come
off
North
11th
Street,
as
you
see
coming
on
in
to
all
four
units.
G
Now
these
elevations,
if
approved
between
first
and
second
reading
the
applicant,
will
need
to
make
changes
and
label
these
elevations
per
per
unit,
but
from
the
front
of
the
buildings.
There's
the
elevation
to
see
to
the
rear
of
each
unit.
G
G
G
The
development
review
and
compliance
staff
has
reviewed
the
petition
and
finds
the
overall
request
to
be
inconsistent
with
a
Land
Development
code.
Should
it
be
City
council's
pleasure
to
approve
the
application,
the
applicant
must
provide
changes
between
first
and
second
reading
as
per
the
revision
sheets
I'm
here
for
any
questions,
councilman
Goods.
I
C
G
See
the
waivers
here
are
natural
resources
had
to
remove
two
non-hazardous
grand
Live
Oaks.
Also,
you
had
development
coordination
had
requests
to
allow
building
fronts
to
orient
towards
the
interior
of
the
zoning
lot.
C
N
Okay,
air
Merit
development
coordination-
I
was
actually
going
to
speak
on
this
because
it's
a
little
unusual
for
our
natural
resources
to
be
consistent
and
to
speak
on
a
project.
But
the
applicant
has
worked
with
us
a
lot
in
trying
to
you
know
to
orient
the
lots
and
to
preserve
as
many
Grand
trees
as
possible.
That.
C
C
O
I
I
think
City
staff,
I
think
Council
for
being
here
the
site
plan,
as
they've
shown
you
we've
made
the
changes
that
the
city
staff
has
referred
to
already.
These
changes
that
they've
requested
are
very
minor,
like
Aaron
was
talking
about
the
Great
Lengths
that
we've
gone
to
to
save
five
out
of
these
Seven
Grand
Oaks
on
this
property.
So
we've
been
working
on
this
since
October
I
believe
was
our
first
scheduled
hearing.
O
M
C
The
the
change
that
you've
made
that
this
that
the
staff
was
asking
for,
have
you
already
made
them,
or
they
have
to
be
made
between
first
and
second
reading.
P
Good
evening
my
name
is
huskovahi
I'm
with
Northside
engineering
partners.
With
this
young
man,
I
have
been
sworn
in,
we're
located
in
Clearwater
300
South,
Belcher
Road
I
wanted
to
State,
as
you
folks
have
iterated.
This
site
is
extremely
challenging
very
unusual
shape.
It
has
a
lot
of
really
nice
Oaks
Grand
Oaks,
beautiful
Oaks
I've,
been
there
several
times.
I've
taken
many
pictures
owners
here
with
us
too
tonight.
P
So
if
there
are
any
questions
that
we
may
not
be
able
to
answer,
Mr
Solo
in
the
back
with
his
wonderful
wife
they're
here
to
ask
any
further
questions.
But
I
wanted
to
recognize
the
staff
for
doing
a
wonderful
job
with
us.
It's
taken
a
while
to
get
that
project
to
where
it
is
in
the
beginning.
It
was
totally
different,
but
working
with
staff
very
closely
with
the
landscape
Department
with
the
zoning.
P
N
You're
a
merit
development
coordination
all
right
so
when
the
applicant
had
originally
come
to
us,
they
were
proposing
to
remove
five
grand
trees,
and
so
this
is
a
site
plan
here
and
they
change
their
setbacks.
They've
changed
the
you
know
the
building
envelopes
to
accommodate
these
Grand
trees
and
given
them
almost
their
full
protective
radii,
except
for
the
cases
where
you
see
permeable,
pavement
or
things
of
that
nature,
and
then
I
just
want
to
show
this
here
is
just
a
picture.
You
know
of
the
site.
N
It
is
it's
very
dense,
especially
to
the
West
along
the
alley.
Where
you
have
this
Grand
Live
Oak
in
the
front
is
staying.
That
tree
is
being
preserved,
probably
the
largest
tree
out
there,
and
then
this
is
kind
of
what
it
looks
like
in
the
site
and
because
of
the
limited
light
back
there.
The
trees
have
grown
pretty
upright,
which
is
good.
N
For
you
know,
construction
you're
able
you
don't
have
to
prune
as
much
off
some
of
these
trees,
but
they
do
what
they
will
need
waivers
to
remove
two
of
them,
which
we
thought
we
could
be
consistent
with
that
as
they're.
Preserving
five
of
the
trees,
one
of
those
is
off-site
as
well
so,
but
if
you
have
any
questions
for
me,
I'm
here.
N
N
I
O
Parking
will
be
handled
by
carports,
carport,
yeah
that'll
be
a
carport,
and
one
of
those
driveways
in
the
plan
that
you
saw
has
actually
shifted
so
that
they'll
be
able
to
drive
right
in
everybody,
except
for
one
lot
will
actually
have
a
driveway
that'll
provide
parking
and
a
carport
to
provide
parking.
There's
the
one
that
you
can
see
is
turned
we
we
had
to
eliminate
the
actual
driveway
parking,
but
they
will
still
have
a
full
carport
for
two
spots,
so
everybody
has
at
least
two
spots
in
every
home
two
spots:
okay,.
O
It
can't
be
accessed
by
vehicular
traffic.
It's
not
paved
and
one
end
is
closed
off.
Okay,
if
it
could
be
paved
from
I
think
26th
on
down.
So
if
we
were
to
pay
off
half
of
it,
it
could
provide
access,
but
even
then
it's
only
15
feet
wide
I.
Believe,
okay,.
O
Q
C
R
I'd
like
to
move
phone
number,
Rez,
22-89
ordinance
being
presented
for
Hershey
and
consideration
ordinance,
rezoning
property
in
the
general
vicinity
of
3410
North
11th
Street
in
the
city
of
Tampa
Florida,
more
particularly
described
with
section
one
from
zoning:
District
classification,
RS,
50,
residential
single
family
to
PD,
plan
development,
residential
single
family
detached
providing
effective
date.
Okay,.
D
D
E
H
Council,
as
you
know
well
know,
rezoning
process
is,
is
not
easily
understood
and
because
we
had
to
go
back
to
the
city
staff
for
DRC,
the
family
didn't
understand
what
was
going
on
and
we've
explained
it
to
them
now,
and
we
also
have
explained
that
they
cannot
go
forward
this
evening
because
there
was
no
evaluation
made
of
this
of
the
site
plan.
H
C
C
C
L
Good
evening,
Danny
Collins
again
with
your
Planning
Commission
staff,
have
been
sworn
in.
Our
next
case
is
in
the
central
Temple
planning
district
and,
more
specifically
in
the
Tampa
Heights
Urban
Village
Robert
C
Garner
Park
is
the
closest
recreation
facility,
which
is
located
directly
to
the
east
of
the
subject
site.
The
closest
Transit
stop
is
within
a
quarter
mile
of
the
subject
site
on
North
Tampa
Street.
The
stop
is
served
by
heart
routes,
one
in
six
providing
connections
to
downtown
Tampa.
L
Here's
an
aerial
map
of
the
subject's
site
and
the
surrounding
properties.
You'll
see
the
subject
site
it's
outlined
in
this
purple,
color,
it's
just
off
just
on
the
west
of
North
Highland
Avenue.
This
is
North
Pole
Avenue
here
here
is
the
adopted
future
land
use
map
the
subject
sites
currently
recognized
under
the
residential
35
future
land
use
designation.
That
designation
allows
residential
development
up
to
35
dwelling
units
per
acre
and
allows
a
consideration
of
multi-family
single-family
attached
and
detached
single-family
uses
directly
to
the
east
of
the
subject.
Site
is
Robert.
L
C
Garner
Park,
which
is
recognized
under
under
the
recreational
open
space,
designation,
the
planet,
commission
staff
reviewed
the
request
and
found
the
request
consistent
with
the
density
anticipated
in
the
surrounding
area.
The
average
density
in
this
portion
of
North
Highland
Avenue
on
the
on
residential
zoned
Parcels
South
of
West
Francis
Avenue,
East
of
North,
Ola,
Avenue
and
north
of
West
Parks
Avenue,
is
6.23
dual
units
per
acre.
This
area
is
planned
for
residential
development
up
to
35
dwelling
units
per
acre,
so
this
surrounding
area
is,
can
be
considered
underdeveloped.
L
The
comprehensive
plan
encourages
single-family
attached
developments
to
be
designed
include
orientation
on
the
front
door
to
a
neighborhood,
sidewalk
and
Street,
which
is
satisfied
through
this
proposed
PD.
A
single-family
attached
wall
units
units
two
through
four
can
access
the
front
doors
via
sidewalk
connected
from
North
Highland
Avenue
along
the
southern
perimeter
of
the
subject
site.
The
request
supports
many
of
the
policies
in
the
comprehensive
plan
as
it
relates
to
housing
the
City's
population.
L
The
comprehensive
plan
encourages
new
housing
on
vacant
and
underutilized
land
to
ensure
an
adequate
supply
of
housing
is
available
to
meet
the
needs
of
Tampa's
present
and
future
populations.
Additionally,
the
request
is
consistent
with
the
con
compact
City
Forum
strategy,
which
encourages
infill
development
within
proximity
to
Transit
and
employment
services,
and
also
this
the
compress
plan
directs
the
greatest
share
of
growth
to
the
city's
Urban
Villages.
So
this
request
would
provide
additional
housing
within
the
Tampa
Heights
Urban
Village.
L
G
As
you
see
the
site
here
outlined
in
red
to
the
north,
you
have
zoned
RM
24,
you
have
residential
single
family
and
also
you
have
office
use
to
the
South.
You'll
have
rm24
Zone
residential
single
family
to
the
West.
You'll
have
a
Zone
PD,
and
this
is
a
vacant
lot
at
this
time
and
then
to
the
east.
You
have
a
park:
Highland,
Park,
zoned,
PD
to
the
east.
G
I
will
show
you
a
little
bit
of
a
broader
view,
so
you
have
an
idea
of
where
this
is.
You
have
West
Park
Avenue
to
the
South.
You
also
have
Armature
Works
down
here
to
the
South.
You
have
West
Amelia
up
here
to
the
north.
If
you
go
to
the
east,
you'll
have
North
Tampa
Street
and
if
you
go
out
to
the
West,
you'll
have
you'll
go
down,
you'll
see
you
have
Armature
Works
and
also
North
Woodrow
Avenue
I
will
now
share
the
site
plan
provided
by
the
applicant
Mr
Hussein.
C
M
I
G
The
proposed
rezoning
is
to
allow
for
residential
single
family
detached
and
residential
single
family
attached
units,
the
properties
on
North
Highland
Avenue.
As
you
see
here
to
the
east,
the
subject
site
contains
a
lot
area
of
9255
square
feet
or
approximately
0.21
Acres.
The
applicant
is
proposing
four
units
here,
three
units
that
are
residential
multi-single-
oh
sorry,
residential
single
family
attached
here
and
one
unit,
that's
residential,
single
family
detached
and
that's
facing
North
Highland
Avenue.
G
G
G
G
The
first
waiver
is
to
request
to
allow
reduction,
I'll
whiff
from
24
feet
to
18
feet.
The
second
waiver
is
required
require
requesting
to
reduce
the
required
eight
foot
vua
buffer
to
five
feet
to
the
West.
The
third
request:
a
waiver
is
to
reduce
the
required
five
foot
use
to
use
landscape
buffer
to
four
feet
to
the
South
adjacent
to
residential
multi-family.
Use
number
four
is
to
request
to
reduce
the
required
350
square
feet
per
unit,
Green
Space
to
163
square
feet
per
unit.
G
G
Development
review
and
compliance
staff
have
reviewed
their
application
and
finds
the
overall
request
to
be
inconsistent
with
the
Land
Development
code
should
be
council's
pleasure
to
approve
the
application.
The
applicant
must
provide
revisions
to
the
revision
sheet
between
first
and
second
reading
I'm
here
for
any
questions.
Any.
H
Good
evening
Council
Steve
michelini,
representing
the
petitioner
we've,
made
some
some
revisions
to
the
site
plan
so
that
there
are
four
waivers
being
requested.
Instead
of
the
six
we've
reviewed
that
basically,
we've
provided
to
the
staff
and
we've
also
been
working
with
a
neighborhood
association
to
address
some
of
the
concerns
that
they
had
raised
and
we've
made
those
revisions
the
the
site
and
I'll
go
through
those
in
a
second.
The
site
is
just
under
10
000
square
feet
is
9255
square
feet.
H
The
request
to
reduce
the
multi-family
Green
Space
from
350
is
now
we've
increased
the
green
space.
So
it's
now
is
290
square
feet,
reduce
the
required
vehicular
use
area
from
eight
feet
to
five
feet
along
the
west
part
of
the
alley.
We've
changed
that
and
then
the
section
to
allow
the
front
doors
of
units
two
through
four
to
face
the
side:
yard
property
units
with
respect
to
the
land
use
code.
We're
allowed
to
develop
seven
units,
however,
seven
units
will
not
practically
fit
on
this
site.
H
What
the
owner
of
the
property
would
like
to
do
is
demolish
the
existing
house
and
rebuild
his
house
and
maintain
that
here,
so
that
would
be
a
single
family
residential
unit
and
then
we've
proposed
three
townhouses
here,
which
would
access
the
alley.
There
are
three
other
townhouse
projects
to
the
north
and
to
the
West
that
access
that
alley
now
and
it
will
be
completely
improved
and
built
to
City
standards.
You
see
that
we've
increased
the
Green
Space
here
and
here
and
the
doorways
will
now
face
the
alley
and
not
and
not
a
a
regular
Street.
H
One
of
the
things
that
we
might
want
to
look
at
in
the
future
is
that
Ally's,
since
they're
becoming
more
and
more
utilized
for
Access
that
that
code
provision
that
says
you
have
to
seek
a
waiver.
You
might
want
to
look
at
that
because,
especially
in
these
infill
projects,
where
you're
trying
to
provide
more
housing,
it's
it's
very
difficult,
but
you're
also
trying
to
encourage
the
use
of
the
alleys
which
that
you
have
a
conflict
in
the
code
when
that,
when
that
occurs,.
H
When
we're
talking
about
the
code
itself,
when
you're,
looking
at
the
at
the
bigger
picture
regarding
the
comprehensive
plan,
the
city,
the
county
staff,
went
through
a
number
of
Provisions
that
we
meet
with
respect
to
the
County,
Planning,
Commission
and
and
the
comprehensive
plan,
we
required
two
spaces
per
unit
and
what's
unusual
here
with
our
our
pro
project
that
we're
before
you
with
we're
providing
14
spaces
when
nine
are
required,
so
we're
reducing
the
ability
for
the
off
Street
or
on-street
parking
for
somebody
to
to
have
to
access
that
and
again,
the
units
regarding
the
the
townhouses
are
all
coming
off
the
alley.
H
The
owner
wishes
to
have
his
access
off
of
Highland,
which
is
where
the
current
access
is
so
we've
taken
this
and
developed.
What
I
think
is
a
unique
solution
to
a
difficult
issue
where
we've
transferred
the
access
for
the
townhouses
to
the
rear
and
we've
maintained
the
single
family
access
exactly
where
it
is
now.
H
H
H
H
This
is,
this
is
a
closer
view
showing
you.
This
is
the
subject
property
here
and
you
can
see
the
driveway
here
which
we're
trying
to
maintain
and
rebuild
a
single-family
residence
here.
There
are
only
three
single-family
residences
on
this
section
of
the
street,
one
on
the
two
to
the
South.
One
of
them
has
already
been
redeveloped,
and
then
this
one
is
proposed
to
be
redeveloped
and
you
can
see
that
we're
in
close
proximity
to
commercial
uses
already.
H
H
When
you're
looking
at
the
responses
from
the
Planning
Commission
staff,
it
says
to
promote
efficient
and
sustainable
uses
of
the
land
for
infrastructure
and
careful
consideration
of
potential
adverse
impacts.
This
has
townhouses
all
around
it.
This
will
not
create
an
adverse
impact
upon
any
surrounding
properties,
allow
the
integration,
different
land
use
and
density,
so
we've
maintained
the
single
family
on
Highland
and
we're
requesting
the
ability
to
develop
the
townhouses
along
the
rear
side
of
the
property
acknowledge
the
changing
needs
and
Technologies.
H
We've
asked
for
some
consideration
here
and
indicated
that,
according
to
the
staff
report,
we
meet
that
requirement
to
property
is
occupied
by
a
single
family
use
and
the
proposed
use
is
compatible
with
the
surrounding
area,
and
the
proposed
height
is
also
compatible,
encourage
flexible
land
uses.
A
total
of
nine
parking
spaces
are
required
in
14
to
be
provided,
which
is
unique.
H
Most
of
these
are,
are
are
being
redeveloped
and
into
a
compatible
design,
and
it
says
the
proposed
proposed
elevations
are
complementary
to
the
uses
in
the
area,
promote
the
retention
and
reuse
of
building
an
existing
stock.
This
is
an
existing
occupied
residential
single-family
house,
which
will
be
demolished
and
then
it'll
be
replaced
with
another
single-family
house.
So
we
have
a
combination
of
things
being
requested.
One
is
a
single-family
house
to
be
replaced.
H
The
second
part
of
that
is
to
allow
townhouses
in
the
rear
accessing
the
alleys,
which
is
another
priority
and
objective
of
the
city
we
have
endeavored
to
meet
with
the
with
the
neighborhood
association.
We've
also
met
with
City
staff.
We've
made
some
modifications
which
increase
the
Green
Space
and
remove
two
of
the
waivers
that
were
being
requested,
and
we
believe
that
we've
gone
a
long
way
toward
making
this
the
most
possible
compatible
development.
H
We
can
within
two
blocks,
as
I
said,
his
Armature
Works
this
this
corner
in
here
of
Highland
and
then
going
South
toward
Armature.
Works
has
been
a
hotbed
for
redevelopment
of
townhouse
projects
and
again
the
alley
access
will
be
completely
improved
to
allow
that
access
to
occur
and
there's
already
two
other
projects
that
will
access
the
alley
to
the
north
and
to
the
west
of
this
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
have
or
respectfully
requesting
your
approval
and
I
guess.
That's.
C
G
Zane
you're
saying
development
coordination,
I
did
hear
and
my
staff
heard
you
know
that
the
applicant
is
requesting
to
change
things
on
the
site
plan
and
lessen
the
waivers,
but
I
just
want
to
make
it
clear
just
an
aware
for
Council
and
the
applicant
to
know
that
if
they're
going
to
make
modifications
to
the
site
plan
that
these
will
it'll
spark
and
have
to
have
another
DRC
review
by
the
whole
entire
staff.
So
I'll
just
keep
that
in
mind.
Please.
F
H
Based
on
the
staff
report
is
based
on
that
site
plan.
Yes,
we've
made
modifications
since
then,
and
according
to
what
the
staff
has
just
told
me
that
we
probably
should
be
requesting
a
continuance
for
this
to
go
back
through
DRC
and
to
also
make
any
other
modifications
necessary
and
get
you
an
appropriate
staff
report
and
site
plan
and
we're
not
we're
no
object
to
that.
We
would
respectfully
request
that.
F
H
F
And
also
also
a
council
of
finding
at
Mr
nicolini.
It
is
your
request,
then,
to
to
get
the
180
day
waiver
to
allow
this
to
be
continued.
C
C
C
C
I
I
Is
there
any
pre-review
before
people
come
to
this
Council
and
we
go
through
this
process
to
go,
I
mean
I'm
I,
don't
think
Mrs
lean,
I'm,
just
talking
to
staff
I
mean
this
is
this
is
starting
to
get
repetitive
with
some
of
these
things
here
and
I'm
just
wondering.
Is
there
a
certain
different
problems?
We
need
to
be
going
at
versus
wasting
this
time.
I
mean
I,
just
I'm
confused
what
just
happened
here.
This.
J
Yes,
LaShonda
development
coordination,
Council
I
would
like
to
explain
the
applicant
had
a
DRC
meeting.
The
applicant
had
requested
revisions
from
DRC
staff.
At
that
time.
Those
revisions
were
made.
The
revised
plan
was
submitted
and
that's
what
the
staff
report
was
written
on
the
changes
that
you
hear
today
that
were
that
the
applicant
has
explained
that
they've
made
to
the
site
plan
staff.
J
Had
you
know
we
have
not
seen
those
revisions
that
came
up
today
wow,
so
we
have
to
have
a
chance
for
our
DRC
staff
to
review
the
changes
that
are
listed
unless
it's
a
change
similar
to
a
note
to
the
site
plan
that
can
be
made
between
first
and
second
reading.
I.
J
C
L
Danny
Collins
with
your
appointment
commission
staff
have
been
sworn
in.
Our
next
case
is
in
the
central
Tampa
planning
district
and,
more
specifically,
the
Tampa
Heights
neighborhood
Robles
Park
is
the
closest
public
Recreations
facility,
I'm,
located
approximately
three
quarters
of
miles
in
the
northeast
of
the
subject
site.
The
closest
Transit
stop
is
adjacent
the
subject
site
on
West,
Columbus,
Drive,
West,
Columbus
or
Columbus.
Drive
is
a
Transit
emphasis
Corridor,
which
is
identified
in
a
plant
as
an
area
of
certified
or
suitable
for
redevelopment
and
intensification.
L
Here
is
a
aerial
map
of
the
subject
site
and
the
surrounding
properties.
You'll
see
the
subject
site.
It's
at
the
northwest
corner
of
North
Morgan
Street
and
East
Columbus
Drive
you'll
see
the
surrounding
area
north
of
Columbus
Drive
along
Morgan
Street's,
predominantly
residential
one
block
west
of
the
subject's
site
is
North.
Florida
Avenue,
which
contains
predominantly
non-residential
uses
here,
is
the
adopted
future
land
use
map.
L
A
majority
of
the
subject
site
is
currently
recognized
under
the
Community
commercial
35
designation,
which
is
a
mixed-use
land
use
category
that
allows
development
up
to
35
Millions
per
acre
or
up
to
a
2.0.
Far,
the
North
West
portion
of
the
site
is
recognized
under
the
residential
10
future
land
use
designation
along
North
Florida
Avenue
is
a
community
commercial
35,
as
well
as
adjacent
to
the
site
along
Columbus
Drive
and
then
to
the
north
and
east
of
the
subject.
L
Site
is
land
recognized
under
the
residential
10
land
use,
designation
due
to
the
site
being
within
an
Urban
Village.
The
subject
site
is
eligible
to
utilize
land
use
policy
5.1.6.
This
policy
allows
lands
divided
by
more
than
one
planned
category
to
proportionately,
weigh
the
floor.
Air
Ratio
or
density
through
the
entire
entire
site
and
permitted
uses
within
each
land
use
category
can
be
considered
anywhere
on
the
site
through
a
PD
rezoning.
L
The
subject
site
is
located
on
Columbus
Drive,
which
is
a
Transit
emphasis
Corridor
that
is
suitable
for
redevelopment
and
intensification.
The
Planning
Commission
staff
finds
that
the
proposed
density
in
uses
will
not
alter
the
the
character
of
the
neighborhood.
The
portions
of
the
subject
site
designate
a
community
commercial
35,
are
considered
to
be
within
a
mixed-use
corridor.
The
plan
development
addresses
the
mixed-use
quarter,
policies
by
placing
you
the
units
close
to
the
public
rights
way
and
including
the
orientation
of
the
front
door
to
a
neighborhood,
sidewalk
and
streets.
L
The
comprehensive
plan
encourages
vehicular
access
from
an
alley
which
is
provided
along
the
western
portion
of
the
subject
site
internal
pedestrian
connections
are
provided
from
the
three
garage
from
three
garages
to
the
single-family
attached
housing
fronting
East
Columbus,
Drive,
Planet,
commission
staff
finds
out
the
PD
addresses
the
mixed
use,
Corridor
policies
of
the
plan.
The
request
supports
many
of
the
policies
in
the
plan
as
it
relates
to
housing
the
City's
population.
L
The
Tampa
comprehensive
plan
encourages
new
housing
on
vacant
and
underutilized
land
to
ensure
an
adequate
supply
of
housing
is
available
to
meet
the
needs
of
Tampa's
president
and
future
population.
Also,
the
comprehensive
plan
seeks
to
direct
the
greatest
share
of
growth
to
the
urban
Villages.
This
supports
this
policy
Direction
and
will
provide
additional
housing
opportunities
within
the
Tampa
Heights
Urban
Village,
based
on
those
considerations.
The
planet,
commission
staff
finds
the
request
consistent
with
the
goals,
objectives
and
policies
of
the
Tampa
Conference
of
plan.
This
concludes
my
presentation
of
all
the
same
questions.
G
As
you
see,
the
property
is
here
outlined
in
red
to
the
north
of
property,
Zone
rs50.
You
have
residential
multi-family
structure
to
the
east
of
the
property.
You
have
residential
rs50,
and
these
are
is
a
vacant
lot
and
then
you
also
have
offices
and
residential
units
over
here
to
the
South.
These
lots
are
zoned
CI,
and
these
are
developed
with
a
cell
tower
and
also
an
auto
repair
shop
here
to
the
South
and
to
the
West.
You
have
Zone
CI.
You
have
an
auto
sales
shop
here
to
the
West.
G
Thank
you
proposed
rezoning
is
for
residential
single-family,
detached
and
semi-detached
the
property
at
this
time
is
currently
vacant.
The
Southern
Property
contains
a
lot
area
of
approximately
10
780
square
feet
or
0.25
Acres.
The
applicant
is
proposing
two
residential
single-family
detest
units
and
two
residential
single-family
semi-detached
units.
G
The
total
building
square
footage
is
7964
square
feet,
vehicle
or
access
to
the
site
for
on
Building
C
is
from
an
alley
to
the
West
and
for
building
a
is
from
North
Morgan
Street.
G
Foreign
Building
C
has
a
three-car
garage
on
the
first
floor
and
residents.
On
the
second
floor,
the
site
plan
identifies
eight
parking,
spaces
are
required
and
eight
are
being
provided
by
the
applicants.
The
maximum
Building
height
here
is
34
feet
in
height.
I
will
now
show
the
elevations
provided
by
the
applicant.
G
G
G
G
The
applicant
is
not
requesting
any
waivers
for
this
case.
Development
review
and
compliance
staff
has
reviewed
the
application
and
finds
the
overall
request
to
be
consistent
with
the
Land
Development
code
should
be
council's
pleasure
to
approve
the
application.
The
applicant
must
provide
revisions
to
the
revision
sheet
and
for
planning
commissions
revision
between
first
and
second
reading
I'm
here
for
any
questions.
T
Good
evening
Mr
chairman
members
of
council,
my
name
is
Mark
Bentley
401,
East,
Jackson,
Street,
Tampa,
33602
and
I
have
been
sworn
represented.
The
applicant
very
pleased
to
present
to
council
a
classic
Urban
infill
Development,
consisting
of
four
units.
One
of
them
is
going
to
be
dedicated
to
meet
the
definition
of
affordable
housing
by
stipulation
or
condition
on
the
site
plan.
T
There
are
apparently
20
letters
of
support
from
stakeholders
in
the
community.
These
are
immediate
residents
in
the
area
and
they
support
the
project,
the
residential
character,
the
project
and
the
Mantra
is,
if
you've
seen
the
letters
that
it'll
maintain
the
residential
character
and
the
Integrity
of
the
area
which
you'll
see
when
Ryan
gives.
His
presentation
is
like
pristine,
residential
there's,
no
commercial
in
this
general
area.
At
all.
T
Not
only
are
the
residents
excited
and
extremely
supportive
of
the
project.
We've
received
positive
recommendations
from
your
staff,
Planning
Commission
staff,
Arc
staff,
The
Arc,
who
made
a
recommendation
to
council
to
approve
the
PD
along
with
the
general
elevations
that
are
part
of
the
PD
process
and
as
Zane
indicated,
this
is
projects
very
unique
in
and
up
that
it
doesn't
request.
Any
waivers
or
variations,
okay,
so
in
totality
the
project
complies
with
the
comp
plan.
T
Is
it
consistent
with
all
Land
Development,
your
entire
Land
Development
code,
so
with
all
due
respect
that
it's
discretion
of
councils,
a
little
constrained
from
my
perspective,
but
in
any
event,
notably
not
only
as
staff
found
the
project
consistent
compatible,
but
the
project
complies
with
the
proposed
Tampa
Heights
code
amendments
that
it's
winding
its
way
through
the
prod
process.
T
T
There
is
a
lot
that
the
client
owned
right
here
and
in
20,
20
I
believe
he
had
built
a
home
and
sold
it
off
and
on
the
dates
of
my
notes,
Here
and
then
subsequently
after
that
sale,
he
then
purchased
a
slot.
So
the
significance
of
that
is
there
was
never
any
common
ownership
at
the
simultaneously
between
this
lot
and
the
Lots
we're
dealing
with
tonight.
So
it
was,
there
was
no
opportunity
for
merger
of
the
two
loss
and
that's
important,
because
the
city
doesn't
allow
if
there's
common
ownership
a
lot.
T
So
you
have
a
non-conforming
lot:
okay
and
the
properties
under
the
same
ownership
by
operation
of
law
automatically
the
properties
merge
to
create
a
more
conforming
law,
so
that
set
of
facts
never
existed
and
I
have
all
the
title:
research
here
to
back
up
and
support
what
I'm
telling
you
here.
So
that's
important
that
this
lot
was
always
independent
from
these
now.
The
first
time
this
slot
was
split
up
was
1984..
T
T
The
owner
of
the
lot
that
I
just
mentioned
to
you
here
that
I'm
pointing
to
at
one
point
in
time,
asked
our
client
to
sell
a
portion
of
our
clients
property
where,
where
the
affordable
housing
unit
is
intended,
however,
that
never
occurred.
Obviously,
as
I
mentioned,
that
would
require
making
the
subject
property
more
non-conforming.
You
can't
split
it
off.
T
Under
your
code,
so
the
long
and
the
short
of
it
with
respect
to
the
zoning
lot
is
our
client
purchased
a
lot
which
originated
in
2007.
The
purchase
occurred
after
the
client
sale
of
the
other
lot
to
the
east,
so
emerging
are
combining
the
Lots
was
a
legal
impossibility.
Under
your
code,
the
PD
process
is
structured
and
intended
to
deal
with
a
unique
situation
that
this
project
presents.
T
The
pde
of
approval
provided
needed,
affordable
housing
in
this
area.
The
PD
is
consistent
with
the
proposed
Tampa
Heights
code
changes
that
I
mentioned
in
terms
of
Ally
access,
and
a
lot
would
be
recorded,
recognized
as
a
lot
legal
out
of
record.
Now
there
was
some
discussion
by
the
Tampa
Heights
civic
association
of
a
preference
trying
to
dictate
the
use
of
our
clients,
property
and
their
Preference.
They
articulated
was
a
mixed
use
project.
T
So
what
we
did
is
we
had
our
engineer,
lay
out
a
commercial
project
on
this
property
and
this
even
assumed
multiple
waivers
from
ADA
compliance,
Landscaping
storm
water
and
things
like
that
and
the
best
we
could
come
up
with.
Okay,
just
in
its
speculation,
was
a
600
square
foot.
Building
and
the
construction
cost
along
with
land
would
be
in
the
range
of
two
million
dollars,
so
600
square
feet
is
the
size
of
someone's
garage,
you
know,
or
maybe
someone's
living
room,
so
obviously
it's
economically
unfeasible
to
to
build
a
commercial
project
on
that
property.
T
So
there's
there's
no
point
in
developing
a
mixed-use
project
for
the
sake
of
having
a
200
square
foot
gift
shop
in
residential,
just
for
the
sake
of
characterizing
that
as
mixed
use,
but
the
bottom
line
is
it
just
doesn't
make
any
sense
at
all?
Is
a
property
owner?
No
one
in
the
right
mind
would
do
that
a
600
square
foot
building,
it's
not
large
enough
for
any
tenant
at
all.
That
I
can
think
of
maybe
a
real
estate
agent
or.
T
U
Good
evening
city
council,
Ryan
manasse
with
Johnson
Pope
401
East
Jackson
Street,
we're
happy
to
be
here
tonight
representing
a
great
project
which
provides
affordable
housing.
It
also
has
18
letters
of
support
for
the
project
from
the
neighborhood.
It
demonstrates
compliance
with
the
city
of
Tampa,
Land,
Development
regulations,
with
full
consistency,
findings
from
the
DRC
staff,
Planning
Commission,
and
a
recommendation
for
approval
from
the
Architectural
Review
commission
and
again,
the
project
is
not
requesting
any
waivers
from
the
code.
Now
bring
your
attention
to
the
overhead.
U
I'll
show
you
what
I'm
showing
here
is
the
request
again,
which
is
at
rs50
and
CI,
to
PD
plan
development
and
that's
where
the
residential
single
family,
detached
and
semi-detached
uses
and
just
to
orientate
you,
the
site
on
screen,
is
outlined
in
green
to
give
you
that
orientation
I
like
to
call
it
like
a
z-shaped
lot,
almost
there's
a
12
and
a
half
foot
platted
alley
to
the
to
the
west
east
Columbus
Drive
to
the
South
and
North
Morgan
Street
to
the
East
and
again,
the
green
outline
shows
the
unique
shape
of
this
parcel
or
this
zoning
lot
that
we're
bringing
forward
for
this
request.
M
U
Okay,
great
so
I'm.
Sorry,
let
me
get
my
paper
straight,
so
the
right-of-way
taking
was
along
this.
That's
why
you
have
the
skew
and
property
line.
As
you
can
see,
it
starts
Meandering
North
right
there.
Additionally,
each
building
is
labeled,
as
Zane
mentioned
in
his
report.
There's
building
a
which
is
comprised
of
that
single
family
detached
dwelling,
Building
B,
which
is
the
single
family
semi-detached
with
two
units,
and
the
units
are
side
by
side.
U
Building
C,
consisting
of
three
enclosed
parking
spaces
on
the
ground
floor
with
the
second
level
being
the
single
family
detached
dwelling
unit
and
again,
that's
what's
being
to
expand
on
Building
C,
there's
a
condition
under
note,
19
on
the
site
plan
and
through
the
review,
we've
stated
criteria
to
make
that
affordable
housing,
so
that
is
dedicated
on
the
site
plan.
U
As
such,
the
approval
will
allow
for
a
total
of
four
dwelling
units
on
the
zoning
lot,
which
meets
land
use
policy
5.1.6,
which
allows
the
project
to
weigh
the
density
permitted
under
the
Community
commercial
35
designation
throughout
the
entire
site.
And
again
the
proposed
rezoning
is
not
requesting
any
waivers.
U
This
rezoning
meets
the
requirements
of
section
27-136.
It
promotes
the
efficient
and
sustainable
land
use
of
land
and
infrastructure.
It
allows
for
the
integration
of
different
land
uses
and
densities.
U
It
promotes
and
encourages
development
where
appropriating
location
character
and
compatibility
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood
built
environment
and
existing
geography
that
promotes
a
more
desirable
living
environment
and
it,
as
shown
in
your
staff
report,
DRC
DRC
staff,
concurs
what
the
proposed
project
is
consistent
with
these
Land
Development
regulations
or
criteria
across
the
board.
U
And
I
know:
Zane
went
through
this
elevation
slide
and
I'll
just
go
through
it
briefly.
Top
is
Building
B
single
family
semi-detached
use
the
middle
being
Building
C
for
parking
I'm,
sorry
for
the
parking
on
the
ground
level
and
affordable
housing
dwelling
unit.
It's.
S
S
U
F
U
D
U
That's
better
all
right,
I'm,
Gonna
Roll
through
them.
Okay
top
is
Building
B
single
family
semi-detached
middle.
If
we
can
scroll
up
to
this,
one
is
going
to
be
Building
C
for
the
parking
on
the
ground
level,
affordable,
housing
dwelling
above
and
then
the
bottom
elevation
is
building
a
which
is
the
single
family
semi-detached,
and
it
might
be
beneficial
if
we
hand
you
the
site
plan,
or
you
could
see
this
from
what
was
turned
into.
U
If
you
guys
want
to
circulate
that,
let
me
just
hand
it
up
to
them,
and
these
these
elevations
would
still
have
to
go
back.
Even
though
this
is
we
had
a
recommendation
for
approval
for
the
rezoning
from
The
Arc.
They
would
still
have
to
go
back
through
the
arc
for
further
certificate
of
appropriateness
applications,
and
can
you
see
the
the
Sanborn
map
on
screen?
Yeah,
okay,
so
the
proposed
development
in
green
on
this
Sanborn
map
is
mostly
between
two
contributing
historic
structures,
as
shown
on
the
on
this
map.
U
This
development
reestablishes
structures
that
are
in
character
with
what
was
previously
built
on
site,
the
Tampa,
Heights,
historic
district,
the
existing
adjacent
contributing
structures
and
the
overall
historic
character
of
the
neighborhood.
The
lots
are
currently
vacant
and
undeveloped,
which
doesn't
help
with
the
residential
infill
needs
of
Tampa
or
contribute
to
the
historic
environment.
U
And
this
is
this
slide
is
from
the
Tampa
Heights
guidelines
for
massing
and
form
in
order
to
maintain
existing
character
of
the
Tampa
Heights
historic
district.
New
buildings
should
have
similar
massing
and
building
form
to
the
neighboring
buildings.
Regarding
our
proposed
rezoning,
the
structures
showing
massing
that
is
in
form
and
reflective
of
its
neighbors
without
replicating
them.
U
U
And
these
are
just
a
few
renderings
of
the
buildings
that
our
client
was
able
to
supply.
Obviously
again,
it
would
still
have
to
go
through
Arc
review
and
approval
for
certificate
of
appropriatenesses,
but
this
is
for
building
a
which
is
a
single
family
detached
this
would
be
Building
B,
which
is
that
semi-detached
the
two
units
on
the
left
and
right
and
then
Building
C,
which
is
that
affordable
housing
unit
that
we're
stipulating
through
the
PD
condition
above
the
three
enclosed
garage
spaces.
M
What
do
you
mean
by
affordable
housing?
What.
U
U
U
This
would
be
tied
because
the
way
the
sites
laid
out
the
unit
one
and
two
the
semi-detached.
This
would
be
the
structure,
that's
above
their
parking,
and
it
would
be
rentable
for,
according
to
the
stipulations
on
the
note
in
the
site
plan.
So.
U
That's
with
it,
so
there's
no
requirement
for
us
to
provide
that,
but
the
applicant
is
going
to
provide
that
we're
not
asking
for
a
density
bonus
or
anything
like
that
that,
typically
you
see
with
rezoning
projects,
they
try
to
get
a
density
bonus
by
providing
affordable
housing.
I
mean
if
you
look
at
it
this
way.
It's
four
units,
one
of
those
units
are
going
to
be
affordable,
basic
math,
that's
25,
so
we're
well
over
10
percent.
What
the
code
would
give
you
a
bonus?
U
So
on
screen
this
yellow
shaded
area-
and
everybody
can
see
this
okay,
the
yellow
shade
area
shown
is
the
subject
site
with
the
white
beans
from
schools
or
churches
in
the
area.
U
The
blue,
shaded
areas,
residential
uses
and
the
non-shaded
area
are
typically
commercial
uses
or
zones
all
uses
to
the
east
of
the
platted
alley
are
residential
and
just
to
point
out,
injecting
some
other
type
of
use
would
be
incompatible
with
the
historical
development
pattern,
as
well
as
the
currently
built
environment
of
that
block,
and
what
I'm
saying
there
is,
if
you
could
see
everything
east
of
this
alley,
this
blue
continues
on
and
then
Southeast
as
well
as
residential.
U
The
proposed
development
further
enhances
the
residential
character
of
the
neighborhood
and
maintains
history,
the
history
of
this
corner
by
Reviving
The
residential
dwellings
in
similar
location,
as
shown
on
the
Sanborn
map,
I
previously
showed
you.
U
The
project
supports
the
growing
needs
of
four
affordable
residential
infield
development
within
the
city
of
Tampa,
by
providing
different
types
of
housing
to
include
affordable
housing
through
a
PD
condition
on
the
site
plan
Additionally,
the
proposed
rezonian
is
not
requesting
any
waivers
nor
requesting
a
bonus
provision
agreement
for
increased
density,
as
I
stated,
like
you
see
on
some
rezonians
trying
to
get
more
density,
it
meets
several
policies
from
the
Tampa
comprehensive
plan
and
Mark
and
I
are
available
for
any
questions,
and
we
respectfully
request
your
approval.
H
One
of
the
most
important
elements
is
that
in
the
PD
criteria,
it
says
to
promote
the
efficient,
sustainable
use
of
land
and
infrastructure,
with
careful
consideration,
a
potential
adverse
impacts
and
I'm
going
to
show
you
what
the
what
the
potential
adverse
impact
is
and
again
we've.
We've
discussed
this
with
with
the
applicant
as
well.
H
H
S
this
property
and
as
Mr
Bentley
referenced
earlier,
this
section
is
where
they're
proposing
a
parking
garage
and
a
single-family
unit,
they're,
also
proposing
that
a
connection
10
feet
wide,
be
allowed
between
the
property
on
Columbus
Drive,
which
we
really
don't
have
a
problem
with
anything
on
Columbus
Drive.
The
issue
is
utilizing
this
lot,
which
is
a
non-conforming
lot.
They
also
reference
that
in
the
future
it
might
become
conforming
through
a
code
Amendment.
Currently
it
is
non-conforming,
it
was
done
deliberately
and
I,
don't
know
exactly
who
did
it,
but
let
me
show
you
visually.
H
What
that
is.
This
property
here
is
is
tebby's
property.
This
property
here
is
where
they
proposed
a
parking
garage
and
the
single
family
unit.
It
I
can't
imagine
how
that
how
that
could
be
considered
to
be
anything
other
than
an
adverse
impact
on
on
tabbies.
Here,
one
of
the
other
provisions
and
I'm
going
back
to
the
land
use
provision
that
that
was
cited
in
the
staff
report.
H
It
says
due
to
the
Urban
Village
the
subject
site
is,
is
eligible
to
be
considered
correct.
It
doesn't
say
it,
it
is
considered.
It
says
it
may
be
eligible,
and
my
contention
is
that
that
the
council,
it's
up
to
you
all,
to
decide
whether
or
not
it's
eligible
for
the
increased
density
to
blend
those.
The
non-conforming
lot,
with
the
conforming
lots
that
they
have
on
Columbus
Drive
It
also
says
that
you
shall
weigh
the
floor
area
density
over
the
entire
site
and
I
would
offer
to
you
that
it
has
no
density
provision.
H
H
It
says
again.
The
Planning
Commission
has
reviewed
the
application
and
found
no
adverse
impacts
of
the
surrounding
neighborhood
I.
Think
that
they've
been
focusing
on
Columbus
Drive
and
not
on
this
out
parcel
in
the
back
and
that's
a
key
element.
This
their
project
doesn't
work
without
this
utilization
of
parking
coming
off
the
street
and
then
taking
a
10
foot
wide
access
point
between
those
two
properties.
When
I
would
ask
you,
let
me
show
you
on
the
site
plan
here.
H
I'll
show
you,
on
the
site
plan
they're
talking
about
a
walkway
here
in
the
backyard
essentially
of
this
property,
which
is
a
single
family
residence.
It
doesn't
make
sense,
respect
to
the
requests
they
come
back
change.
Their
plans
put
the
parking
where
it
belongs
off
of
Columbus
Drive
and
not
going
to
reduce
that
use
into
the
rear
of
another
adjacent
single-family
residence.
Thank
you.
C
D
V
V
Thank
you
and
I
would
like
to
note
that
I
was
online
on
the
prior
agenda
item,
but
was
muted
by
staff.
So
I've
been
here,
dear
Tampa,
City
Council,
the
Tampa
Heights
civic
association
board
unanimously
opposes
Rez
22-125
and
asks
that
you
deny
this
application
first,
Mr
Bentley
is
in
no
position
to
articulate
the
intent
and
contents
of
the
proposed
him
bites
overlay
District.
He
has
publicly
opposed
the
process
and
refused
to
discuss
this
Community
Driven
initiative
with
us.
V
The
new
counter
argument
tonight
of
the
unviability
of
commercial
uses
on
the
site
clearly
ignores
the
proposed
reduction
of
commercial
parking
minimums
in
this
District,
which
would
allow
for
a
larger
commercial
structure
to
be
built.
Furthermore,
is
understanding
how
alleys
are
supposed
to
be
used
is
incorrect,
as
well
as
the
assertion
of
this
vesting
non-conforming
Lots,
the
high
quantity
of
surrounding
property
owners
who
supposedly
support
this
product
has
not
been
submitted
for
the
public
record
for
verification
of
property
ownership
as
well.
V
The
planning
intent
is
clear
that
these
are
to
be
intended
to
be
built
for
commercial
or
mixed
use.
The
Tampa
Heights
neighborhood
plan,
adopted
by
City
Council
in
2003,
calls
for
this
area
of
Columbus
Drive
around
Tampa
Street
and
Florida
Avenue
intersections
to
become
a
thriving
mixed-use,
Town
Center.
The
fact
that
the
existing
zoning
and
future
land
use
step
down
from
CI
to
rs50
and
from
cc35
to
r10,
respectively,
east
of
Morgan
Street,
upholds
the
intent
of
the
neighborhood
plan.
V
Rezoning
this
property
to
a
single
family
use
under
PD
is
not
the
highest
and
best
use
intended
under
these
three
planning
documents.
It's
also
a
detrimental
action
to
walkability
we've
seen
an
erosion
of
commercially
zoned
properties
on
Commercial
corridors
turned
to
residential.
Only
as
commercial
sites
become
further
spread
apart,
they
become
less
walkable.
While
this
may
not
be
grounds
for
the
rezoning
denial
due
to
the
weakness
in
the
comp
plan,
the
council
should
be
aware
that
these
practices
are
counter
to
the
city's
Vision
zero
goals.
V
Crucially,
this
site
plan
and
the
accompanying
DRC
report
do
not
note
that
a
waiver
is
required
from
city
code,
22-282,
9c1,
single
family
attached
design
standards
which
raise
the
ground
floor,
entrances
or
front
doors
to
dwelling
units
should
face
Street
right-of-way,
not
including
alleys.
The
northernmost
lock
contains
a
unit
above
the
garages
which
is
noted
as
single
family
attached
on
the
rezoning
plans
and
talking
with
staff
they've
allowed
the
garage
apartment
or
condo
that
is
being
built
above
the
garage
to
be
classified
a
single-family
detached.
V
This
is
how
we
understand
that
the
code
was
twisted
to
avoid
the
waiver,
allowing
this
sets
a
serious
precedent
to
how
that
can
be
interpreted.
I'd
like
to
also
add
the
first
iteration.
This
project
was
a
special
use.
One
was
denied
by
The
Arc.
They
denied
the
case
in
April
2022
for
the
reasons
of
inconsistency
of
site
orientation
coverage
and
masking.
That
case
was
tied
to
special
use
application,
20
su-1
2222,
because
the
applicants
su1
approval
was
impossible.
Without
the
rrc
approval
they
have
pivoted
to
pursue
a
rezoning.
V
However,
the
site
plan
did
not
change
substantially,
nor
is
it
compatible
with
the
surrounding
development
pattern
of
Columbus
Drive.
The
single-family
home
proposed
that
212
East
Columbus
Drive
is
oriented
the
same
way
as
prior
and
takes
up
a
similar
mass
with
the
small
change
of
the
addition
of
a
wraparound
porch,
the
architecture
is
oriented
to
Morgan
While,
most
other
adjacent
structures
are
oriented
towards
Columbus
the
arc's
recent
approval
of
this
res
is
not
only
baffling
but
inconsistent
with
their
previous
ruling
and
should
not
be
the
basis
of
rezoning
approval.
T
Just
a
couple
comments:
council
members:
I:
don't
want
to
go
Tit
for
Tat,
there's
no
point
in
doing
I.
Think
you
get
the
big
picture
here
is
the
fundamental
I
think
problem
that
the
Association
has
is
the
use
of
the
property
and
I
think
you're
aware
that
an
entire
city
block
has
just
been
recently
approved
with
the
plan
amendment
to
umu,
60
I
believe
for
a
real
legitimate
mixed-use
project
and
I.
Think
Ryan
you've
got
that,
don't
you.
T
Okay,
so
that's
going
through
the
process
here
and
you
might
have
seen
the
TVO
news.
Article
I
mean
you
guys
are
pretty
involved,
we're
involved
in
this
as
well.
So
there's
really
no
need
for
this
mixed-use
project,
10,
000
square
feet
kind
of
Meandering
its
way
between
residential
development.
With
respect
to
this
comment
that
we
oppose
Tampa
Heights
proposed
Land
Development
code,
Provisions
we've
never
taken
a
position
they've
never
reached
out
to
us,
even
though
they
represented
they
would
so.
We
don't
have
a
position.
What
Mark
Bentley
thinks
about
it
is
not.
T
The
point
is
when
I
was
talking
about
the
intent.
It
speaks
for
itself
if
it
says
Thou
shalt
use
the
alley
and
improve
allies
in
the
code.
I
know
what
that
says,
and
that's
what
I
told
city
council
that
we're
doing
exactly
what's
been
advocated
in
these
proposed
regulations
in
terms
of
confirmation
of
the
persons
in
support,
we
submitted
submitted
letters
and
support
with
their
addresses,
so
you
could
easily
get
on
the
Property
Appraiser's
website
and
confirm
that
and
Mr
seal
is
very
knowledgeable
about
about
the
process
so
that
you
know
I'm
surprised.
T
He
also
said
we
need
the
city
staff
Overlook
something
and
we
actually
needed
a
waiver
for
building
C
and
there's
no,
however,
there's
no
design
criteria
for
a
single-family
detached
under
your
code.
So
that's
false
talks
about
the
arc
case.
He
said
he
was
baffled
by
that
we
went
to
the
arc.
They
spent
a
lot
of
time.
T
Reviewing
this
and
made
a
recommendation
city
council,
you
approved
the
rezoning
along
with
the
attached
elevations,
which
are
just
generalized,
and
we
have
to
go
back
in
front
of
the
arc
and
get
in
to
the
to
the
details.
Some
of
the
things
that
Mr
seal
apparently
was
concerned
about
now
with
respect
to
Mr
michelini
I
thought
it
was
interesting
and
item
number
four.
He
was
a
great
advocate
for
the
alley
in
in
using
the
alley
and
access
to
the
alley
and
and
all
that,
in
this
case,
I
guess
it's
kind
of
different.
T
He
has
a
different
perspective
since
he
has
a
client
who's
he
wants
to
represent,
but
it
does
meet
the
PD
criteria.
You've
had
two
professional
staffs
weigh
in
saying
it.
It
exactly
meets
the
criteria
set
forth
in
the
Land
Development
code.
With
respect
to
the
lot,
he
called
it
a
series
of
lot.
It's
one
cohesive,
non-conforming,
lot,
there's
nothing
we
can
do
with
it.
We
didn't
create
it.
My
client
didn't
create
it.
He
bought
it
that
way
it
was
created
15
years
ago.
Okay,
so
it
has
to
be
developed
in
this
present
form.
T
T
He
said
the
walkway
doesn't
make
sense.
Having
a
walkway
is
no
different,
having
a
walkway
at
your
house
to
your
garage,
that's
just
how
it
functions.
There's
nothing
unique
about
that.
T
So,
in
summary,
we
have
complied
with
all
codes
and
regulations
per
the
recommendations
of
your
professional
planning.
Staffs
no
waivers
have
been
sucked
all
staffs
and
Arc
have
found
the
project
consistent
with
the
city
codes,
historic
preservation,
policies
in
the
comp
plan
and,
as
I
explained
early
on
the
numerous
stakeholders
who
kind
of
reached
out
to
us,
and
it
wasn't
very
difficult.
T
A
lot
of
these
neighbors
were
excited,
so
we
didn't
have
to
twist
any
arms
to
get
the
20
letters
in
support
or
19
or
whatever
it
is,
and
they
rendered
their
support
with
the
understanding
that
it
would
be
a
residential
project
so
and
I
think
I
made
it
clear
to
you
that
it's
virtually
impossible
to
make
a
legitimate
mixed-use
development
on
this
property.
If
you
try
and
meet
Ada
buffering
storm
water
parking
Etc,
it's
just
not
going
to
happen
because
of
the
configuration
of
the
property,
and
it
doesn't
really
make
any
economic
sense.
T
T
T
T
M
The
smaller
one
was
fine.
This
is
fine,
however,
you
want
to
do
it,
so
you
have
an
alley
there
right
correct,
and
then
you
have
this
building
above
the
garage.
How
do
those
people
reach
the
street.
M
U
M
Is
that
alley
used
right
now?
Yes,
how
wide
is
it
it's.
U
This
one
right
here
that'll
be
further
reviewed
by
Solid
Waste
Department,
at
permitting
whether
they
pull
their
cans
out.
It's
not
going
to
be
a
solid
waste
enclosure,
so
all
these
units
would
have
typical
private
everybody
has
at
their
single
family
home,
which
would
be
the
cart
rollout.
U
Where
storm
or
I'm
sorry
I
keep
saying
stormwater
where
Solid
Waste
would
determine
whether
or
not
they
either
go
down
the
alley
or
they
would
I'm.
Assuming
down
the
alley,
I
mean
you'd
have
to
meet
the
again
Solid.
Waste
is
a
department
that
would
review
that
at
permitting
they
determine
what
their
trucks
and,
where
their
trucks
service.
T
U
T
Q
G
As
the
applicant
bought
it
in
2022
as
I
understand,
the
law
to
the
north
west
is
needed
to
having
this
PD.
To
have
this
to
be
a
lot
correct.
C
C
T
I'm
not
going
to
solve
the
midst
the
riddle
here.
These
lots
are
just
you
know:
they
go
back
and
forth,
and
but
this
particular
lot
it
became
this
configuration
in
2007.
Then
it
was
sold
again.
Then
it
was
sold
to
my
client.
So
it's
non-conforming
with
respect
to
obviously
frontages
and
things
like
that,
but
with
respect
to
size
it
exceeds
the
minimum
lot
size
for
the
zoning
districts
that
apply
to
it.
Okay,
so
it
has
a
non
it
has
non-conforming
characteristics
is,
is
what
I'd
say.
C
C
I'm
not
trying
to
give
evidence,
but
at
some
point
in
time
either
that
lot
gets
absorbed
back
into
another
property
or
it's
going
to
have
to
stay
non-conforming
until
we
have
the
land
use
policies.
C
Thank
you,
Mr
councilman,
Carlson,.
R
If
I
could
just
follow
up
on
that
Mr,
Bentley
or
staff,
could
you
tell
us
if,
if
you
couldn't
connect
those
properties?
What
could
you
do
with
that?
That
non-conforming
property
you
couldn't
build
anything
there.
T
Was
assuming
they're,
let's
just
for
the
discussion
purposes,
they're
legal
non-conforming,
Lots
yeah:
you
could
you
could
build
almost
essentially
what
we're
talking
about
tonight
now
that
the
hiccup
is
where
do
you
put
the
parking
for
the
middle
lot?
Okay
and
that's
that's
what
we're
struggling
with
when
we
came
up
with
this
Creative
Design,
let's
put
it
on
the
lot
adjacent
to
the
alley
and
let
them
walk
so.
R
T
Under
the
existing
zoning
and
if
and
we're
and
we're
on
the
same
page,
that's
a
legal
non-conforming
lot.
I
guess
you
could
here
again
I'm
a
lawyer,
not
a
planner,
but
I!
Guess
you
could
it's.
It
appears
to
be.
You
could
develop
some
type
of
residential
on
that
property,
but
Ryan.
Would
you
agree
with
that.
U
Yeah
I
think
I
believe
the
code
addresses
and
staff
can
maybe
able
to
confirm
it,
but
the
code
addresses
non-conforming
Lots,
so
it
would
have
to
go
through
that
review
and
see
you
know
what
can
it
could
be
entitled
for
just
and
I
just
like
make
one
quick
statement
is
the
only
process
that
that
this
project
can
go
through.
Is
this
PD
rezoning
process?
R
I
guess
the
question
and
maybe
staff
could
reconfirm
or
not,
but
the
difference
between
if
that
lot
was
separate
and
if
it
or
if
it's
connected
to
this
is
only
the
10
foot
pathway
correct.
Would
that
be
correct,
like
they
could
build
the
exact
same
building
that
they're
proposing?
But
the
only
difference
because
they're
connected
is
a
10-foot
pathway
because.
G
Then
you're
saying
development,
coordination
upon
that
request,
we'd
have
to
look
at
the
staff,
the
site
plan
and
they
may
need
waivers.
They
may
need
something
to
actually
be
able
to
have
a
structure
on
that
lot.
The
non-conforming
lot.
W
A
W
Ideal,
though,
but
yeah.
F
C
X
Yes,
sir
I
moved
here,
I
move
an
orange
is
being
presented
for
first
reading,
consideration,
ordinance,
rezoning
property
in
the
general
vicinity
of
210
East,
Columbus
Drive
and
2702
2706
North
Morgan
Street
in
the
city
of
Tampa
Florida,
and
more
particularly
described
in
section
one
from
zoning,
District
classification,
CI,
commercial,
intensive
and
rs
50
residential
single
family
to
PD
plan
development,
residential
single
family
detached
and
semi-detached,
providing
an
effective
date.
So
no.
C
E
I
D
K
J
Thank
you
so
much
chairman
citro
and
Council
LaShawn
dock
development
coordination.
Council.
This
item
is
for
the
property
located
at
1200
North
Westshore
Boulevard.
The
applicant
is
represented
by
Kami
Corbett.
The
request
is
to
rezone
the
property
from
op1
Office
Professional
in
map,
one
municipal
airport
to
PD
plan
development,
and
this
is
to
allow
the
uses
of
retail
sales,
residential,
multi-family
and
also
restaurant
on
the
staff
report,
provided
the
restaurant
use
was
not
listed.
So
that
is
a
correction.
J
J
L
Danny
Collins
with
your
planet,
commission
staff
have
been
sworn
in.
Our
next
case
is
within
this
West.
The
West
Shore
planning
district,
the
West
Shore
business
district
and,
more
specifically
in
the
Tampa
International
Airport
area,
Charles
B
Williams
Park
is
the
closest
recreation
facility
being
located
approximately
one
mile
southeast
of
the
subject,
site
Transit
is
adjacent
to
the
subject
site
along
North
Westshore
Boulevard,
which
is
a
Transit
emphasis
corridor.
L
Here's
an
aerial
map
of
the
subject
site
in
the
surrounding
properties,
subjects
that
are
shown
here.
It's
online,
the
purple
color
it's
just
it's
just
north
of
the
intersection
of
Northwest
Shore
Boulevard
and
West
Cypress
Street
North
occident
street-
is
here
there's
predominantly
non-residential
uses
along
Northwest.
Shore
Boulevard
here
is
the
adopted
future
land
use
map.
The
subject
site
is
within
the
rmu
100
future
land
use
designation,
which
is
one
of
the
most
intensive
land
use
categories
in
the
city.
L
L
The
rmu
100
is
to
the
north
east
and
south
of
the
subject
site.
This
area
here
west
of
the
subject
site,
is
within
the
map.
Future
land
use
designation,
which
is
the
municipal
airport
land
use
category,
and
then
we
have
some
areas
shown
in
blue
that
represent
public
semi-public
lands
in
the
city.
The
Planning
Commission
staff
reviewed
the
request.
They
found
a
consistent
with
overall
policy
direction
of
the
comprehensive
plan.
The
subject
site
is
located
on
Northwest
Shore
Boulevard,
a
Transit
emphasis
Corridor,
which
is
suitable
for
redevelopment
and
intensification.
L
Transit
investment
has
occurred
within
proximity
to
the
subject
site,
with
several
Transit
stops
located
within
proximity
of
the
site
that
provide
service
to
East,
Tampa,
downtown
Tampa
Westshore
and
the
Tampa
International
Airport.
The
request
is
consistent
with
the
compact
City
form
study,
which
seeks
to
promote
housing
at
densities
that
promote
walking
and
Transit
near
employment
concentrations,
residential
services
and
amenities.
L
The
the
PD
prodo
proposes
a
2.38
far,
which
is
well
below
the
far
that
can
be
considered
on
the
site
under
the
rmu
100
again
under
the
Army
100.
It
allows
up
to
a
3.5
far
the
PD
is
proposing
a
2.38.
The
PD
addresses
the
mixed
use,
Corridor
policies
by
orienting
buildings
toward
the
adjacent
public
rights
away
and
providing
pedestrian
connections
throughout
the
site.
The
proposed
internal
pedestrian
connections
will
help
ensure
pedestrian
pedestrians
can
save
safely
access
the
amenities
in
retail
located
on
the
site.
L
The
proposed
rezoning
supports
many
of
the
policies
and
the
comprehensive
plans.
It
relates
to
housing,
the
City's
population.
The
comprehensive
plan
encourages
new
housing
on
vacant
and
underutilized
land.
To
ensure
an
adequate
supply
of
housing
is
available
to
meet
the
needs
of
Tampa's
present
and
future
populations.
A
request
will
add:
additional
housing
within
the
West
Shore
planning
district
portions
of
the
site
are
within
the
kulsa
hazard
area
and
a
level
a
evacuation
Zone
rezonings
in
the
coastal
planning
area
that
increase
the
number
of
residential
units
shall
mitigate
the
impact
on
shelter.
L
Space
demands
based
on
the
shelter
Space
level
of
service.
The
app
the
applicant
shall
continue
to
coordinate
any
hurricane
mitigation
payments
with
Hillsborough
County
and
the
City
of
Tampa.
At
the
time
of
Permitting,
the
comprehensive
plan
promotes
the
West
Shore
overlay
standards
due
to
the
site
being
within
the
West
Shore
business
district
and
West
Shore
overlay
District.
The
planning
Planning
Commission
staff
encourages
the
applicant
to
continue
to
work
with
the
city
to
meet
these
standards.
L
J
Thank
you
again:
Council
lashon
doc
development
coordination,
and
this
request
this
rezoning
request
to
a
PD
plan
development
would
allow
for
the
development
of
7502
square
feet
of
retail
sales,
space
and
398
residential
multi-family
units
on
site,
along
with
the
use
of
the
restaurant
on
site.
So
this
site
is
fairly
large
over
four
acres,
as
mentioned
earlier
by
Planning
Commission
staff,
Danny
mentioned
the
site,
contains
approximately
300
feet
of
Frontage
and
600
622
feet
in
depth.
So
this
is
the
site
plan
for
the
site.
J
This
site
is
also
located
in
the
West
Shore
overlay.
District
and
development
must
comply
with
the
West
Shore
overlay
standards
unless
they
are
waived
within
a
part
of
this
PD
and
you'll
see
that
there
are
waivers
that
are
listed
on
the
PD,
which
I'll
review
with
you
shortly.
The
subject
site
located
on
West
Shore
Boulevard
is
classified
as
a
priority
pedestrian
street.
The
rezoning
plan,
that
is
before
you
meets
the
standards
for
the
priority
pedestrian
street
classification
within
the
code.
J
So
this
is
the
site
that
is
located
here
to
orient
you
on
this
site
plan.
This
is
West
Shore
Boulevard.
This
is
accident,
which
is
on
the
west
side
of
the
site.
So
what
is
proposed
is
a
new
Private
Drive,
which
will
be
located
here
with
access
on
West
Shore.
This
drive
would
make
that
connection
to
the
west
to
Austin.
So
this
is
the
you
can
see
the
the
delineation
of
the
zoning
districts.
This
yellow
highlighted
line
shows
you
the
existing
op1
Office
Professional,
one
zoning
versus
the
map,
one
zoning.
J
J
The
residential,
the
seven
Story
Tower
would
be
located
on
site
the
open
space,
the
dog
park.
These
Green
Space
areas
are
located
on
the
west
end
of
the
site.
Your
commercial
is
located
here
on
the
East,
with
the
outdoor
seating
areas
for
poles
adjacent
to
the
sidewalk
that
would
be
provided
which
meets
the
West
Shore
standards.
J
J
So
this
is
the
property
identified
in
red.
This
is
West
Shore
Boulevard.
This
is
Cypress
Street,
and
this
is
accident,
which
is
the
West
portion
of
this
site.
You
can
see
the
op-1
zoning
and
then
the
map
one
exists
to
the
West,
and
then
you
have
CI
commercial
intensive
and
then
your
PDS
with
the
commercial
uses
further
south
on
the
site.
So
when
I
show
you
pictures
we'll
go
to
the
east
of
the
site,
the
west
and
then
we'll
go
south
work,
our
way,
East
and
then
North.
J
J
J
That
continues
West
and
then
we'll
head
south
of
the
site
which
I
can
separate
these.
J
So
this
is
the
hotel
use,
that's
located
south
of
the
site.
This
has
the
excess
on
accident.
It
does
not
connect
through
to
West
Shore,
and
this
is
heading
for
the
South.
This
is
southeast
of
the
site.
This
is
at
the
corner
of
cypress
and
then
we
swing
back
around.
This
is
east
of
the
site,
the
commercial
that
exists
along
Westshore.
J
J
The
DRC
staff
reviewed
the
request
and
finds
the
request
inconsistent,
and
that
is
due
to
the
waivers
that
are
requested.
The
waivers
are
relating
to
the
natural
resources
related
code
and
transportation.
There
are
site
plan
modifications
to
be
made
between
first
and
second
reading.
Also,
there
are
additional
changes
that
have
already
been
discussed
with
staff
prior
to
hearing
that
will
be
incorporated
on
the
revision
sheet.
J
Y
Good
evening
Council
Cami
Corbett
with
the
law
firm
of
hillward
and
Henderson
representing
the
applicant
tremel
Crow,
we're
really
excited
to
bring
another
Redevelopment
project
to
the
West
Shore
area,
north
of
Kennedy
I.
Think
a
couple
months
ago
you
heard
1501
Northwest
Shore,
which
was
a
similar
multi-family
mixed-use
development,
and
we
are
proposing
a
similar
development
here
this
evening
with
any
Redevelopment
project.
Z
Good
evening,
Council
Randy
Cohen,
4121,
West,
Cypress
Street
I,
have
been
sworn
I,
have
the
job
of
addressing
three
Transportation
waivers.
These
are
all
typical
waivers
you've
seen
before
overhead.
The
first
one
is
a
small
parking
waiver.
We
actually
discuss
parking
ratios
in
the
trends
towards
less
parking
for
multi-family
projects.
Two
months
ago,
when
the
1515
West
Shore
multi-family
was
proposed.
Basically,
we
continue
to
see
trends
of
parking
ratios
going
down
hovering
around
1.4
as
an
average.
Z
We
presented
that
they
asked
for
a
13
for
13.4
percent
waiver
and
that
was
approved
by
a
council
after
consideration.
This
particular
project
asks
for
a
12
waiver,
which
still
has
some
is
a
very
high
rate.
Oh
sorry,
there
we
are,
this
is
Altus,
for
their
actual
parking
ratio
is
1.39
1515,
West
Shore
that
was
approved
in
December.
They
ended
up
with
their
waiver
with
a
parking
ratio
of
1.44
1200
Westshore
before
you
today
would
end
up
with
a
parking
ratio
of
1.76,
so
very
ample
parking.
They
are
asking
for
a
very
small
waiver.
Z
Second
waiver.
We
have
from
a
transportation
perspective
and
I'll
make
sure
this
one
is
more
appropriately
oriented.
This
is
oxidant,
which
is
a
service
road
other
than
the
hotel
here
in
the
hotel.
Here
this
is
predominantly
Industrial.
This
is
the
rear
of
the
subject
property,
which
is
the
old
Ramada
Inn.
We
have
a
vehicle,
maneuvering
waiver
for
a
couple
of
dumpsters
that
are
right
here.
This
street
currently
has
a
vehicle
maneuvering
issue
for
the
parallel
perpendicular
parking
spaces.
Z
Here
they
also
have
the
need
for
vehicle
maneuvering
in
the
public
right-of-way
for
a
solid
waste
facility
here,
as
well
as
parking
here.
When
you
look
in
this
neighborhood,
you
see
lots
of
things
that
have
maneuvering
waivers
that
are
required
for
them,
so
not
unusual,
very
low
volume,
Street
non-residential
in
nature.
Z
Finally,
we
have
what
is
a
blooming
waiver
for
residential
products
simply
because
our
code
requires
loading
bursts
for
all
large
buildings
as
it
should
in
West
Shore.
We
only
require
one
loading
berth
per
large
building,
as
opposed
to
the
codes
multiple
birth
requirements.
However,
it
is
a
12
foot
by
60
foot
loading
berth,
that
is,
for
a
large
commercial
Allied,
Van
type
moving,
which
we
do
not
see.
Z
Z
I
did
a
quick
inventory
of
a
number
of
entities,
CNET
moving
method,
Forbes
home
Etc?
What
are
the
type
trucks
that
actually
go
to
multi-family
into
retail?
We
don't
even
require
a
loading
birth
for
retail
on
this
project
because
of
its
size,
but
I
went
through
to
find
out
what
are
the
typical
vehicle
signs
used,
they're
all
less
than
30
feet,
so
we're
asking
for
that
waiver
down
to
a
30-foot
loading
berth,
we're
actually
providing
a
35-foot
loading
berth
just
to
provide
a
little
extra
room
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
may
have.
AA
Good
evening,
Council
Ricky,
pederica,
308,
East,
7th
Avenue
I
have
been
sworn
two
natural
resource.
Waivers
first
is
for
retention.
The
West
Shore
District
requires
25
percent
of
protected
trees
to
be
retained.
We
currently
provide
10
percent
has
started
up
here.
That's
the
plan.
Request
is
for
five
percent,
just
because
we're
so
there
are
so
few
trees
that
something
can
happen
in
development.
We
don't
want
one
tree
to
trigger
something
at
permitting
so
requested
a
safety
Factor.
AA
Since
this
inventory
was
created,
we
were
able
to
preserve
some
additional
trees
in
the
West
portion
of
the
site
near
occident
shown
here.
These
additional
Seven
Trees
increase
our
actual
retention
percentage
to
20
percent,
so
waivers
still
needed,
but
and
we're
going
to
request
15
percent.
AA
If
we
used
the
newly
updated
weighted
retention
percentage
that
came
in
the
2022
or
the
January
2020
cycle
of
code
amendment
that
was
adopted
in
October
2022,
we
come
up
with
39
percent
of
retention,
which
would
exceed
the
West
Shore
retention
waiver
staff
acknowledged
this.
We
had
several
conversations
but
because
this
was
submitted,
this
PD
was
submitted
under
the
pre-october
2020.
We're
proceeding
with
the
waiver
request,
but
adjusting
it
to
15
percent
with
this
preservation.
AA
The
staff
is
considering
the
buffer
five
feet
because
of
that
sidewalk,
but
effectively
we're
providing
a
what
I
like
to
think
of
as
a
modified
C
buffer,
where
that
includes
trees
that
would
not
normally
be
required
includes
plants
that
would
not
normally
be
required
and
with
the
sidewalk
ironically,
becomes
a
pedestrian
amenity
versus
just
a
yard
and
a
wall
on
the
south.
A
similar
tactics
used
but
what's
happening,
there
is
the
existing
curb
line
that
was
maintained
and
curb
cuts
on
either
side
that
was
maintained
from
the
original
development.
AA
Is
kept
here
and
that
is
what's
defining
the
width
of
the
buffer
again,
all
that
would
be
required
is
a
wall
and
grass
we're
providing
holding
that
curb
line
and
providing
oak
trees,
shade,
trees
and
Native
ground
covers
and
shrubs
as
a
supplement
or
or
replacement
to
mitigate
them.
I
apologize,
sorry
guys,
and
that's
though,
while
this
is
only
half
the
site,
these
these
buffer
conditions
are
consistent
across
the
entire
area
that
the
buffers
requested
return.
The
presentation
back
to
Mr
mittens
Corbett.
Y
I
think
that
that
very
thoroughly
explained
the
reason
why
we
have
these
waivers
and
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
too.
Only
one
of
those
waivers
is
a
waiver
to
the
west
or
overlay
District.
The
rest
of
the
building
design
will
comply
with
the
West
Shore
overlay.
District
I
only
received
one
phone
call
from
the
surrounding
neighbors
and
that
was
Mr.
Andy
scaglione
owns
a
property
directly
to
the
South
and
he
indicated
that
he
had
no
objection
to
the
application,
and
so
with
that,
we
would
respectfully
request
your
approval.
C
S
S
I
have
an
ordinance
being
presented
for
first
reading
consideration.
This
is
an
ordinance
rezoning
property
in
the
general
vicinity
of
1200
North
Westward
Boulevard
in
the
city
of
Tampa
Florida,
more
particularly
described
in
section
one
from
zoning,
District
classifications,
op1,
Office,
Professional
and
m
a
p
one
municipal
airport
to
PD
plan
development,
residential
multi-family
retail
sales
and
restaurant,
providing
an
effective.
X
S
I
also
see
that,
in
compliance
with
the
applicable
goals,
objectives
and
policies
and
comprehensive
plan,
for
example,
the
proposed
uses
and
intensity
are
consistent
with
the
Urban
Development
pattern
anticipated
in
this
area
of
the
city
consistent
with
land
use
policy
814.1
and
encourages
new
housing
on
underutilized
land.
S
To
ensure
an
adequate
housing,
Supply
is
available
to
meet
the
needs
of
Tampa's
present
and
future
populations
consistent
with
land
use
policy
9.2.1
on
housing
policies,
1.3.1,
1.3.3
and
1.3.4
I
also
find
that
there
is
compliance
with
the
Land
Development
code
in
section
27-136,
because
the
proposed
development,
as
shown
on
the
site,
promotes
or
encourages
development
that
is
appropriate
and
location
character
and
compatibility
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
Also,
the
proposed
use
promotes
the
efficient
and
sustainable
use
of
land
and
infrastructure,
and
any
waivers
I
find
in
compliance
with
section
27-1394.
S
Specifically,
the
design
of
the
proposed
development
is
unique
and
therefore
in
need
of
the
waivers,
the
requested
waivers
will
not
substantially
interfere
with
or
injure
the
rights
of
others
whose
property
would
be
affected
by
the
waivers.
And
that
concludes
my
motion.
C
And
it's
actually.
F
Ms
doc
filed
with
the
clerk
a
revision
sheet
dated
February
8
2023.
If
this
could
be
done
between
first
and
second
reading,.
C
Sheet,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
Who
was
the
secondary
I
did
motion
made
by
councilman
manuscript
the
seconded
by
councilman
Miranda
roll
call
vote.
E
C
Agenda
item
number
six:
seven
file,
number
res
22-109.
G
L
Danny
Collins
with
your
pawning
commission
staff,
I've
been
sworn
in.
Our
next
case
is
within
the
central
Tampa
planning
district
and,
more
specifically,
the
West
Tampa
Urban
Village
closest
public
Transit.
Stop
is
located
approximately
264
feet,
west
of
the
subject
side
of
the
section
of
West
Columbus
Drive
and
North
Havana
Avenue.
This
route
is
service
by
heart,
Route
15,
which
provides
access
to
West
Shore
and
the
network
Park
Transfer
Center
subject
site
is
within
an
evacuation.
L
Zone
e
here's,
an
aerial
map
of
the
subject
site
in
the
surrounding
properties,
you'll
see
the
subject
sites
on
the
north
side
of
Columbus
Drive
between
Habana
Avenue
and
North
tampania
Avenue,
the
subject
site
is
adjacent
to
residential
uses
to
the
north.
There
are
some
a
mixture
of
residential
uses
along
Columbus,
Drive
and
then
non-residential
uses
As.
You
move
towards
Habana
Avenue.
L
The
subject
site
is
recognized
under
the
Community
mixed
use:
35
future
land
use
designation.
That
designation
allows
development
up
to
a
2.0
far
or
35
join
us
per
acre.
The
CMU
35
is
predominantly
found
on
the
north
side
of
Columbus
Drive
directly
to
the
South
is
the
community
commercial,
35,
designation
and
then
to
the
north
of
the
subject.
Site
is
residential
10..
There
is
an
alley
that
separates
the
properties
just
north
of
the
subject
site
from
the
residential
10.
L
the
planet.
Commission
staff
reviewed
the
application
found
no
adverse
impacts
in
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
This
portion
of
West
Columbus
Drive
between
North
Havana,
Avenue
and
North
tampania
Avenue,
contains
personals
recognized
under
the
Community
mixed
use.
35
designation,
the
segment
has
has
an
existing
density
of
9.36
dwelling
units
per
acre.
That's
existing
density
is
26
percent
of
the
density
that
can
be
considered
under
the
Community
mixed
use.
35
designate
designation
under
the
CME
35
designation.
The
site
can
be
considered
for
a
maximum
of
three
dwelling
units.
L
Planning
Commission
staff
reviewed
the
lot
with
along
the
segment
of
West
Columbus
Drive
lockwoods
range
from
approximately
49
feet
to
108
feet
with
a
majority
of
the
lot
wisps
being
approximately
50
feet.
The
lot
width
of
the
subject's
site
is
50
feet
per
the
submitted
Subway
or
submitted
survey,
taking
into
consideration
the
existing
block
density
and
range
of
plot
widths
along
the
segment
of
West
Columbus
Drive
Planning
Commission
staff
finds
the
requests
will
provide
a
residential
development
that
will
be
built
within
the
existing
street
block
and
lock
configuration
of
the
neighborhood.
L
In
conclusion,
the
proposed
rezoning
supports
many
of
the
policies
in
the
comprehensive
plans.
It
relates
to
housing,
the
City's
population.
The
comprehensive
plan
encourages
new
housing
on
vacant
and
underutilized
land
to
ensure
an
adequate
supply
of
housing
is
available
to
meet
the
needs
of
Tampa's
present
and
future
populations.
The
request
will
also
maintain
the
stability
while
expanding
opportunities
for
housing
choices
in
the
West
Tampa
Urban
Village,
based
on
those
considerations,
the
Planning
Commission
set
finds
a
request
consistent
with
the
goals,
objectives
and
policies
of
the
Tampa
Conference
of
plan.
G
As
you
see,
the
property
right
here
outlined
in
red
to
the
north
you'll
have
West
Ivy
Street
to
the
east.
You'll
have
North
tampania
Avenue
to
the
West.
You'll
have
North
Havana
Avenue,
and
this
lot
is
along
West
Columbus
to
the
South.
You'll
have
West
Saint
Joseph
Street
to
the
north,
south,
east
and
west
of
the
property
are
all
residential,
single-family
detached
units.
G
Currently
the
site
is
vacant
at
this
time.
The
subject
property
contains
a
lot
area
of
4
700
square
feet.
Now,
although
this
does
not
meet
the
minimum
lot
requirements
of
the
rs50
zoning,
which
is
5
000
square
feet,
this
lot
can
be
resume
rs50
due
to
being
in
the
West
Tampa
overlay,
where
a
lot
existing
By,
plot
or
deed,
as
of
2004,
is
considered
a
lot
of
record.
G
The
lot
has
a
width
of
49.96
feet
and
a
lot
length
of
93.87
feet.
As
you
see,
it
is
along
that
way
of
West
Columbus
Drive
and
in
between
North
Havana
Avenue
and
North
tampania
Avenue,
as
I
went
out
to
the
site.
I
took
pictures.
I'll
show
you
what.
G
Development
coordination
and
compliance
staff
has
reviewed
the
application
and
finds
the
overall
request
to
be
consistent
with
the
Land
Development
code
should
be
the
pleasure
of
city
council
to
approve
this
case,
this
being
euclidean.
No
no
site
plan
is
needed
and
there's
no
review
sheet
I'm
here
for
any
questions.
Any.
G
Zane
Hussein
development
coordination.
The
lot
area
is
4
700
square
feet,
the
width
is
49.96
feet
and
the
length
is
93.87
feet.
G
This
can
be
rezoned
rs50
due
to
being
in
the
West
Tampa
overlay,
correct.
Okay,
thank.
C
AB
I
have
been
sworn
in.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
so
I'm
currently
enrolled
in
my
final
year
at
St,
Petersburg,
College
pursuing
my
degree
in
public
policy
and
administration.
My
honest
reason
for
speaking
today
is
to
satisfy
a
requirement
for
that
degree,
but
also
because
I
truly
believe
that
the
aforementioned
proposal
should
be
approved
in
my
research
I
found
that
application
number
res22-109
filed
by
applicant
was
not
only
submitted
in
timely
fashion,
but
was
also
found
to
be
consistent
with
the
city
of
Tampa's
code
of
ordinances.
AB
According
to
the
rezoning
staff
report
filed
by
the
development
review
and
compliance
staff
in
quick
summary
of
the
applicant
request
to
rezone
the
property
located
at
2713,
West
Columbus
Drive
from
its
current
status
as
a
public
development
Zone,
and
instead
repurpose
and
rezone
this
land,
so
that
it
falls
within
resident
single
family
50,
so
that
it
may
be
used
for
residential
purposes
and
current
time
the
property
in
question
is
vacant.
Furthermore,
the
property
is
mostly
surrounded
by
by
either
single
family
residences
or
other
commercial
properties.
AB
This
is
important
to
note
as
I'm
sure
you
are
all
aware.
A
major
requirement
for
approval
of
such
applications
is
that
the
property
should
be
mentally
disruptive
to
adjacent
areas.
Nor
should
it
disturb
the
piece
of
the
environment.
It
will
be
placed
or
zoned
Within,
considering
the
applicant
wishes
to
utilize
the
property
for
the
same
purpose
as
the
majority
of
the
surrounding
buildings
and
structures.
This
should
not
be
an
issue.
Furthermore,
as
stated
within
the
rezoning
staff
report
quote,
the
site
is
located
within
the
community.
AB
Mixed
use,
35
future
land
use
designation,
which
allows
for
the
consideration
of
medium
intensity,
slash,
density,
horizontal
and
vertical
mixed
use,
single-use
General,
commercial
and
residential
uses.
Unquote.
The
proposed
zoning
district
rs-50
is
consistent
with
the
underlying
future
land
use
designation
per
the
consistency
Matrix
located
within
the
Land
Development
code,
Additionally,
the
Planning
Commission
reviewed
the
application
and
all
its
supplemental
material
and
found
that
the
project,
if
approved,
would
result
in
very
minimal
negative
impacts
to
the
surrounding
area.
So
you
don't
have
to
take
my
word
for
it.
AB
The
direct
quote
located
within
the
Planning
Commission
report
stated
the
following:
Planning
Commission
staff
finds
that
the
potential
for
one
unit
through
approval
of
this
request
will
allow
for
compatible
infill
development
in
an
area
planned
for
35
dwelling
units
per
acre.
So
on
closing
I'd
like
to
reiterate
the
basic
facts,
application
ras-22109
satisfies
all
the
requirements
set
forth
by
the
city
of
Tampa.
AB
Second,
the
applicant
submitted
the
request
in
a
timely
manner,
along
with
enough
supplemental
material
to
substantiate
her
proposal,
and,
lastly,
The
Proposal
itself,
if
carried
out,
does
not
seem
to
pose
a
major
negative
impact
on
the
city
of
Tampa
and
has
been
labeled
consistent
by
the
Planning
Commission,
as
well
as
the
development
and
review
and
compliance
staff.
For
those
reasons,
I
do
believe
it
would
be
beneficial
for
the
application
to
be
approved.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
C
AB
C
Thank
you
boy,
any
other
people
in
chamber
any
other
person
in
Chambers
who
tough
out
to
follow
that.
That
wants
to
speak
on
agenda
item
number.
Seven
and
I
do
not
see
anybody
online.
Q
M
22-109
ordinance
being
presented
for
first
reading
consideration
an
ordinance
rezoning
property
in
the
general
vicinity
of
2713
West
Columbus
Drive
in
the
city
of
Tampa
Florida,
and
more
particularly
described
in
Section
1
from
zoning
District
classification
PD,
planned
development
to
RS
50
residential
single-family,
providing
an
effective
date.
We.
E
C
G
Ain't
just
saying
development
coordination,
there's
a
proposery
Zone
rezoning
at
1200
West
Cass
Street
proposed,
is
going
from
IG
and
CI
to
CI
I'll
now
pass
along
to
our
planning
commissions,
foreign.
L
Good
evening,
Danny
Collins
with
your
Planning
Commission
staff,
I've
been
sworn
in.
Our
next
case
is
in
the
central
Tampa
planning
district
and,
more
specifically
in
the
West
Tampa
Urban
Village,
Julie,
B,
Lane,
River,
Run
Riverfront
Park
is
located.
Is
the
closest
public
recreation
facility
located
approximately
0.2
miles
Northeast
of
the
subject
site?
The
closest
Transit
stop
is
approximately
0.17
miles
east
of
the
subject
site
at
West,
Cass,
Street
and
North
Boulevard.
L
This
stop
serves
heart,
Route,
7
and
10,
providing
connections
to
downtown
Tampa,
West
Tampa
and
the
Tampa
International
Airport
subject
site
is
within
evacuation.
Zone
B
here
is
an
aerial
map
of
the
subject
site
and
surrounding
properties.
You'll
see
the
subject's
site.
It's
located
on
the
south
side
of
West
Cass,
just
east
of
the
intersection
of
Newport
Avenue.
L
Subject
site
is
currently
recognized
under
the
Community
mixed
use:
35
future
land
use,
designation
that
designations
to
the
Northeast,
south
and
west
of
the
subject
site.
It
allows
development
up
to
a
2.0,
far
or
35
doing
units
per
acre.
It
also
allows
for
the
consideration
of
commercial
General
multi-family
single-family
attached
uses
as
you
move
north
of
Cass
there's
land
recognized
under
the
residential
35
feature,
minus
designation
and
I
actually
apologize.
This
is
the
general
mixed
use,
24
designation
subject:
the
proposed
commercial
intensive
zoning
District
can
be
considered
under
this.
L
The
proposed
CI
zoning
District
can
be
considered
within
the
GMU.
24
designation
is
consistent
with
the
consistent
consistency
Matrix
in
section
27-21
of
the
line
development
code,
the
surrounding
areas
characterized
by
Light
industrial-like
commercial
uses
for
the
to
the
north,
our
single
family
detached
uses.
The
subject
site
is
surrounded
by
parcel
zoned,
CI
and
IG
CI
zoning
is
present
to
the
Northeast
and
west
of
the
site.
L
Industrial
General
zoning
as
president
to
the
south
of
the
subject
site
due
to
the
diverse
range
of
commercial
and
Industrial
uses
and
proximity
of
the
subject
site,
the
CI
zoning
District
would
be
appropriate
for
this
site.
Additionally,
any
development
on
the
site
must
meet
the
requirements
in
the
line
development
code.
At
the
time
of
Permitting.
The
comprehensive
plan
promotes
pedestrian
safety
and
encourages
commercial
development
that
enhances
the
city
of
Tampa's
character
and
Ambiance.
L
The
Tampa
comprehensive
plan
promotes
compatible
development
and
Redevelopment
to
sustained
stable
neighborhoods,
ensure
that
social
and
economic
health
of
the
city,
Planning
Commission
staff,
has
reviewed
the
application
and
found
no
adverse
impacts
of
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
The
Planning
Commission
staff
finds
the
request
will
not
alter
the
character
of
the
surrounding
area
is
comparable
and
compatible
with
this
portion
of
the
West
Tampa
Urban
Village.
Based
on
those
considerations,
the
Planning
Commission
staff
finds
a
request
from
the
system
and
the
goals,
objectives
and
policies
of
the
Tampa
Conference
of
plans.
G
As
you
see
the
property
outlined
in
red
now,
this
proposery
zoning,
as
you
see,
there's
two
zones,
as
you
see,
to
the
north
side.
You'll
have
CI
and
to
the
South
Side
here,
you'll
have
a
IG,
so
you
it's
split
between
two
zones
here
on
West
Cass,
Street
you'll
have
North
Boulevard
here
to
the
east.
You'll
have
UT
here:
you'll
tap
a
prep
and
you'll
have
development
coordination
office.
If
you
look
to
the
West,
you'll
have
North
Newport
Avenue
to
the
north.
They'll
have
West
Cypress
Street
and
to
the
South.
G
If
you
go
down,
you'll
have
more
of
UT
and
West
North
A
Street.
Now
the
property
here
is
encompassed
and
surrounded
by
either
office
or
repair
shops
for
automobiles.
G
G
D
G
There
you
go
to
the
west
of
the
site;
here,
you
have
more
offices,
you
have
a
Buddy
Brew
here
and
also
a
car
repair
shop
to
the
West
on
Cass.
G
C
While
you're
plugging
that
in
I
see
that
we
also
have
some
of
your
other
people
that
may
be
online,
are
they
going
to
speak
because
if
so,
I'd
like
them
to
be
sworn
in
now.
C
I
just
see
representatives
and
owners
yep.
AC
Good
evening,
Council
Alex,
Shaler,
400
North
Ashley
Drive,
for
the
record
I,
will
make
this
very
brief.
I'm,
not
fortunate
to
bring
many
euclidean
rezonings
in
front
of
you,
but
I
think
this
one
is
it's
pretty
straightforward
too
I'm
saying
did
a
good
job
setting
up
where
this
is
located
right
along
Cass,
Street,
I'm,
just
east
of
the
Willow
and
Cass
Street
intersection
there.
It
does
look
like
it's
two
Parcels,
but
it's
actually
a
single
parcel.
It's
just
bifurcated
by
a
north-south
alley.
AC
We
are
leaving
that
alley,
as
is
that's
not
proposed
to
be
vacated
in
conjunction
with
this
application.
So
the
current
zoning-
this
is
a
colored
map
of
what
Zayn
was
showing
earlier.
Currently,
the
property
is
split.
Zoned,
the
north
half
is
Zone
CI,
the
southern
portion
is
zoned
IG.
Our
proposed
request
would
just
drag
the
CI
designation
across
the
entirety
of
the
parcel
all
the
way
to
the
southern
boundary
line,
effectively.
Dropping
the
IG
designation
and
a
little
bit
of
background
on
this
request.
AC
Not
only
is
the
parcel
split
Zone,
but
the
existing
building
on
site
is
split
zoned.
It
takes
up
the
entire
right
right
block
of
the
parcel
the
building
was
constructed
in
1930.
The
owner
wants
to
keep
it.
We
don't
want
to
move
it,
they
do
have
a
new
tenant
coming
in
and
his
proposed
business
operations
are
not
consistent
with
the
IG
category,
they're
commercial,
and
so
that's
the
reason
behind
this
request.
Today,
Danny
went
through
the
comp
plan.
AC
Consistency
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
the
CI
being
drug
across
the
entirety
of
the
parcel
would
be
consistent
with
the
comp
plan
and
the
GMU
24
future
land
use.
Designation
and
staff
found
this
consistent
across
all
the
different
reviewing
departments
and
so
did
the
Planning
Commission,
and
with
that
I'll
conclude
my
presentation
and
available
for
any
questions.
C
S
C
E
G
L
Stanley
Collins,
with
your
Planning
Commission
staff,
have
been
sworn
in.
Our
next
case
is
within
the
central
Tampa
planning
district
and,
more
specifically
in
the
Seminole
Heights
Urban
Village
giddens
Park
is
the
closest
public
recreation
facility
located
approximately
0.4
miles
north
of
the
subject
site.
The
closest
Transit
stop
is
within
0.3
miles,
east
of
the
subject
site
at
North,
15th,
Street
and
East
Osborne
Avenue.
This
stop
is
serviced
by
heart.
Route
9,
which
provides
connections
to
the
university
area
in
downtown
Tampa
subject
site
is
within
an
evacuation.
L
Zone
e
here
is
an
aerial
map
of
the
subject's
site
and
the
surrounding
properties.
The
subject
site
is
on
the
south
side
of
East
Louisiana
Avenue,
it's
just
east
of
the
inner
or
west
of
the
intersection
of
North
12th
and
East
Osborne
Avenue.
The
surrounding
areas,
predominantly
residential
single
family
here
is
the
adopted
future
land
use
map.
As
you
can
see,
the
subject
sites
recognized
under
the
residential
10
future
land
use
designation.
This
designation
allows
development
up
to
10
volumes
per
acre.
L
The
r-10
is
to
the
north
east,
south
and
west
of
the
subject
site
also
to
the
southeast
of
the
subject.
Site
is
land
recognized
under
the
residential
20
designation,
the
planet,
commission
staff
finds
that
the
request
is
comparable
and
compatible
with
the
surrounding
area.
The
surrounding
areas
characterized
by
single-family
detached
uses
a
place
of
religious
assemblies
to
the
south
of
the
subject
site
this
area
between
East
Osborne,
Avenue
and
east
east
New,
Orleans
Avenue
and
North
11th,
Street
and
North
12th
Street
has
an
existing
density
of
7.21
units
per
acre.
L
This
is
well
below
this
is
below
the
maximum
of
10
dwellings
per
acre
anticipated
in
the
residential
10
future
land
use
designation.
L
The
applicant
is
proposing
7.69
dwellings
per
acre
the
planet.
Commission
staff.
Fine,
has
determined
that
the
proposed
PD
is
comparable
and
compatible
with
a
development
pattern
in
the
surrounding
area.
The
request
supports
many
of
the
policies
and
comprehensive
plans
that
relates
to
housing,
the
City's
population.
The
Tampa
comprehensive
plan
encourages
new
housing
on
vacant
and
under
utilized
land
to
ensure
an
adequate
supply
of
housing
is
available
to
meet
the
needs
of
Tampa's
grown
population
Additionally.
The
comprehensive
plan
seeks
to
direct
the
greatest
share
of
growth
to
the
urban
centers
and
Villages.
L
The
proposed
PD
supports
this
policy
Direction
by
creating
additional
housing
opportunities
within
the
Seminole
Heights
Urban
Village.
Finally,
the
PD
proposes
a
sidewalk
along
East
Louisiana
Avenue.
The
proposed
sidewalk
will
help
ensure
that
sidewalks
interconnect
with
existing
and
future
sidewalks
on
adjacent
properties,
which
is
consistent
with
the
policy
Direction.
The
comprehensive
plan
based
on
these
considerations,
the
Planning
Commission
staff,
finds
the
requests
consistent
with
the
goals,
objectives
and
policies
of
the
Tampa
comprehensive
plan.
That
concludes
my
presentation.
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
G
As
you
see
the
subject
site
here
outlined
in
red
along
East,
we
Asiana
Avenue,
you
have
East
New
Orleans
Avenue
to
the
north.
You
have
North
9th
Street
out
here
to
the
West
to
the
east.
Here,
you'll
have
North
13th
Street
and
to
the
South
you'll
have
East
Osborne
Avenue.
Now
the
site
is
surrounded
by
shrs
zoning
and
these
are
all
residential
single-family
homes.
The
only
one
that
doesn't
have
a
home
is
here
to
this
is
directly
south
and
the
lot
is
vacant.
At
this
time,
I'll
now
share
the
site
plan
provided
by
the
applicant.
G
The
proposed
development
is
for
two
residential
single-family
detached
dwelling
units.
The
subject
property
contains
a
lot
area
of
approximately
11
497
square
feet
or
0.26
Acres.
The
current
site
currently
has
one
377
square
foot
structure
on
it,
which
will
be
demolished.
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
create
two
lots
here
on
the
wall
to
the
West,
we'll
measure
45
feet
in
width
and
a
lot
to
the
east
will
also
be
45
feet.
As
you
see,
the
two
proposed
Lots,
the
maximum
Building
height
will
be
35
feet
in
height
or
two
stories.
M
G
G
Is
this
site,
as
is
there,
was
a
fence
there,
but
you
have
the
sign
for
public
notice.
If
you
look
also
I'll
show
you
another
picture.
This
is
the
377
square
foot
structure.
That's
currently
on
the
lot,
which
will
be
demolished.
G
G
To
the
West,
you
see
there's
a
lot
of
Agriculture
a
lot
of
trees,
but
to
the
West
you'll
have
residential
single
family
behind
the
gate.
G
G
You
know,
I
was
joking
with
the
natural
resource
with
Aaron
and
I
was
saying,
you
know,
I'm,
not
an
arborist
or
anything,
but
those
are
some
pretty
cool
trees.
You
got
out
there,
so
that
was
very,
very
nice.
G
There
are
two
proposed
waivers,
and
these
are
from
Urban
Design.
First
one
is
to
request
to
increase
the
front,
build
to
line
from
33.83
feet
to
37
feet,
and
the
second
request
is
to
increase
the
carport
roof
from
four
out
of
12
to
6
out
of
12
roof
pitch
development
review
and
compliance
staff
has
reviewed
the
application
and
finds
the
overall
request
to
be
consistent
with
the
Land
Development
code.
Should
it
be
council's
pleasure
to
approve
this
application?
AD
Good
evening,
council
members,
my
name
is
David
Wright,
president
of
tsp
company's
address
is
PO
Box,
273-417,
Tampa,
33688
I
think
the
staff
has
covered
the
request
pretty
adequately.
I
would
just
add
that
the
first
waiver
request
to
increase
the
build
to
line
is
to
satisfy
the
two
parking
requirement.
AD
We
had
to
move
the
house
back
a
little
bit
from
the
street
in
order
to
making
a
able
for
the
second
car
to
park
in
the
driveway
and
then
the
build
the
the
request
to
change
the
roof
pitch
on
the
carport
is
so
that
it
would
match
the
roof
pitch
over
the
top
of
the
house
too.
So
we
just
felt
like
a
architecturally.
It
looked
better
for
those
to
be
consistent,
I'm
available
for
any
questions.
Q
Q
You
Mr
chairman
file,
number
nine
Rez,
22-131
horn
has
been
first
reading,
consideration
an
owner's
rezoning
property
in
general
vicinity,
1105
East,
Louisiana
Avenue
in
the
city
of
Tampa
Florida,
and
more
particularly
described
in
section
one
from
zoning,
District
classification,
sh,
slash,
RS,
Seminole,
Heights,
residential
single
family
to
sh,
slash,
PD,
civil
rights
plan
development,
residential
single-family
detached
providing
an
effective
date.
We.
Q
And
before
I
go
any
further,
I
just
want
to
say
that
it
compliance
with
the
staff
notes
that
has
a
377
square
foot
structure
will
be
demolished,
but
then
in
mind.
I
also
find
the
reasoning
consistent
with
lands
policy
9.2.1
in
housing
policy
1.31133134,
which
incurs
new
housing
for
under
your
life
land
and
ensures
us.
Accurate
supply
of
housing
needs
to
be
met
for
the
presidents
of
Tampa
and
future
population
and
regarding
the
waivers,
the
waivers
meet
the
purpose
and
the
intent
for
the
the
zoning
District
to
recognize
unique
conditions
that
allow
design
flexibility.
C
D
C
C
E
G
L
Danny
Collins,
with
your
Planning
Commission
staff
and
sworn
in
our
last
case,
is
within
the
central
Temple
planning
district
and,
more
specifically
in
the
West
Tampa
Urban
Village
Wright
Park
is
located
approximately
550
feet
south
of
the
subject
site.
The
closest
Transit
stop
is
located
370
feet,
Southwest
of
the
subject
site
along
North,
Howard
Avenue,
the
stop
served
by
heart
routes,
7
and
14,
connecting
the
subject
site
to
downtown
Tampa,
Hillsborough
Community
College,
the
Yukon
Transfer
Center
and
Britain
Plaza.
L
The
property
is
located
within
a
level
e-evacuation
Zone
here
is
an
aerial
map
of
the
subject
site
and
surrounding
property.
You'll
see
the
subject:
sites
outlined
on
the
outlined
in
purple:
it's
on
the
south
side
of
West
Saint,
Conrad
Street,
just
east
of
North
Howard
Avenue.
The
surrounding
area
is
predominantly
residential.
There
are
some
non-residential
uses
along
North,
Howard
Avenue,
as
well
as
North
Albany
Avenue.
L
Here
is
the
adoptive
future
land
use
map
the
subject
side,
including
Parcels,
to
the
north
east,
south
and
west
of
the
site,
are
recognized
under
the
residential
35
designation.
This
designation
allows
medium
density,
residential
development
up
to
35
20
units
per
acre
about
a
parcel
and
a
half
west
of
the
site
towards
As.
You
move
towards
North
Howard
Avenue,
there's
land
recognized
under
the
CMU
35
designation
As,
you
move
South
on
Howard
Avenue.
L
You
have
land
recognized
or
under
the
cc-35
future
lenius
designation,
the
planet,
commission
staff
reviewed
the
request
and
found
no
adverse
impacts
of
the
surrounding
area.
This
portion
of
West
Saint
Conrad
Street
between
North
Howard,
Avenue
and
North
Albany
Avenue,
has
an
existing
density
of
10.21
dwellings
per
acre
on
the
existing
density
is
29
of
the
density
that
can
be
considered
under
the
R35
designation.
The
PD
proposes
a
density
of
18.75
dwelling
units
per
acre.
L
The
planet,
commission
staff
finds
that
the
request
is
consistent
with
the
density
anticipated
under
the
residential
35
future
land
use
designation.
The
comprehensive
plan
encourages
single-family
attached
developments
to
be
designed
to
include
orientation
on
the
front
door
to
go
to
Neighborhood,
sidewalk
and
Street.
The
requests
satisfies
this
policy
by
providing
front
doors
facing
West
Saint
Conrad
Street.
Additionally,
vehicular
access
to
the
site
is
provided
from
an
alley
located
along
the
South
Boundary
of
the
subject
site,
which
is
current
encouraged
by
the
comprehensive
plan.
L
L
G
As
you
see,
the
subject
parcel
here
outlined
in
red
on
West
Saint
Conrad
Street
to
the
north
you'll,
have
West
St
Louis
Street
and
West
St
John
Street
to
the
West
you'll
have
North
Howard
Avenue
to
the
east,
you'll
have
North
Albany
Avenue
and
to
the
South
you'll
have
West
Beach
Street,
the
property
is
surrounded
by
The,
Zone,
RS,
50
and
all
of
the
units
around
the
parcel
are
residential.
Single
family.
G
Three,
the
subject
site
contains
a
lot
area
of
7174
square
feet
or
0.16
Acres.
It's
located
on
West,
Saint,
Conrad
Street
to
the
north.
The
site
is
within
the
West
Tampa
overlay.
G
The
proposed
parking
is
seven
parking
spaces
and
the
code
stays
that
seven
parking
spaces
are
needed,
so
this
requirement
has
been
met
as
you'll
see.
Vehicular
access
comes
from
the
south
that
Alleyway
to
the
South
and
you'll
have
three
detached
carports
from
the
primary
structure.
For
these
parking
spaces,
the
proposed
height
is
35
feet
in
height
of
the
structure.
G
G
You'll
have
the
front
facing
the
alleyway
of
the
detached
garage.
Also,
here.
G
There
are
three
waivers
being
requested
and
these
are
from
natural
resources
and
Urban
Design.
The
first
request
is
to
reduce
the
required
five
foot,
use
to
use
landscape
buffer
to
the
east
and
West
to
four
and
a
half
feet,
and
one
and
a
half
feet.
4.5
and
1.6
second,
is
to
request
or
reduce
the
required
20
vua
Green
Space
to
eight
percent,
subject
to
landscape
and
fees
at
the
time
of
permitting,
and
the
third
is
to
request
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback
from
the
required
seven
foot,
ten
to
six
foot.
G
Eight
development
review
and
compliance
staff
has
reviewed
the
application
and
finds
the
overall
request
to
be
consistent
with
a
Land.
Development
code
should
be
council's
pleasure
to
approve
this
application.
The
applicant
must
provide
revisions
between
first
and
second
reading.
Okay
for
any
questions.
R
G
The
the
one,
the
one
waiver
here
number
three
request
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback,
that
is
for
Urban
Design
and
the
two
above
that
are
for
natural
resources.
AE
Good
evening
Ralph
Schiller
2401
North
Howard
Avenue
I
have
not
been
sworn.
C
AE
I
wanted
to
touch
on
a
couple
pretty
easy
things:
I
think
it's
a
pretty
straightforward
project,
of
course.
First,
the
waivers
the
waivers
are.
AE
We
have
plenty
of
room
on
both
sides
of
the
units
where
the
waivers
are
is
that
we
have
to
slide
in
a
visitor
space
here.
So
we
have
four
and
a
half
feet
only
at
the
garage
detached
garage
on
both
sides.
I
have
six
feet
here
again
we
have
a
tree
here
that
we're
sliding
the
the
structure
over
us
to
protect
that
tree
and
then
the
1.6
is
this
Dimension,
which
is
really
only
this
visitor
spot
on
the
last
18
feet
of
the
lot
so
and
then
the
second
is
a
vua
green
space.
AE
Technically,
because
this
is
a
multi-family
development,
we
have
to
meet
a
design
criteria
of
the
commercial
building
which
requires
vua.
Well,
VOA
really
doesn't
apply
here
very
well
because
we're
talking
about
vua
in
an
alley
not
on
the
front.
All
of
our
parking
is
in
the
alley
and
of
course,
to
get
all
that
parking
in.
We
need
most
of
the
width
of
this
lot,
so
we're
happy
to
play
the
in-lu
fee.
AE
We're
going
to
have
green
space
here
here
here
and
a
little
little
bit
there,
but
again
it's
in
an
alley
and
then
lastly
I
believe
the
this
was
a
waiver
requested
last
minute
from
from
Urban
Design,
which
is
we
calculated
a
setback,
a
lot
averaging
a
little
less
than
they
did
I
think
we're
happy
to
actually
provide
the
seven
foot
ten
versus
the
six
foot,
eight,
it's
not
a
big
deal
and
we'll
so
we'll
get
with
staff
and
decide
if
that's
a
waiver
that
we
can
remove
other
than
that
it's
it's
again
a
vacant
empty
lot
that
is
underutilized
in
in
the
way
of
density.
AE
We
could
have
asked
for
five
units,
but
single
family
attached
is
more
consistent
with
the
neighborhood
and
we
believe
that
this
would
be
a
contributing
to
the
West
Tampa
in
general,
and
it
was
considered
consistent
within
the
Urban
Design
criteria
in
the
West
Tampa
overlay.
With
that
I'll
take
questions.
M
I
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
appreciate
your
focusing
the
parking
in
the
back
and
the
residential
in
front
to
try
to
maintain
a
front
yard
consistency
with
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood.
It
is
noted.
C
Q
C
R
I'd
like
to
move
file,
number
Rez
23-02
ordinance
being
presented
for
the
first
reading,
consideration
ordinance,
rezoning
property
in
general
vicinity
of
2132,
West
Saint,
Conrad
Street
in
the
city
of
Tampa
Florida,
and
more
particularly
ascribed
in
section
one
from
zoning,
District
classification,
RS,
50,
residential
single
family
to
PD
plan
development,
residential
single
family
attached,
providing
effective
date,
including
the
revisions
waiver
sheets,
because
and
because
the
applicant
has
met
its
burden
of
proof
to
provide
competence
of
central
evidence
that
the
development
has
conditioned
and
shown
in
the
site
plan
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
planet
city
code
that
I
find
that
the
requester
waivers
do
not
adversely
affect
the
public
health
safety
and
general
welfare.
R
With
that
in
mind,
I
find
that
the
proposed
development
is
consistent
with
land
use,
policy,
2.1.2
and
housing
policies,
1.3.1
1.3.3
and
1.3.4,
which
encourage
new
housing
on
vacant
and
underutilized
land
to
ensure
that
an
adequate
supply
of
housing
is
available
to
meet
Tampa's
needs
and
the
proposed
development,
as
shown
on
site
plan,
promotes
or
encourages
development
that
is
appropriate
and
location,
character
and
compatibility
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
C
R
M
E
I
S
AA
C
S
D
X
Yeah,
just
very
briefly,
I
want
to
give
a
commendation,
a
nice
gentleman
that
some
of
us
know
Luis
cumpozano,
who
was
one
of
the
part
owners
of
Crabby
Bills,
was
a
Bay
of
Pigs
veteran,
a
Navy
veteran,
just
a
really
nice
guy,
passed
on
and
I
wanted
to
give
his
family
a
commendation
in
his
memory
tomorrow.
In
fact,
here
at
City
Hall
at
one
o'clock.
C
X
Aye
second,
if
I
may
and
lastly,
there's
I
was
brought
to
my
attention
by
a
number
of
individuals
here
in
Tampa,
Indian
Americans,
with
the
game
cricket
and
they're
looking
for
places
where
they
can
play
cricket
in
our
city.
Fields.
So
I
wanted
to
ask
our
friends
at
Parks
and
Recreation,
where,
if
they
can
identify
exist,
either
existing
locations
within
Parks
and
Recreation
or
fields
or
green
spaces,
Etc
or
alternatively,
sites
that
can
be
used
in
the
future.
X
C
X
S
C
I
have
a
request.
Council,
you
remember
the
helicopter
accident
that
happened
off
of
Davis
Islands,
where
our
Buccaneers
quarterback
Gabbert
and
his
brothers
rescued
the
four
people
I've
just
been
informed
by
Brian
Ford
that
the
only
day
that
we
can
get
all
of
them
together
to
present
the
accommodation
to
them
would
be
February
23rd.
S
F
Regard
to
the
workshop
on
the
23rd,
it
is
a
very
full
Workshop.
My
suggestion
perhaps
is
to
ask
the
administration
to
work
with
the
chair
to
actually
group
these
in
ways
that
we
can
move
them
along
and
and
do.
C
It
sounds
good
I
will
I
watched.
We
can
do
that.
F
Continuances
it's
relevant,
but
with
regard
to
requests
for
continuance,
I
had
prepared
changes
to
the
rules
of
procedure,
but
a
question
came
up
Council,
where
the
council
wanted
to
incorporate
into
that.
A
first
continuance
is
a
matter
of
right
as
long
as
they
give
at
least,
let's
say
one
week's
notice.
At
least
one
week's
notice
did
Council
want
to,
because
in
that
case
it
would
appear
on
the
draft
agenda
that
the
request
had
been
continued.
F
So
the
question
is:
does
council
want
to
have
the
first
continuous
as
a
matter
of
right,
or
do
you
want
the
process
to
be
the
way
it
that
the
first
one
would
not
necessarily
that
none
of
them
would
be
actually
as
a
matter
of
right,
but
normally
Council?
It
has
been
noted
that
normally
Council
has
been
granting
the
first
continuance,
really
without
much
discussion
and
debate.
So
what
is
council's
pleasure
a
consensus
if
you
have
it
if
you're?
Not?
F
M
I
I
Robert
Irving,
who
sits
on
our
particularly
board,
passed
away
his
services
for
today,
good
fraternity,
brother
of
mine,
was
president
of
opportunity.
Kelly
sorry,
fraternity
incorporate
so
I
wanted
to
make
sure
I
recognized
him.
I
did
have
the
office
and
a
resolution
from
our
office
over
to
the
family,
but
since
he
did
serve
on
our
citizen
review
board,
which
you
know
is
a
critical
board
in
this
particular
I'd
like
to
go
and
get
an
accommodation
to
his
family
and
present
it
to
him.