►
From YouTube: Tampa City Council PM 01172019
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).
D
E
F
E
More
illegal
Department,
this
also
went
to
the
CRA
this
morning.
This
is
a
development
agreement
that
coincides
with
the
area
wide
rezoning.
We
just
moved
forward.
As
I
mentioned,
there
is
a
substitute
that
has
been
sent
to
the
clerk's
office.
It's
just
to
recognize
that
change
scheduled
for
the
transportation
in
the
ownership
and
maintenance
agreement.
So
it's
incorporated
and
everything
agrees
with
one
another
I'm
available.
If
you
have
any
questions
regarding
us.
B
E
Twenty-Four
inch
or
larger
tree
that
would
otherwise
it's
one
of
the
species
that
would,
in
the
future,
qualify
us
brand
we've
also
added
definition
for
tree
removal
zone
eligible
Lots.
Those
are
the
Lots
that
will
be
eligible
for
the
tree
removal
zone,
as
well
as
the
new
automatic
setback
reductions.
E
Thank
you.
The
definition
has
a
exception
for
the
Parkland
estates,
which
we
discussed
on
the
December
6
item.
Parkland
estates
has
a
state
law
that
makes
them
very
unique
in
terms
of
application
of
these
various
code
provisions,
so
we
felt
that
they
could
be
accepted
safely
from
these
provisions,
and
that
is
included
in
this
draft.
G
G
E
B
F
B
F
H
Good
evening,
council
members
Jennifer
Malone
with
your
Planning
Commission
staff.
This
is
located
in
the
University
planning
district.
It
is
served
by
there's
a
bus,
stop
approximately
250
feet
away
at
this
corner
right
here.
It's
an
evacuation
zone
D.
This
is
the
aerial
it's
located
along
Hillsborough
Avenue,
there's
a
wall
wall
right
across
the
street.
This
is
a
storage
facility,
so
there's
some
great
commercial
presence
along
Hillsborough
Avenue
already
and
the
adopted
future
land
uses
community
commercial
35,
which
is
that
red
that
we
see
along
Hillsborough
Avenue
and
to
move
north
from
the
subject
site.
H
This
is
residential,
20
and
then
residential
10,
providing
that
transition
staff
did
find
this
consistent
with
the
Comprehensive
Plan
as
cg
is
an
allowable
use
for
allowable
zoning
districts
in
that
community,
commercial
35,
and
this
is
a
long
promotional
corridor.
We
found
that
it
would
be
comparable
and
compatible.
Thank
you
so
much
I'm
available
for
any
questions.
F
As
I
stated,
Mary's
Samaniego,
this
is
an
application
to
rezone
the
property
from
commercial
general
and
Rs
50
to
commercial
general,
the
subject
properties
in
green,
it's
on
West
Coast
for
Avenue
and
it
but
backs
up
against
West
Mohawk
Avenue.
It
actually
currently
has
split
zoning,
so
the
southern
half
is
already
commercial
general.
The
northern
half
is
in
the
RS
50
zoning
district
they're
wanting
to
have
the
entire
property,
so
in
commercial
Jena.
In
order
to
use
the
entire
property
for
commercial
general
uses.
F
This
is
across
the
street,
the
Wawa
to
the
east,
further
to
the
east
and
then
back
next
door
to
the
west
of
the
subject
property
is
you
can
see
this
euro
series?
It's
a
commercial
corridor,
another
commercial
use.
This
is
the
subject
property
the
back
of
it
from
Mohawk,
and
then
these
are
the
residential
houses
that
face
the
back
of
the
property
along
Mohawk.
F
As
I
stated,
this
is
Euclidean
rezoning
district,
so
there
are
no
waivers
or
site
plans
to
approve
tonight.
Any
development
that
was
to
happen
on
this
property
would
have
to
comply
with
all
C
G's
standards,
as
well
as
all
development
standards
found
in
chapter
27
and
applicable
sections
of
the
city
of
Tampa
code.
The
overall
property
is
a
little
over
half
an
acre.
It's
about
five
Lots
down
from
the
intersection
of
West,
Hillsborough
Avenue
and
what
else
Rome
Avenue
intersection,
and
it
has
115
feet
of
lot
width
both
on
Hillsborough
and
no
Hodge.
F
F
H
Jennifer
Malone
with
your
Planning
Commission
staff.
This
is
in
South
Tampa,
it's
an
evacuation
zone.
Beach
gaston
park
is
our
closest
public
recreational
facility
and
we
have
a
heart
route
that
connects
subject
downtown
tampa.
This
is
the
subject
site
right
here.
This
is
Anderson
Avenue,
it's
just
south
of
inner
Bay
and
then
yourself
show
me.
Every
highway
I
have
a
Circle
K
on
the
corner
and
the
Dollar
General
and
the
vicinity.
And
then
these
are
single
family
detached
place.
H
There's
the
future.
Ladies.
They
adopted
future
languages
residential
ten
along
South
Delaware
highway.
We
have
that
community
commercial
35.
That's
that
tank
representing
the
commercial
uses.
This
is
recreational
open
space
which
is
I,
believe
cats
to
heart
the
east
of
this
website,
and
there
are
some
light
industrial
uses
to
the
south.
That's
that
great
color
staff
did
fine.
That's
consistent
with
the
Comprehensive
Plan
on
the
residential
10
allows
for
those
10
dwelling
units
per
acres
as
the
density.
H
F
F
F
Whenever
we
have
a
rezoning
request
to
go
from
our
$60
5000
the
development
pattern
in
the
immediate
area
for
this
study,
the
red
or
commercial
Lots,
so
those
were
not
included
and
then
the
yellow,
color
or
townhomes.
So
those
weren't
included
in
this
overall
study,
a
total
of
112
Lots
were
analyzed,
27
of
which
are
equal
to
or
greater
than
60
foot
wide
locks,
leading
73
or
a
majority
of
wedge
less
than
60
people,
life
of
the
subject
block,
which
is
this
block.
F
There
are
41
Lots,
22
of
which
are
60
feet
wide
or
greater,
and
then
the
remaining
78
percent
or
less
than
60
feet
wide
for
the
subject
bought
face,
which
is
this
northern
side
of
Anderson
Avenue.
There
are
21,
total
Lots,
19
of
which
are
60
feet
wide
or
wider,
and
the
remaining
81%
is
less
than
60
feet
wide
and
then
for
this
block,
this
3600
block
being
the
block
face
as
well
as
across
the
street.
F
F
The
total
lot
is
12,500
square
feet
and
it
is
100
feet
wide.
So,
if
approved
that
the
rs.50
zoning
district
could
be
split
into
two
Lots,
this
is
the
occluding
rezoning,
so
there's
no
site
final
review
and
no
waivers
to
consider
any.
There
are
no
additional
comments
from
the
developer
review
compliance
stuff.
Any
development
that
we're
doing
on
this
property
would
have
to
comply
with
all
applicable
zoning
standards
of
the
Rs
50
zoning
districts.
B
E
Good
evening
counsel,
Steve
McClean
IAM,
representing
karina
s,
who's
the
petitioner
on
this
project.
Basically,
this
restores
the
1946
original
plat
that
were
50-foot
Lots
and
in
this
case
it
will
allow
for
the
redevelopment
of
these
two.
These
two
particular
Lots
were
requesting
and
there
will
be
no
waivers
because
it's
Euclidian
zoning
and,
as
the
staff
has
pointed
out
in
all
four
categories,
including
block
face
area.
E
The
street
frontage
are
all
in
excess
of
50
foot
development
like
70,
say
I,
think
70%
are
all
developed
in
50
foot
configurations.
This
lies
between
Dale,
Mabry
and
hyams,
just
south
of
inner
Bay
Boulevard,
and
the
area
has
experienced
a
great
deal
of
infill
and
redevelopment
recently.
So
basically,
the
staff
is
recommending
that
this
is
consistent
on
both
the
planning
committee
and
then
the
city
staff
and
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
for
you
regarding
this
project.
But
we
respectfully
request
your
approval.
B
E
E
H
H
I'm
not
great
at
pronouncing
the
street
name,
but
this
here
it
is
right
here.
I
also
have
south
Hines
Avenue
and
West
Bay
to
Bay
Boulevard
to
the
south,
and
this
is
the
subject
site.
This
is
a
church
to
the
south
along
with
native
a
Boulevard,
and
we
also
have
some
commercial
uses
in
this
area.
This
portion
of
the
street.
We
have
some
attached
townhomes
some
duplexes
kind
of
a
mix
of
those
residential
types
which
is
reflected
on
our
future
land
use
map.
H
It's
residential
20,
which
allows
for
that
medium
density,
residential
to
the
north.
That
orange
is
residential.
Ten
I
have
community
makes
you
35
along
West,
Bay,
debate,
Boulevard
and
then
the
yellow
is
residential,
six,
the
residential
once
he
category
does
provide
for
that
sensitive
transition
between
this
residential
ten
and
the
community
commercial
35,
as
we
move
north
from
West
Bay
to
Bay
Boulevard,
and
this
request
is
within
that
intent
of
that
residential
20,
keeping
with
that
medium
density
residential
category.
So
we
did
find
this
consistent.
H
F
F
Because
of
the
size
of
the
light,
it's
only
0.11
acres
and
they
currently
have
two
tolling
units
on
the
site,
they're
below
the
acreage
that
they
need
to
have
two
conforming.
The
the
second
unit
is
non-conforming
and
per
the
non-conforming
chapter,
they're
severely
limited
on
what
they
can
do
to
that
second
unit.
They
can't
expand
it.
They
can
enlarge
it.
They
can
only
do
basic
repairs
with
the
RM
18
zoning
district.
F
F
F
H
B
G
You
very
much
mr.
chair,
I,
read
and
present
an
ordinance
being
presented
for
first
reading
consideration
an
ordinance
rezoning
property
in
the
general
vicinity
of
3511
west
of
the
Dorado
Street
in
the
city
of
Tampa
Florida,
and
more
particularly
described
in
section
one
from
zoning
district
classification,
RM
16,
residential
multi-family,
2,
RM,
18,
residential
multifamily,
providing
an
effective
date.
B
F
H
Jennifer
Malone,
if
you're
planning
a
mission
staff,
this
is
going
to
look
very
familiar.
This
came
before
you
is
a
comprehensive
plan
amendment.
It
was
part
of
the
February
28
to
cycle
I,
believe
it
came
before
you
last
June.
It's
on
North
Campus,
Street,
it's
about
a
block
away
from
North
Florida
Avenue.
This
is
a
Home
Depot
parking
lot.
H
These
are
commercial
uses
right
here
and
then
residential
uses
they
move
away
from
it.
It
is
located
in
the
university
planning
district,
the
evacuation
zone
E
on
your
future
land
use
map.
We
have.
The
community
makes
use
35,
which
is
that
Home
Depot
parking
lot
I
pointed
out
earlier
community
commercial
35.
This
is
residential
20
as
part
of
the
request
that
was
before
you
let
last
year
this
block
was
changed
to
the
residential
20
future
land
use
designations.
H
That's
now
the
adopted
future
land
use
of
the
subject
site
and
then,
as
we
move
further
its,
but
it
transitions
that
residential
10,
so
staff
did
find
this
request.
Consistent.
We
did
find
that
this
provides
a
logical
transition
and
density
as
we
move
away
from
our
Florida
Avenue.
It's
still
that
medium
density
residential
district,
so
we
did
find
that
it
would
be
consistent,
comparable
and
compatible
with
those
surrounding
uses
and
I
am
available
for
any
questions.
Thank
you.
F
Maybe
San
Diego
here
is
the
zoning
map
Pacific
properties
in
green.
As
you
can
see,
it's
in
a
large
area
of
the
Rs
50
zoning
district,
and
then
it
goes
to
commercial
intensive
along
Florida
afternoon.
This
Jennifer
stated
this
went
through
this
portion
of
the
block
went
through
a
comprehensive
plan
amendment
to
change
the
future
LAN
G
star
20,
which
allows
consideration
of
multi-family
density
and
zoning
districts.
F
The
current
property
has
a
house
and
then
behind
it
is
a
semi
detached
structure,
equaling
three
total
dwelling
units
that
are
all
legal,
not
legal,
non-conforming
again
like
the
last
case,
when
is
structure
and
reduce
illegal
month
forming
this
is
the
property
owners
are
limited
as
to
what
can
be
done
with
that
use,
and/or
structures.
If
this
rezoning
were
to
be
approved
to
RM
18,
they
are
allowed
to
have
two
dwelling
units
total
the
existing
house
will
remain
and
then
the
semi
detached
structure
and
the
back
won't
be
converted
into
it.
F
That's
tied
into
one
dwelling
unit
leaving
to
tilt
toward
total
dwelling
units
on
the
site.
Sorry
about
that.
Here's
the
subject
property,
here's
the
house
in
the
front
and
the
two
family
units
in
the
back
that'll
be
converted
to
a
house
or
a
single
dwelling
to
the
north
of
the
property
at
a
716
across
the
street.
F
Oh
single-family
houses,
there's
no
site
plan
review
and
no
waivers.
If
the
rezoning
were
to
be
approved,
they
would
have
to
comply
with
all
our
m18
zoning
standards.
There
are
no
additional
comments
from
staff
and
the
developer
view
you
can
find
stamp
out
and
consistent
with
the
city
of
Tampa
Code
of
Ordinances
get
any
questions
for
me.
E
Good
evening,
I'm,
Christina,
Mendoza,
Houston
ya,
know
and
the
property
owner
of
87
14,
North
Tampa
Street
I'm
here
to
respectfully
ask
for
your
approval
to
rezone
our
property.
We've
owned
this
property
for
two
years.
We've
got
fused
by
the
pan
amendment,
and
hopefully
you
will
take
that
in
consideration
to
rezone
my
property.
Thank
you
any
questions
to
me.
B
B
B
F
H
Jennifer
balloon
with
your
Planning
Commission
staff.
This
is
located
in
central
Tampa.
Three
transit
routes
are
the
subject
site
connecting
it
with
variety
of
destinations.
We
are
at
West,
Martin,
Luther,
King,
jr.
Boulevard
to
the
north
is
st.
Joseph's
Hospital
as
well
as
this
parcels
that
I
don't
know
my
directions
tonight
to
the
west,
and
then
this
is
the
subject
site
right
here.
There's
a
variety
of
medical
office
uses
along
this
corridor
of
Western
art,
Luther,
King,
jr.
Boulevard.
H
This
is
reflected
on
the
future
land
use
map.
The
blue
is
public.
Those
are
that's.
The
public
uses
of
the
hospital
this
is
community,
makes
use
35
residential
20
to
the
south
and
then
that
resident
of
10
we're
seeing
that
transition
density
as
it
moves
south
commercial
general
is
an
allowable
zoning
district
in
this
area.
I'm
staff
found
no
concerns
with
this
request
to
given
the
development
pattern
and
what's
surrounding
the
area,
so
that
is
our
finding
and
I
am
available
for
any
questions.
Thank
you.
F
Mary
Samaniego
for
the
record:
here's
a
zoning
map
of
the
surrounding
area.
The
subject
property
is
in
green.
It's
still
an
office
professional
across
the
street
is
st.
Joseph's
Hospital,
which
is
office
professional
one
and
on
either
side
of
the
property
to
the
east.
End
to
the
west
is
already
the
commercial
general
zoning
district
for
which
the
applicant
is
requesting.
Cg
zoning
for
themselves,
south
of
the
property,
is
residential
office,
and
then
it
starts
on
the
south
side
of
Virginia
starts
transitioning
into
just
some
medical
office
uses
and
residential.
F
There
are
two
separate
addresses
as
part
of
this
singular
rezoning
request.
This
is
28
14
and
28.
12
existing
medical
uses
to
the
east
as
a
mid
Express
across
the
street
is
st.
Joseph's
Hospital
currently
under
construction,
obviously,
and
then
to
the
west.
Is
a
checkers
restaurant
with
the
construction
worker
from
st.
Joseph's
having
lunch.
F
The
total
properties
0.87
agers,
if
this
property,
the
profit
existing
uses,
were
developed
in
1960
1976.
If
the
property
was
to
be
rezone
to
commercial
general,
they
would
have
to
comply
with
other
commercial
generals
or
district
zoning
standards.
They
meet
the
minimum
lot
size
minimott
areas
for
the
commercial
general
zoning
district
to
be
developed
together
or
separately.
City
staff
had
no
further
questions
or
concerns
with
this
application
and
the
development
review
required
stuff
gonna
consistent
with
the
city
of
Tampa
court
of
ordinances.
Do
you
have
any
specific
questions?
Any.
E
Good
evening
my
name
is
Tara
Tedrow
I'm,
an
attorney
at
lounge,
drastic
2,
&
5,
north
Eola,
Drive
Orlando
Florida.
Here
on
behalf
of
the
property
owner.
We
appreciate
staffs
assistance
with
this
rezoning
request.
Staff
has
found
it
to
be
consistent
with
your
land
development
code,
as
well
as
with
your
comprehensive
plan.
We
agree
with
the
findings
of
your
staff
or
requesting
no
waivers
today,
and
we
actually
received
an
unsolicited
letter
of
support
from
a
neighboring
property
owner
at
2
8:08
West
Martin
Luther
King
jr.
Boulevard.
E
It's
interesting
because
currently
there's
a
pharmacy
on
the
site,
but
if
you
look
at
your
use
table
a
pharmacy
under
the
opie,
zoning
has
to
be
an
accessory
use,
so
you
know
to
bring
it
in
line
with
what
the
current
code
would
allow,
since
these
were
built
a
really
long
time
ago
and
to
give
some
options
for
marketability
of
the
property.
We
found
consistent
with
the
development
pattern
in
the
area
that
the
CG
zoning
would
be
the
best
option
for
this
site.
Ok,.
D
D
C
Yes,
sir
mr.
chair,
moving
ordinance
being
presented
for
shooting
consideration
and
oranges,
rezoning
property
and
general
vicinity
of
28:12
and
2814
west,
dr.
Martin
Luther
King
jr.
Boulevard
in
the
city
of
Tampa,
Florida,
more
particularly
described
in
section
one
from
zoning
district
classification,
opie
office,
professional
2cg,
commercial
general,
providing
an
effective
date.
F
H
Commission
staff:
this
is
in
the
South
Tampa
planning
district.
It
is
within
a
hospital
high
hazard
area
and
evacuation
zone.
A
court
Champa
Park
and
the
port
campus
community
center
are
about
0.2
miles
the
east
that
secretes
public
recreational
facility
and
part
route
17
provides
transit
to
the
subject
site.
Here's
where
it's
located,
we're
at
Southwest
short
at
the
corner
of
South,
West,
Shore,
Boulevard
and
West
McCoy
Street
directly
to
the
north
is
a
multi-family
development
aside
with
multi-family
development,
further
north
in
this
direction,
the
subject
site.
H
These
are
CSX
tracks
right
here,
and
this
is
a
portion
of
Port
Tampa
part
to
the
south.
The
adopted
future
land-use
is
transitional,
use
24.
That's
the
salmon
color
in
this
area.
The
apartments
to
the
north
were
developed
into
that
same
future.
Land-Use
category.
This
is
a
subject
site
right
here.
I
also
have
residential
20,
residential
35
residential
10
in
the
area.
This
is
the
park.
It's
recreational
open
space.
H
We
did
find
this
consistent.
The
traditional
use,
24
is
a
unique
category.
It
was
originally
placed
in
areas
of
the
city
that
didn't
have
an
identifiable
development
pattern.
However,
in
this
immediate
surrounding
area,
especially
in
South,
Tampa
staff
has
found
that
parcels
with
this
designation
are
being
redeveloped
for
moderate
density,
residential
such
as
that
parcel
to
the
north.
It
has
the
same
future
land
use
category,
so
we
did
find
that
this
would
be
consistent
with
the
with
the
underlying
future
land
use
and
the
surrounding
development
pattern.
H
But
the
224
is
a
unique
category
that
allows
for
a
lot
of
different
zoning
districts,
which
we've
seen
in
other
areas
of
the
city,
but
we
did
find
that
it
was
comparable
and
compatible
and
consistent
with
that
policy
direction
that
also
encourages
utilizing
vacant
land.
So
further,
the
preferences
of
Tampa's
help
for
the
housing
for
its
future
residents
I'm
available
for
any
questions.
Thank
you.
F
Very
Sammy
a
go.
Here's
the
zoning
map,
the
subject
property
is
in
green.
As
you
can
see,
it's
part
of
a
larger
plan
development.
The
larger
plan
development
was
approved
in
2011.
It
was
Casey
1146
for
multifamily
development,
and
then
this
portion
was
slated
to
be
commercial
and
retail,
the
property's
currently
vacant,
and
it's
been
vacant
since
2011.
So
the
property
owners
are
wanting
to
convert
this
piece
to
multifamily,
actually
to
single-family
attached
to
kind
of
close
out
the
entire
development
for
residential
purposes.
F
This
is
the
apartment
developments
that
again
was
the
initial
larger
phase
of
the
2011
plan
developments
you're,
showing
gates.
This
is
all
taken
from
McCoy
across
McCoy,
some
open
storage
and
a
single-family
house,
and
then
on
the
corner,
the
opposite
corner
of
West,
Shore
and
McCoy
some
residential
units.
F
F
They're
requesting
a
total,
a
total
of
23
drawing
units
which
is
allowable
under
their
current
future
land
use
designation
series
of
buildings.
There's
four,
sir
there's
five
in
this
building
five
in
this
for
five
and
four,
they
are
asking
for
a
number
of
waivers
and
I
kind
of
walked
it
one
of
those
they're
asking
for
one
hundred
percent
tree
reduction,
because
they're
an
acre
all
properties,
an
acre
or
larger,
requires
you
to
maintain
50
percent
of
the
existing
trees.
F
They're
asking
for
a
waiver
to
remove
all
existing
trees
staff
is
not
in
support
of
this
waiver.
We
build
the
applicant
could
have
designed
a
project
to
retain
some
of
these
new
trees
on
site.
They
are
also
asking
to
pay
to
the
trees
trust
fund
for
a
section
13
165
D
because
of
the
limited
space
they
have
for
the
mitigation
and
the
required
tree
planting
very
try
to.
They
are
required
to
replace
the
trees
that
are
moving
as
well
as
to
put
in
some
parking
lot
trees
and
landscaping
for
the
project
itself.
F
There's
very
limited
green
space
left
on
the
property.
These
are
sidewalks.
These
are
sidewalks
to
the
doors.
So
the
green
space-
you
have
are
kind
of
limited
areas
that
would
not
meet
the
protective
radii
requirement
for
new
plantings.
Do
that
they're
asking
for
waiver
to
pay
into
the
tree?
Trust
fund
for
trees,
not
mitigated
on-site,
the
third
waiver
and
they
have
a
total
seven
waivers
for
this
application.
F
Third
waiver:
there's
a
code
provision
for
building
separation
based
on
the
height
of
the
buildings
and
the
lengths
of
the
buildings
and
there's
a
formula
that
we
use
that's
built
into
the
code.
The
height
of
these
buildings
are
proposing
there's
35
feet
because
of
the
calculations.
These
buildings
are
all
kind
of
too
close
to
each
other.
I
don't
go
through
the
numbers,
but
buildings,
2,
&
5
are
supposed
to
be
23
and
a
half
feet.
They're
only
20
feet
apart,
2
&
4
are
supposed
to
be
23
and
a
half
the
only
20
feet
apart.
F
So
basically
there's
a
waiver
request
kind
of
to
allow
for
those
buildings
to
be
closed
up.
The
fourth
waiver
is
the
section
27
to
80
2.92.
Although
the
front
doors
of
these
buildings
do
not
face
a
right-of-way
again,
we
have
west
shore
over
here
and
then
mccoy
down
here.
These
units
obvious
mccoy,
these
face
west
shore
with
the
front
doors,
but
these
units,
the
front
doors,
actually
face
the
rear.
The
properties
are
actually
faced
with
the
existing
apartment
buildings,
so
that
requires
another
waiver.
F
They're
asking
for
a
waiver
from
27
to
83
12
to
reduce
the
drive
aisle
from
24
and
24
feet
to
20
feet.
I
believe
it
is
in
this
area
here
and
there's
a
20
foot
drive
out
here,
but
they
have
recessed
the
garage
door,
so
I
believe
that
they
need
it
in
that
location,
to
redo
another
waiver
27
to
85,
to
reduce
the
vehicle
use
area
race-based
requirement
because
of
the
amount
of
internal
drive,
aisles
and
parking
they're
required
to
have
1673
square
feet
of
green
space
and
only
providing
1293
square
feet
of
green
space.
F
So
if
that
way
were
to
be
approved,
they'd
have
to
pay
to
the
green
space
fund
for
district
6,
and
the
last
waiver
is
to
reduce
the
vu
a
green
space
buffer
from
3
feet
to
1
foot
along
the
north
property
line
again
subject
to
the
field.
Lieu
payment
for
district
6
they're
acquired
to
be
3
feet,
they're
only
measure
about
1
foot
there,
the
setbacks
that
they're
proposing
bless
14
feet,
north
10,
feet,
east
5,
feet
and
south
14.
As
I
stated
they're
at
a
35
foot
maximum
height,
a
total
of
50.
F
If
approved,
there
are
changes
that
staff
is
recommending
to
clean
up
the
site
plan
between
first
and
second
reading.
Land
developments,
land
development
because
of
the
nature
and
the
number
of
waivers
they're
requesting
and
given
the
site
is
vacant.
Land
development
did
find
this
inconsistent.
Natural
Resources
also
found
it
inconsistent
because
of
exceeding
the
50%
tree
removal
asking
to
remove
all
trees.
On-Site.
F
Overall,
the
development
review
compliance
staff
found
it
inconsistent
again
reference
to
transportation
for
draw
Bell
with
natural
resources
and
land
development
due
to
tree
preservation
and
green
space
provision.
In
the
event,
City
Council
approves
the
waivers.
Please
make
a
motion
to
have
the
changes
made
between
first
and
second
reading.
Further
revision
sheet.
Mr.
Cohen.
G
G
F
So
this
is
the
larger
blend
of
it
Jennifer
your
area,
please.
So
this
is
the
overall
PD
that
was
first
approved
in
those
seven
and
then
revised
in
2011
I
believe
that
Thanks
it
was
kind
of
broken
up
into
two
sections.
This
section
was
always
supposed
to
be
multi-family,
and
then
this
section
was
going
to
have
residential
and
retail
uses.
F
I'm
sorry,
restaurant
and
retail
uses
as
allowable
uses
and
I
know
that
the
applicant
and
the
applicants
represent
a
different
speaker
more
detail,
but
it's
my
understanding
in
clear
that
the
property
has
sat
empty
for
the
past
eight
years,
so
they're
wanting
to
exercise
the
option
to,
in
effect
revise
the
proposal
to
eliminate
this
from
having
the
option
for
retail
and
restaurant
in
temperate.
If
residential.
J
Good
evening,
Unity
Council
I'm
Roy
major
I'm,
an
engineer
and
a
planner
with
WRA
engineering
representing
weekly
homes,
we're
looking
to
develop
23
townhomes
on
this
acre
lot.
This
is
the
reason
why
our
front
we're
in
front
of
you
here
and
to
make
that
switch
from
the
restaurant
use
to
the
residential
was
beyond
the
administrative
discretion
of
staff,
and
so
a
PD
is
required.
J
And
staff
staff
went
through
the
adjacent
uses.
You
have
the
you
have
the
the
Jefferson
townhomes
to
the
north,
which
is
at
24
units
per
acre,
and
we
have
23
units
per
acre.
There's
higher
densities,
suburban
residential
across
the
street,
to
the
south
of
us
is
currently
a
open
storage.
However,
there's
some
commercial
intensive,
some
CI
and
also
to
you
24
to
the
south
of
us.
J
My
point
here
is-
is
note
that
there
is
no
shopping
or
retail
in
the
direct
proximity
of
this
parcel
also
note
that
the
trees
along
this
parcel
are
all
along
the
western
and
southern
boundary.
You
know
this
parcel
was
master
planned
to
be
you
know
a
commercial
use,
so
it
was
masqueraded
or
clear-cut
and
has
been
in
its
current
state,
basically
same
acre
pasture
essentially
for
seven
years.
J
The
kind
of
point
of
my
presentation
is
that
we
feel
our
tone.
Townhome
project
is
gonna,
add
a
complimentary
alternative.
Housing
choice
to
the
area,
while
not
adding
an
additional
burden
to
the
area's
infrastructure.
I
just
have
some
statements
to
make
that
discussion
initially
when
I
say
that
we're
adding
another
housing
choice,
I'm
referring
to
adding
townhomes
in
an
area
here
where
you
have,
if
you
have
an
apartment
choice,
you
have
you
know:
high
density,
suburban
to
north
a
little
lower
density,
suburban.
Now
we're
also
adding
townhomes
into
that
residential
mix.
J
The
concept
of
having
diverse
housing
options
is
discussed
in
the
Planning
Commission's
analysis
of
our
site,
and
then
analysis
did
yield
compliance
to
they're
there
to
the
planning
to
the
excuse
me
Planning
Commission's
analysis.
What
I'm
talking
about
infrastructure
and
not
over,
not
burdening
the
infrastructure.
You
know
I.
Think
of
the
think
of
the
main
pain
points
you
know
within
the
city
think
truck
traffic
congestion,
parking,
stormwater,
okay
in
terms
of
traffic,
a
3500
square
foot,
restaurant,
which
is
a
typical
size
for
a
chain,
restaurant
and
Outback.
Yes,
something
like
that.
J
23
child
homes
generates
about
134
daily
trips,
and,
if
you,
if
you
look
at
a
peak
hour,
comparison,
a
restaurant
of
that
size,
3
a.m.
peak
trips,
kind
of
figures,
ours
would
generate
10.
So
a
little
more
in
the
morning,
but
in
the
evening
3,500
square
foot
restaurant
generates
26
peak
p.m.
trips.
Ours
generates
12.
My
point
there
is,
you
know
the
traffic
is
about
a
wash.
It
could
be
argue,
maybe
we're
lessening
traffic
with
this
proposal.
But
it's
it's
about
a
wash
parking.
J
We
meet
the
city
criteria
for
parking,
two-car
garages,
we
meet
the
requisite
amount
of
guest
spaces
and
then
stormwater
drainage
issues.
This
site,
the
apartments
and
this
site
was
master
planned
for
development.
So
there's
we're
gonna
tap
in
to
their
stormwater
vault
system,
there's
currently
an
inlet
and
a
pipe
and
a
stub
to
this
site.
So
there
will
be
no
off-site
drainage
coming
off
our
site
into
any
into
any
I'll
fall,
except
where
it's
currently
planned.
So
my
point
here
is
that
we're
putting
23
townhomes
in
place
of
a
restaurant.
J
J
We
are
asking
for
several
waivers
clearly
clearly
and
just
a
base
discussion
on
that.
Our
request
is
based
on
the
assertion.
Our
project
is
in
harmony
with
the
overall
character
of
this
area.
You
talk
about
tree
removal
and
green
space.
Again
looking
at
the
perimeter
of
this
site,
the
trees
are
more
or
less
along
the
right-of-way,
and
so
we
will
be
removing
those
trees,
several
which
are
cabbage
palms
or
some
pretty
nice
pines.
Unfortunately,
you
know
we'd
have
to
remove
those
staff
is
indicated
that
our
mitigation
would
be
13
inch
trees.
J
J
J
J
J
So
the
the
drive
aisle
width,
the
drive
aisle
width-
is
20
feet
throughout
the
site.
However,
between
the
garage
door
and
the
drive
aisle
there's
a
three-foot
apron,
so
someone
who's
pulling
in
or
puller
backing
out,
has
23
feet
of
space
and
if
you
actually
measured
it
to
garage
door
to
garage
door,
there's
26
feet.
J
I'd
also
point
out
the
20
feet
to
10
foot
lanes
is
a
very
common
roadway
width
for
local
roads,
well,
not
in
the
city,
but
we
do
I
do
a
lot
of
work
in
the
counties
for
a
subdivision,
Road
20
feet
wide.
This
is
kind
of
the
standard,
so
I
think
we
meet
many
of
the
standards
for
drive.
Aisle
width
plus
the
apron
makes
this
palatable.
J
Transportation,
so
excuse
me
I'm
sorry,
so
transportation
objection
is
correct.
However,
we
fee,
we
feel
we
meet
that
regarding
building
separation.
Indeed,
between
buildings,
2
&
3
are
10
feet
apart
by
the
cat
by
the
city
formula.
They
have
to
be
a
little
over
14
feet:
buildings,
2,
&,
5,
&,
2,
&
4
should
be
about
23
and
a
half
feet
apart.
I
believe
they're.
J
J
Something
that
we
have
done
upon
kind
of
discussion
with
city
staff,
so
you
look
at
this
this
area
down
here
where
the
sidewalks,
the
entrances
of
the
front
doors,
goes
directly
to
the
sidewalk
you're
kind
of
a
rowhouse
feel,
and
we
took
out
the
perimeter
sidewalk
a
lot
of
McCoy,
so
those
particular
units
you
kind
of
walk
right
out.
You
have
a
little
bit
of
a
front
yard
and
then
you
kind
of
take
some
steps
right
down
to
this
kind
of
that
that
urban
kind
of
row
house
feel
along
McCoy.
J
You
know
we
think
that
adds
a
little
bit
of
character,
a
little
bit
of
difference
to
the
area.
So,
basically,
in
conclusion
that
we
feel
we're
providing
a
townhome
project
which
complements
the
area
provides
alternative
housing
has
a
unique
design
feature
with
that
with
that
one
section
of
row
house
and
does
not
create
an
adverse
impact
to
the
area
infrastructure.
D
Amazing
I've
got
one
question,
particularly
the
project
itself,
I'm
a
little
bit
confused
based
on
the
notes
and
what
had
been
told
to
us.
So
the
the
entire
development
was
part
of
a
PD.
Is
that
correct?
Yes,
sir?
All
right,
so
is
this
a
new
owner
or
is
it
still
the
owner
of
the
original
PD
I
believe
it
is
the
same
underlying
owner,
okay,
and
so
the
original
plan
was
to
have
a
restaurant
or
some
other
type
of
mixed-use.
Here
correct
it
was
a
restaurant.
It.
D
As
a
restaurant,
okay
and
so
the
decision
to
go
with
23
townhomes
I'm,
you
know
when
you
go
from
one
type
of
use
on
a
master
plan
to
something
really
completely
different,
based
on
the
fact
that
the
restaurant
was
probably
going
to
serve
the
larger
project
for
the
most
part
and
the
rest
of
the
surrounding
neighborhood,
and
especially
since
this
particular
neighborhood
is
getting
a
lot
more
people.
Moving
in.
Why?
Why
the
change
now
into
a
into
townhomes
as
opposed
to
what
was
there
previously?
You.
J
D
You
all
were
doing
this
plan.
Was
there
any
thought
into
reducing
the
number
of
townhome
units
to
allow
for
some
of
the
green
space
and
some
of
the
other
mitigations
that
you
have
to
provide
anyway
because
of
the
the
green
spaces,
the
the
trees
I
mean
frankly
based
on
the
the
aerial
of
the
previous
PD
and
what
had
built
out?
There's,
not
a
lot
of
green
space
at
all
in
that
entire
project.
J
J
So
we
did
meet
the
green
space
requirement
for
that
the
general
green
space
is
the
vehicular
use
requirement
we're
a
little
shy
on,
but
it's
just
you
know
sure
the
client,
my
clients,
trying
to
you
know,
do
the
best
you
can
and
again
we
feel
were
in
keeping
with
the
green
space
in
the
character
of
the
area.
Thank.
D
I
The
same
lines
you
have
received
all
of
the
four-star
general
three
three
departments
said
that
you
were
inconsistent:
you're
asking
for
seven
waivers
and
I
understand
the
shortages.
You
say:
I'm
350
square
foot
of
an
acre.
They
say
I'm
four
feet
short
of
24
foot,
driveway
I'll,
this
rumors
about
I'd,
say
26
27
foot
at
the
widest,
not
between
the
columns,
yeah
and
so
I'm,
trying
to
guess
and
then
you
said
well,
you
got
the
sidewalk
and
the
entryway
and
does
a
code
require
that
to
be
counted
or
just
a
street
itself.
I
I'm
not
against
projects,
but
then
you
want
a
hundred
percent
tree
removal.
That's
right
and
please
you
can
interrupt
me
at
any
time
because
I'm
not
perfect
when
I
say
these
things,
sometimes
I
era,
and
so
it's
just
to
me
as
mr.
Schwarz
were
saying,
I
understand
the
development
I
understand
what's
happening
there.
You
know
for
a
long
time
it
had
been
forgotten
and
then
it
was
recognized
15-20
years
ago.
It
has
continued,
be
recognized
and
I'm
appreciative
of
that,
but
the
24
to
an
acre.
It
depends
what
the
acre
looks
like.
I
It
depends
where
the
acres
at
and
my
my
judgment,
it's
just
not
a
set
right,
24,
so
you're,
one
short
of
an
acre,
then
I'm,
one
was
development
unit
short
of
the
24
to
an
acre
code,
but
I'm
looking
at
it,
I
said
myself,
you
know
it's
a
beautiful
area,
beautiful
location,
beautiful
development
from
your
own
appley.
Don't
count
that
against
him
and
it
just
to
me
is
just
trying
to
put
up
a
gallon
of
milk
into
two.
You
know
half
a
gallon
jug,
it
quite
doesn't
look,
it
looks
great
but
quite
doesn't
fit
inside.
J
J
Sir,
you
know
in
regards
to
speaking
of
sidewalk
and
in
the
drive,
Isle
width
there's
no
way
we're
having
cars
driving
over
sidewalk
yeah
no
way.
What
the
point
was
is
that
you
have
a
garage
like
a
garage
door
and
then
a
three-foot
apron
and
then
the
drive
line
and
then
another
three-foot
apron
and
so
and
so
what
it's
nothing.
I
J
I
I
E
I
G
Yeah
I
don't
want
to
beat
a
dead
horse,
but
I
have
a
couple
problems
with
this.
First
of
all,
when
this
PD
was
originally
done,
it
was
done
as
part
of
a
larger
project
and
we
all
balanced
everything
when
we
do
it
so
to
come
back
later
and
carve
out
a
piece
for
a
change
affects
the
decision
making
over
the
whole
so
right
away
that
elevates
this
I
think
to
a
higher
standard
of
scrutiny.
G
G
You
can't
make
it
work
because
you're
asking
for
7
waivers
you're
you're
busting
through
all
the
setbacks,
you're
putting
the
building's
closer
together
than
they're
supposed
to
be
and
you're
removing
100%
of
the
trees,
and
so
one
of
the
themes
that
I
see
here
from
the
staff
is
that
they
think
some
of
these
things
could
be
mitigated.
If
the
site
were
designed
differently,
then
I
think
the
final
thing
is,
you
know
the
the
comment
about
the
lack
of
demand
for
the
restaurant
I
think
is
subjective.
G
J
J
K
Hello,
I'm
Tom,
Vento,
4701,
Ingram,
Street,
Port
Tampa,
also
the
president
of
the
Civic
Association
I'm
not
very
prepared
tonight,
I've
been
pretty
ill
lately
and
coming
back,
but
one
of
the
things
is
the
gentleman
said:
there's
no
shopping
or
retail
or
restaurants
in
the
area.
That's
exactly
why
that
PD
was
made
back
in
the
in
the
day
in
2007.
K
Of
course,
the
market
conditions
after
2007
that
was
the
were
in
the
bubble,
burst
2008.
So
we
are
probably
getting
back
to
the
point
now.
After
all
this
time,
where
the
market
conditions
are
getting
more
in
line
with
what
they
wanted
or
what
was
going
to
be
put
there
as
a
restaurant,
the
neighborhood
and
the
owner,
who
is
the
same
petitioner
now
or
the
same
person?
K
We
went
back
and
forth
worked
together
for
probably
I,
don't
know
a
year
year
and
a
half
and
they
made
some
changes,
and
this
was
one
of
the
things
that
the
neighborhood
really
wanted,
because
we
knew
that
there
would
come
a
time
like
there
is
right
now
where
everything
north
of
us
has
developed.
We
can't
drive
through
you
recapture
a
lot
of
the
traffic
by
not
having
people
having
to
drive
to
Gandy
to
go
to
use
a
restaurant
or
retail
whatever,
but
mainly
it
was
restaurant
is
what
it
was
for.
K
In
fact,
there
was
something
about
it
was
going
to
be
a
sit-down
restaurant.
It
would
I,
don't
even
know
if
that's
written
in
the
plan
or
not,
if
that
ever
got
through
there
in
2011
they
actually
crowded
the
apartments
towards
the
road.
I
wasn't
involved
at
the
time
closer
to
the
road
setbacks.
Some
I
guess
waivers,
you
would
say
so.
That's
the
history
of
it.
The
history
was
work
with
the
owner
to
try
to
get
some
land.
That
was
going
to
be
that
somebody
was
going
to
eventually
develop
as
a
restaurant
to
serve
the
neighborhood.
K
We
in
our
part
of
the
that
corner
of
the
city
we
we
have
to
drive
north
through
dense,
more
dense
or
more
dense
areas
to
get
to
get.
You
know
to
get
a
bite
to
eat
or
to
go
shopping,
so
it
was
kind
of
a
a
lot
of
foresight
and
I
thought.
It
was
in
good
intentions
and
feels
like
we
were
like
that's
hope
he
would
deny
that
change.
Thank
you.
E
Vinnie
named
Cali
Donna,
with
Port
Tampa,
to
echo
kind
of
what
Tom
said.
There
is
no
retail
restaurants
there
right
now,
but
there's
definitely
a
need
for
one,
and
this
was
decided
back
then
and
as
councilman
Cohen
said
I'm
since
then
there
has
been
more
development
and
it
continues
to
grow.
We
do
have
town
homes
and
additional
town
homes
were
recently
built
with
the
marina
district
which
is
getting
completed.
There
are
also
apartment
buildings
across
the
street,
from
the
marina
district
that
are
getting
completed.
E
There
is
land
just
southwest
of
this
vacant
lot
and
it's
zoned
and
approved
for
444,
more
apartment
units
and
Lennar
is
building
single-family
homes
just
south
of
this
172
of
them.
So
we're
going
to
continue
to
grow
and
add
more
people
that
could
service
this
restaurant
if
it
stays
zoned
that
way
so
I
just
respectfully
ask
for
you
to
consider
keeping
it
zoned,
as
it
was
decided
back
when
I
was
made
this
way.
Thank
you.
So
much
all.
J
Thank
you
know.
Having
have
you
heard
public
input
in
the
council
I
would
ask
council
consider
a
motion
continue
this
and
working
through
some
of
the
comments.
Not
only
that
we've
heard,
but
through
staff
analysis,
gonna,
move
for
a
continuance
to
help
us
get
this
site
more
to
compliance
and
reduce
the
waivers
and.
D
You
know
mr.
maser,
if
you
know,
based
on
some
of
the
comments
that
myself
and
my
colleagues
have
made
and
what
the
neighborhood
has
said.
You
may
want
to
go
back
to
your
client
and
work
with
them.
I
would
suggest
meeting
with
them
to
talk
about
some
of
the
issues
and
how
this
can
be
come
a
more.
You
know,
successful
project
for
you,
so
I
will
make
that
motion
to
continue
if
you're
done
masseur
with
any.
I
D
Okay,
yeah
I
was
just
gonna
say,
miss
yeah,
go
I,
think
has
something
to
say:
I'm,
not
sure
what
it
is.
F
Miss
MEA
go
I
wanted
to
speak
about
the
continuance.
I
am
recommending
that
we
continue
to
February
28th,
which
is
an
alcohol
night.
That
would
give
staff
enough
time.
That
would
give
the
applicant
enough
time
to
fully
reconsider
a
site
plan.
Get
it
together,
give
it
to
staff
and
give
step
adequate
time
and
code
require
time
to
do.
A
thorough
review
of
it.
I
feel
like
February.
14Th
would
not
be
enough
time.
F
G
H
Jennifer
Malone
their
clinic
mission
staff
that
we
both
gave
in
the
central
Tampa
planning
district
for
a
hundred
feet
to
the
east
of
the
transit,
stop
serving
part
Route,
one
which
runs
along
North,
Florida
Avenue.
It's
an
evacuation
zone,
II
River,
crest
Park,
is
about
3,100
feet
to
the
northwest
and
that
proposes
public
recreational
facility
I'm
going
to
show
an
aerial,
mrs.
North,
Florida,
Avenue,
West,
Ginny's,
Street,
here's
the
subject
site
and
North
Highland
Avenue,
it's
in
the
Seminole
Heights
urban
village.
This
is
the
blind
Tiger
cafe
actually
on
this
person
right
here.
H
We
also
have
some
car
lots
along
this
portion
of
North
Florida
Avenue
and
then
the
single-family,
the
adopted
future
land
use
is
residential
10.
That's
that
orange
color,
indicative
of
the
neighborhood,
the
red,
which
runs
along
North
Florida
Avenue,
is
that
community
commercial
35,
which
allows
consideration
of
those
commercial,
the
commercial
uses
that
are
along
with
for
an
Avenue
since
it
is
a
transit
corridor
and
a
heavily
used
commercial
corridor.
H
This
rezoning
will
allow
for
the
and
I'm
variable
go
further
into
detail
about
this,
but
staff
reviewed
this
rezoning
and
we
did
find
that
it
would
allow
for
the
adaptive
reuse
of
existing
structure
for
this
for
residential
purpose,
which
is
supported
by
the
Tampa
comprehensive
plan.
I'm
gonna
cite
land
use
policy.
Nine
point
two
point:
five
and
five
point
one
point:
seven:
this
will
recognize
that
unique
development
pattern
in
the
Seminole
Heights
urban
village
and
it
is
compatible
with
the
long
range
pattern
that
the
comprehensive
plan
has
identified
for
this
area.
H
We
did
find
that
this
would
be
the
the
comprehensive
plan
supports
adaptive
reuse
of
these
structures
that
this
is
gonna
be
comparable
and
compatible,
and
especially
with
those
two
policies
that
I
cited,
which
are
also
in
our
report.
It
follows
about
that
policy
guidance
to
them
the
comprehensive
plan
and
the
long-term
vision
of
these
urban
villages,
especially
that
adaptive
reuse
for
residential
development,
and
that
concludes
my
presentation.
I'm
an
open
question.
Thank
you.
F
Mary
cemani
I
go
for
the
record,
we're
in
Seminole
Heights
now,
and
the
special
semi
hide
zoning
district.
This
specific
site,
which
is
in
green,
is
in
the
Seminole
Heights
residential,
which
is
the
single-family
zoning
district.
For
some
of
the
heights,
the
existing
building
on
site
was
just
site
which
is
transition
in
the
pictures.
Here's
the
existing
building
on
site
it
was
constructed
in
1924,
and
the
last
use
of
the
property
was
an
appliance
repair
shop
there.
F
The
applicants
are
executing
the
adaptive
reuse
policy
to
retain
the
existing
structure,
but
to
use
it
for
residential
purposes.
They're
asking
for
eight
total
I
believe
eight
total
dwelling
units
multifamily.
This
is
the
side
lot
of
the
subject
property
where
the
parking
lot
will
go
in
I'll
show
you
in
a
second
surrounding
their
property
of
single-family
houses.
This
is
directly
to
the
east
that
planned
development
for
a
lot
split
further
to
the
east
across
the
street.
F
F
F
Multi-Family
eight
dwelling
units
in
that
building
they
are
providing
parking
v,
/
q
spaces
along
the
west
property
line,
part
of
the
Seminole
Heights
parking
code,
you're
allowed
to
count
a
number
of
motorcycle
parkings
as
an
equivalent
to
one
car
personal
space,
as
well
as
there's
a
trade
off
for
a
series
of
bicycle
parking
spaces
that
can
also
count
for
a
car
parking
space.
So
for
this
development,
based
on
the
Seminole
Heights
code,
there's
eight
parking
spaces
required.
F
F
The
next
few
waivers
have
to
do
with
Sona
Heights
specific
code.
The
code
says
the
is
a
bill
to
line
four
of
forty
feet
based
on
the
development
pattern.
The
averaging
on
the
Lots,
the
house
to
the
east
is
set
relatively
far
back.
This
house
is
set
relatively
close
to
the
West.
You
have
to
take
an
average
to
those
two
seviche
this
bill
to
line.
However,
we
are
dealing
with
an
existing
building,
so
it
does
not
meet
the
40-foot
bill.
F
Similarly,
the
code
says
that
parking
has
to
be
behind
the
bill
to
line
in
order
to
to
get
as
much
vehicular
parking
on
site
as
possible.
They're
asking
for
a
waiver
to
have
a
portion
of
this
parking
space
forward,
the
building
line
and
then
the
last
waiver
that
they
are
requesting,
which
is
the
4th
27
1113
e
to
the
Western
property
line,
because
this
development
is
up
against
the
parking
is
up
against
a
single-family.
Residence
is
required
to
have
a
six-foot,
high
fence
or
wall
with
a
hedges
and
they're
asking.
F
If
within
1
feet,
they're
asking
to
just
be
able
to
put
up
a
six
foot
high
wall
or
fence
and
with
no
hedge,
because
there's
only
1
foot
distance
in
there
and
that's
not
adequate
space
to
find
hedges
for
buffering.
So
those
are
all
waivers.
So
there
are
4
waivers
to
the
Seminole
Heights
standard,
so
the
urban
design
staff
did
find
this
consistent.
A
A
The
property
we're
talking
about
today,
as
shown
just
by
staff,
is
this
site
right
here
and
it's
it's
a
long
float.
This
is
the
back
of
the
buildings
along
Florida
Avenue,
the
building
under
the
adaptive,
reuse
of
historic
structures.
We're
not
allowed
to
expand
the
building
or
change
it,
so
the
building
is
where
the
building
is,
and
it's
not
going
to
get
any
smaller
or
any
larger
when
it
gets
redone.
So
that
is
really
what
is
triggered.
A
A
lot
of
the
need
for
the
waivers
and
very
discussed
is
trying
to
bring
a
very
old
constructivist,
both
very
cyclist,
constructed
a
long
time
ago
into
compliance
with
today's
regulations,
and
obviously
they
were
very,
very
different
70
years
ago
than
they
are
today.
So
we're
doing
the
best
we
can
to
bring
this
into
the
appliance.
The
building
was
built.
Court
has
historically
always
used
as
an
industrial
building.
So
when
you
look
at
the
pictures
of
the
building
here
and
by.
A
They
have
cleaned
the
site
up
well
there,
since
after
purchasing
it-
and
they
have-
we
don't
know
whose
car
that
is
by
the
way
it
was
just
on
the
property.
When
we
go
in
over
to
take
pictures
but
they've
taken
all
the
trash
off
the
site.
There
was
a
lot
of
debris
back
here
that
they've
cleaned
out
and
cleaned
the
building
up
to
the
you
know
as
a
holding
facility
holding
for
the
time
being.
A
This
is
posed
rendering
of
what
it
should
look
like
at
the
end,
and
once
again
we
can't
change
the
building
in
terms
of
adding
on
to
it
or
anything.
We
can
only
renovate
it,
but
this
would
be
the
parking
and
some
green
space
in
front
of
it.
We
think
it's
being
great
improvement
to
the
situation.
That's
out
there
now
it
would
be
furthering
the
provisions
of
the
Seminole
Heights
vision
plan
that
was
adopted
in
the
Comprehensive
Plan,
be
furthering
your
ability
to
provide
more
affordable
housing
in
Seminole
Heights,
infill
housing.
A
This
would
be
structured
to
target
more
young
professionals,
teachers,
people
Evette
in
that
income
bracket,
who
would
might
need
can't
afford
to
buy
their
own
home
yet,
but
there's
a
real
shortage
of
moderately
priced
I'm,
affordable
I,
don't
mean
section:
8
housing,
I'm
talking
about
a
moderately
priced
private
sector
housing.
So
it's
an
opportunity
to
do
this.
The
Couture's
have
done
several
of
these
I
have
going
to
hand
you
in
a
series
of
some
handouts.
One
is
and
just
I'll
go
through
them
with
you.
A
Now
one
is
the
face
book
statement
of
support
from
the
7th
sip,
Association
and
I'm,
not
sure,
if
anyone's
here,
to
speak
in
support
or
opposition
tonight,
but
this
was
posted
pictures
of
before
and
after
the
building,
a
brief
biography
of
the
Co
tours
pointing
out
the
things
they've
done
in
Seminole
Heights.
They
are
long
lifelong
residents
at
amp
and
been
in
Seminole
Heights,
almost
20
years
and
also
I've,
provided
you
a
some
pictures
of
the
other
apartments
that
they
have
rehabbed
in
the
in
the
area
that
are
all
that
same
size.