Evening Session — July 24, 2025 FINAL

Alan Clendenin

5:01:48PM Call this meeting to order. Can we have a roll call, please?

Charlie Miranda

5:01:54PM Here.

Guido Maniscalco

5:01:55PM Here. Viera? Carlson?

Bill Carlson

5:02:00PM Here.

Alan Clendenin

5:02:00PM Here.

The clerk

5:02:03PM We have a physical quorum.

Alan Clendenin

5:02:04PM Thank you. We have quite a bit of housekeeping. I see Mr. Sam is up there at the microphone. Would you like to review the agenda with us?

Samuel Thomas

5:02:15PM The first item is item 2, rez-25-20. Requesting a continuance to October 16, along with waiving the 180-day requirement.

Alan Clendenin

5:02:25PM Motion from Councilman Maniscalco. Second from Councilman Carlson. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

Samuel Thomas

5:02:32PM Item 3, rez 25-24, and item 4, DRI 25-14823 are requesting a continuance to November 11 along with waiving the 180-day requirement.

Alan Clendenin

5:02:46PM We have a motion from Councilman Maniscalco. Second from Councilman Carlson. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

Samuel Thomas

5:02:52PM Item 10, rez 25-30 is requesting a continuance to October 16, also waiving the 180-day requirement.

Alan Clendenin

5:03:02PM We have a motion from Councilman Maniscalco. Second from Councilman Carlson. All in favor, aye? Ayes have it. The record if there's anybody in the audience that wants to speak to the request for continuance?

5:03:22PM Is there anybody in the audience for the items we've listed -- we've got requests this evening for items 2, 3, 4, 10, and 11 to be continued. Is there anybody that wishes to speak reference that continuation on those items? Let the record show Councilwoman Hurtak joined the meeting.

Samuel Thomas

5:03:50PM It's actually November 13, not November 11.

Alan Clendenin

5:03:54PM November 13. Can we take it as a scrivener's error? Unanimous consent.

Samuel Thomas

5:04:03PM Leave off on item 10? Did we do item 10? Item 11, rez-25-56, requesting continuance to November 13 along with waiving the 180 day requirement.

Alan Clendenin

5:04:23PM Motion from Maniscalco, second from Carlson. All those in favor aye. Opposed. Ayes have it. Item 12.

Samuel Thomas

5:04:32PM Rez 25-26 has been withdrawn. Please remove it from the agenda.

Alan Clendenin

5:04:38PM And then a misnotice on 13. We have a motion to remove items 12 and 13 from the agenda. Motion from Councilman Miranda. Second from Councilman Maniscalco. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Those are removed from the agenda. I would like to open all public meetings. Motion from Councilman Maniscalco. Second from Councilman Carlson. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Item 1, who from staff is going to present item 1? I guess I should make a note, if you look to our right, your left, you will see this is not marty Shelby. Marty Shelby is at a conference this evening. Camaria Pettis-Mackle has agreed to sit in his stead. Thank you for showing up. I won't discuss the fact about this being an upgrade. I'm told I'm not supposed to be funny. There you go. Item 1, please. We should have a powerpoint. I'm here for our second public hearing for our annual action plan going forward for the FY '26 and program year 2025. Talking about our sources of funding and then our uses of the funding. Our timeline, public input, 30 day public comment period and then approval by council. So as part of this, we do our consolidated plan, which is a five-year plan. 2022 to 2026. And we're required to do this every five years, we'll do another one next year. It describes our needs, resources, priorities, and the activities that will be undertaken with federal funding for that five-year period. Our annual action plan is required on an annual basis. We submit it to HUD every year during the five-year comp plan cycle. This is the fourth year. This will describe the specific projects that will be undertaken with our federal funding. So we're going to talk about our available funding, applications. We did selection committee, and then recommendations, draft document, citizen participation, and then the presentation to council, submission to HUD and then the implementation. So our priority needs have been identified as affordable housing, as you're aware, public facilities and infrastructure, public services, as well as economic development, homeless services, and then Planning and administration. So the annual action plan provides kind of a summary of what we're going to do with our money and who it's going to go to and how it will address the needs and priorities for the city. So we receive different funding sources, community development block grant, emergency solutions, grant housing opportunities for folks with aids or HIV and then the home program. These are our allocations for this year. We take administrative fees off the top, and that varies depending on the different grants. We are administering program delivery and outreach with 431,000, dedicating 3,685,000 to our housing projects this year, between CDBG, home and SHIP funding. We have housing counseling, public facilities and infrastructure. We also have public services. We have our HOPWA program which covers the four-county area, ESG, home chdo funds and then home tenant based rental assistance. For this year, we're going to talk real quick about our CDBG. CDBG can be used for a variety of activities targeted to low and moderate income individuals, households, and neighborhoods. 80% of the area median income and below. So the various uses, public improvements, public facilities, rehabilitation, infrastructure work. You can do acquisition, economic development, as well as our Planning and administration. These are our proposed public service programs for this year. Tampa lighthouse will be allocated 75,000. Our seniors in service also 75,000. Metropolitan ministries for 125,000. The CDC of Tampa for 75,000. And then the Hillsborough County School readiness. So we total 450,000 for our public services. We can only use 15% of our funds for public services from our total grants. So we are limited in that. Our public facilities are going to go to metropolitan ministries to replace a shelter roof, and then to cornerstone for child care center improvements. We only had those two applications, so we do have 850,000 that was unallocated this year. And we may issue a new request for applications to allocate that funding down the road. So our proposed housing counseling programs, these go to our local counseling agencies that help prepare folks for the dare program that we run. Each of them get a hundred thousand, and they will get that this year. They are all four repeat, so they were funded previously. They refer people to us for the down payment assistance. Our ESG funding provides homeless outreach, street outreach, does the local HMIs system, provides funding to shelters -- I'm so sorry. Help operate shelters. Provide homeless prevention or rapid rehousing to those on the verge or those who are homeless. And this funding goes to the tampa/hillsborough homeless initiative and then they will disburse it out through their RFP process. And these are the programs that they have proposed under contract. Family services, the spring -- Dawning Family Services, the spring and Catholic Charities. Our HOPWA program provides housing for folks with aids or HIV. Again, we operate this through the four-county area of Hillsborough, hernando, pasco, and pinellas. And eligible activities include rent, either tenant based or facility based, permanent supportive housing, and then you can also do short-term rent, mortgage, utility assistance and other supportive services. These are the various agencies that are being funded. All of these agencies have been funded in the past. And I won't go through each one unless you want me to. Our total HOPWA strategy is 5.129 million dollars for this year for the four-county area. And those are the other three or two. Finally, our home program provides funding to nonprofit and private developers to create affordable housing for low and moderate income families. Again, 80% area median income and below. Number of things you can do with it, acquisition, new construction, renovation. We can do down payment assistance, and we can do rental assistance as well. As part of that, we also have what is called our chdo. Our home proposed programs are going to be our tbra, rental assistance, epic, and they were given 600,000 last year for the program. So tenant based rental is a two-year program. So this will be the second year of their grant for 600,000. Then we have our chdo which develops single-family home ownership. And that is done as a set-aside of 15% minimum, and that goes to habitat for humanity of Hillsborough. They are going to construct two single-family homes in East Tampa. Our citizen participation, 30-day public comment period started June 23rd and it ends today. This allows the public to submit any comments in writing, in person or online. We also had an online survey that was open from June 12 to July 15. We held our second public hearing today. And it was advertised in our paper as well as on the city's website. Comments, again, are accepted in person, remotely via internet, voice mail, e-mail, or telephone. And our calendar, this is, as you see, we are at the July 24th date today. We will be back next week to have the plan approved, the annual action plan and submitted to HUD by August 15. Then October 1, the new year begins and all the agreements are in effect with the new agencies. So our public comment period closed today. Again, like I said, we'll be getting our funding agreements out once the plan is approved and submitted to HUD. HUD will approve it hopefully and we'll go into action October 1st. If you have questions or comments, you can come to our office, call us, e-mail us, anything that works for you. Can I answer any questions on this?

5:14:45PM Does council have any questions? Is there anybody in the public that wishes to speak to this item? Motion to close? Motion to close from Councilman Maniscalco. A second from Councilman Viera. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Thank you, sir. We are swiftly moving along. For the rest of the items on the agenda, they require folks that are going to testify or speak to the items to be sworn in. If you're Planning to speak this evening, please stand, raise your right hand and be sworn in. [Oath administered]

5:15:28PM Thank you very much. Item number 2.

Samuel Thomas

5:15:32PM Sam Thomas, Development Coordination. Agenda item 5 is rez, 25-37, a request to rezone 4911 east 10th avenue from residential multifamily 16 to residential multifamily 24. We'll start with the aerial map, as always. You can see the subject site outlined in red here on east 10th avenue and east 8th avenue. North of the subject site, you have RM 16 zoning. Also RM 16 zoning west of the subject site. Then east of the site, you have CG, which is occupied by a restaurant. South, you have industrial general zoning, you have a restaurant directly to the south and then a parcel used for open storage, directly to the west of the site, residential single-family homes, and that RM 16 zoning and a Place of Religious Assembly. Since this is euclidean rezoning, there are no site plans or elevations, so we'll move straight into the pictures. But I did want to mention that RM 16 zoning currently allows for nine units to be considered on the subject site, with the RM 24 zoning, you can considered up to 13 units on the subject site. This is looking south from the subject site on east 10th. That is the street to the south. This is looking north or 10th is the street to the north. Excuse me. This is looking north on 10th avenue. Now we're looking south on 8th. You can see the other drive-through restaurant south of the subject site. This is looking southwest from 8th avenue. Now we're looking south on 10th avenue at the subject site. Looking north on 8th at the subject site. And now we're looking west on 10th avenue. The subject site would be over here on the corner. This is the Place of Religious Assembly that I pointed out on the map. With that, our development review and compliance staff have reviewed the application and found the request to be consistent. I'll turn it over to Danny, unless there are any questions.

Alan Clendenin

5:17:40PM Any questions? Danny Collins with the Planning Commission staff. I was sworn in. This case is within the central Tampa Planning district. Subject site located in the coastal Planning area, specifically evacuation zone e. It is recognized under the community commercial 35 designation, which is a medium density mixed use plan category. That category is present along east 10th street, to the east of north 50th it transitions to light industrial. We have light industrial to the south and then further south we have heavy industrial. We have residential 20 just a block to the northwest of the site, as well as some public, semi-public land -- sorry. Community commercial 35 to the north. The Planning Commission reviewed the request and found it consistent with the number of policies in the comprehensive plan. The RM 24 zoning district can be considered in the cc-35 designation. Part of the city's Planning and housing strategies is to accommodate current and future population demands by using land uses. Land use resources more efficiently and encourages infill development on vacant and underutilized sites to ensure an adequate supply of housing to meet Tampa's population needs. The request supports these strategies by promoting higher density on a vacant and underutilized site planned for 35 dwelling units per acre. Development of the site will need to meet the RM 24 development standards in the land development code and should addressed the mixed use center and corridor policies. Overall, the Planning Commission staff found the request will not alter the character of the surrounding area and will provide additional housing choices in the central Tampa Planning district. Based on the considerations, the City of Tampa staff finds the request consistent with the Tampa Comprehensive Plan. That concludes my presentation.

5:19:38PM Thank you. Any questions? Is there an applicant? You do not have to say anything, but if you have a presentation -- she asked if she had to say something. Basically, my name is Annie -- I am the owner representative and the applicant for the rezoning. Basically, I'm just requesting approval to rezone the property from RM 16 to RM 24 to allow a slightly higher residential density. Currently it's allowed 8 residential units on this 0.56 acres. After rezoning, able to build up to 13 units with the increase of 5 additional units make the project more economical, supporting construction costs, infrastructure investment and the long-term maintenance while providing additional housing choices in the area. The purpose of increasing the unit, the proposed increasing the units allowed the project to be financially more fiscal because the small multifamily tenants with fewer than ten units often struggle to cover the rent and the costs. Also, the increase support the city goals of encouraging infill development. Furthermore, this increase will create more housing opportunities for residents, transition, accessible location. Also, as staff already stated the rezoning is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and also compatible with the community commercial 35 future land use. In summary, just respectfully request your approval for this rezoning to support a responsible development infill housing goals and the economy. Thank you so much for your consideration.

Guido Maniscalco

5:22:21PM How many units was it again? But after rezoning to the rm-24, it will be up to 13 units, if all the development standards meet.

5:22:38PM Up to 13 units after the rezoning. I'm glad to see development in this area. My grandfather bought his first house 60 years ago up the street from there for a hundred dollars down and $56 a month mortgage. I have the papers. The house is still there. I go through that area always, and it's a forgotten part of town. I'm glad to see this kind of development there. Thank you.

Alan Clendenin

5:23:04PM Councilman Miranda.

Charlie Miranda

5:23:06PM Nothing. I just listened to Mr. Maniscalco.

Alan Clendenin

5:23:10PM Very good. Thank you very much. Anybody in the public that wishes to speak to this item? Motion to close from Maniscalco. All in favor, aye? Opposed? Ayes have it. Councilman Carlson.

Bill Carlson

5:23:29PM Like to move number 5, rez-25-37, ordinance being presented for first reading consideration, ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 4911 east 10th avenue in the City of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from zoning district classification rm-16, residential, multifamily, to rm-24, residential, multifamily, providing an effective date.

Alan Clendenin

5:23:50PM Motion from Councilman Carlson. Second from Councilman Viera. Is it a roll call vote? Voice vote. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Ayes have it unanimous.

The clerk

5:24:08PM Motion carried unanimously. Second reading and adoption will be held on August 28, 2025, At 10 a.m. at old city hall, located at 315 East Kennedy Boulevard, third floor, Tampa, Florida, 33602.

Alan Clendenin

5:24:22PM Thank you. Moving on to item 6.

Samuel Thomas

5:24:25PM Sam Thomas Development Coordination. Agenda item number 6 is rez-25-43, request to rezone 4904 West Paul Avenue and folio number 131914-0000 from commercial intensive to Planned Development residential, single-family attached. Before I jump into our aerial map and surrounding uses, I do want to provide a lengthy background on this case. The applicant previously submitted a rezoning request for the subject site. File rez 23-66. This rezoning request was heard before Tampa City Council on January 18, 2024, and was denied. The request was to rezone the property from commercial intensive to Planned Development to allow for 10 residential single-family attached units. There were two waivers requested. The first was to section 27-284.3.3a, request to reduce the required use-to-use landscape buffer from 15 feet and six foot masonry wall to three feet on the east and four feet on the south with six foot PVC fence. The second waiver section 27-282.9, request to allow the front door orientation for units 6 through 10 to be facing an internal drive aisle. After this hearing, the applicant submitted a request to the Zoning Administrator to waive the time to resubmit the rezoning application. On November 20, 2024, the Zoning Administrator determined that the basis for denial was not properly addressed by the applicant and the plan proposed was not substantially different from what was presented to City Council. The basis for the City Council denial related to the following: the design not promoting or encouraging development that is appropriate, only five of the ten units provided front door orientation to the right-of-way. Requested use to use buffer, failure to comply with section 27-139 the need or desire for waivers, and the proposed density of the development is not appropriate for the site and does not comply with the land development code. Lastly, for the record, since the first hearing, it has been determined by Development Coordination staff that the zoning designation for both parcels located south of the subject site, which would be here, the map currently shows only one that is PD. This is all PD. It was recently corrected through a scrivener's error. That PD was approved under file number z 03-77 for residential townhome development. As such, use to use buffer waiver is not required. Applicant resubmitted a rezoning request before you, the rezoning requires one waiver relating to the front door orientation. With that, unless there are any questions, I'll start going into the site plan and the aerial and use map. You can see the subject site here outlined in red, Paul Avenue here, and Paul Avenue there. North of the subject site you have one parcel zoned CI, which has a commercial use on it, and then you have a PD here and PD here. The first PD is rez 24-1480. This is the Westshore marina district PD. So you have to the north and to the west single-family attached uses. The other PD here -- excuse me, this is actually PD, z 07-48 and this is PD 14-80. And this is approved for single-family attached and developed as such. To the east you have CI zoning, so you have open storage. And then you have a multifamily buildings here. To the south, PD that was previously discussed. It has not been developed. And then you have the marina district further to the west. To the south, a little bit of commercial and multifamily development along Westshore Boulevard and move into the single-family detached units and then you have Gandy Boulevard to the north. With that, we'll move on to the site plan provided by the applicant. The applicant is proposing two structures with a total of 10 single-family attached units. You have units 1 through 5 oriented to the along west North Paul Avenue. Then you have a sidewalk connection along Paul Avenue that will connect to a five-foot sidewalk along this portion of Paul Avenue. The front doors are located here for each unit. Then unit 6 through 10 oriented to the south property line and then the front doors are located here with a sidewalk connection also to the sidewalk that is proposed on this portion of West Paul Avenue. Vehicular access to the site is provided in two locations. To the northeast and then to the south west. Total of 23 parking spaces required and 23 parking spaces are provided. There are two-car garages for each unit and then three visitor parking spaces located here. Solid Waste is located to the southeast, and then the maximum building height is proposed to be 40 feet or three stories. So we will move on to the pictures or the elevations and the pictures. Here are the elevations provided by the applicant. Now we will go into pictures. So this is looking south on the northern section of paul. This is the lot directly to the east of the subject site. Now we're moving west, so this is where the subject site is now starting to begin over this way. Here is the view of the subject site here. This is where the units would be located that are facing north, facing Paul Avenue. Move a little farther to the west. You can see the stormwater right there. Now we're looking southwest. You can see those townhomes that are part of the Westshore marina district. Starting to round that corner on Paul Avenue where it starts to head south. Now we are looking north around the corner at the subject site. And now we are looking east -- or south of the subject site at where the PD where the scrivener error is located south of the subject site on Paul Avenue. So this is -- when you're rounding the second corner, where it starts taking the turn back around towards Westshore Boulevard. So this is the subject site that is south of it that is zoned all PD that was corrected through the scrivener's error. Now we're looking back north on the other side of the trees is where the subject site would be. Here is the site plan again. Development Coordination and compliance staff reviewed the application and find the request to be consistent. Should it be the pleasure of council to approve the application or to approve the waivers and the application, modifications to the site plan as shown on the revision sheet must be completed between first and second reading, unless there are any questions, I'll turn it over to Danny.

Alan Clendenin

5:31:41PM Council have any questions?

Danny Collins

5:31:48PM Danny Collins with your Planning Commission staff. I was sworn in. This case is in the South Tampa Planning district. More specifically in the Gandy Sun Bay South neighborhood. It is within the coastal high hazard area. It's within evacuation zone a. The site is designated UMU 60 and that designation surrounds the entire site. Overall, the Planning Commission staff found the request comparable and compatible with the surrounding area. As sam noted, there are townhomes directly to the north and west of the site. The site, the subject site, because it is within the UMU 60 designation is subject to be in the mixed use center and corridor design policies in the plan. However, certain site challenges, including existing stormwater ditch along West Paul Avenue made the construction of a sidewalk in this area impractical. Making it difficult to address the mixed use centers and corridor policies. As a result, the applicant is requesting that the council find the sidewalk requirement impractical and allow the payment in -- payment fee in lieu at the time of permitting, which is consistent with the plan. Due to these site constraints, the applicant is unable to fully meet the policies related to mixed use centers and corridors, including the orientation of all the units toward the neighborhood sidewalk or street. Applicant has made efforts to align with the intent of the policies by orienting units 1 through toward west 5 Paul Avenue and providing internal pathways to all unit entrances to provide a more pedestrian friendly environment. The proposal also supports several housing policies in the plan. It promotes development on vacant and underutilized land, helping to address both current and future population demands. Additionally, the project supports lu policy 1.1.8 which encourages a variety of housing types in proximity to transit within the South Tampa Planning district. Based on those considerations, the Planning Commission staff finds the request consistent with the City of Tampa Comprehensive Plan. That concludes my presentation.

Alan Clendenin

5:33:54PM Council have any questions? Do we have an applicant?

Steve Michelini

5:34:03PM Good evening, council. Thank you for your consideration. I was going to -- Steve Michelini, representing the petitioner. One of the units on the back side of the property is oriented toward a street. So there's four that we're requesting the waiver. Let me give these to you. So in order to mitigate the request for that waiver, we're providing this elevation to demonstrate how we're going to have an attractive attachment for those four units that can't face the right-of-way. So that is consistent with your other guidelines regarding the garden-style connection that makes it attractive and also it connects to the right-of-way along paul. This has a land use designation of UMU 60, which is 60 units to the acre. This property is approximately one half acre. So you're at by right density is 25 units and we're requesting the development of 10. The garages and I know that's been an issue regarding how you fit the cars in there. We're proposing a 20 by 22-foot wide garage, and we have on-site garbage collection, which means that the garbage containers do not have to go inside or adjacent to the structures. We're also proposing 2,475 square feet of greenspace which far exceeds the requirements established by the code. The plan was found consistent by both the city and the Planning Commission staff and the surrounding development is dominated by town houses and apartment buildings. So we're not introducing an element that's not consistent there. Let me show you this aerial. The subject site is here. We have apartments and town houses on this side and also on the other side of the street, which is there. A town house project is approved here, and another apartment building is here. If you're going down the street to the east, this is the view of the town house project that's diagonally across the street and approximately a hundred feet to the east. This is the subject site to the right. Another photograph of the subject site to the right, and you can see that that stormwater ditch is overgrown and has not been maintained. Part of the improvement that will occur here is that drainage system will be improved, restored, and we will be installing reinforced concrete pipe so we don't have the issues regarding plugging up of that drainage system. This is immediately to the west. This is to the west and to the north. These are basically the same pictures just showing you the subject site is here. This is west, and this is north. So we're not establishing any kind of new precedent here. And it is less than half of what would be allowed by density by right. With respect to the comprehensive plan, as I said, staff, city, and county staff have found it to be consistent. These are proposed units 1 through 5, as I said, oriented toward the right-of-way, and 6 through 9 are oriented to the back with that connection that I just showed you. Going through the criteria that are supposed to be meeting, ground floor entrances, applicant asked for the waiver, only waiver for those units on the back. We are promoting the efficient and sustainable use of the land, and we've been found to be consistent with that. And we're also adjusting the site plan to save the trees as identified by the natural resources department. Encourage flexible and land development, the development is proposed to require multifamily and the requirement is 350 square feet of greenspace per unit and we're exceeding that. Promote, encourage development of appropriate location, the site is surrounded by townhomes and residential single-family attached development to the north, south, to the east is the one commercial lot and to the west is the other multifamily project. That is the Westshore marina district just immediately to the west and to the north. Promote more desirable living conditions and the proposed site is allowed, euclidean zoning, we could not meet that because of the number of site conditions we're trying to deal with, including restoring and rebuilding that entire corner with the stormwater system. Promote the architectural features and elements which are attractive and consistent, and we've been found to be consistent with that. The design of the proposed is unique and therefore need the waiver, I demonstrated how we have mitigated that request regarding the access waiver that we need on the rear. And the waiver if allowed will not substantially interfere with others. It's adjacent immediately to the south by another town house project, and that town house developer is the only one who contacted us and indicated their support. The waiver is in harmony and serves the general intent and purpose of this chapter and otherwise the Tampa and development regulations. And it was not meant to single this property out when it's completely surrounded by other developments that are similar size and scale. Allowing the waiver will result in substantial justice. It would be an injustice not to allow this to move forward. This is not establishing a new precedent. We simply are repeating what already exists in the area. With respect to the Planning Commission report, it's in an urban mixed use area, as I said, urban mixed use 60, which allows for much higher density project. Mixed use category, as I said, we're allowed to have 25 units. We are consistent with the -- I'm not going to read all of these objectives but they are in your report. The city design objective consistent, City Planning strategies consistent. Mixed use centers and corridors, goals and objectives were consistent. Land development regulations were consistent. Overall residential development and redevelopment consistent. Neighborhood community plans consistent. Adequate sites to accommodate housing needs consistent. And at the conclusion of that, the Planning Commission staff found us to be consistent. Overall, I would respectfully request your approval on this, and I would be happy to answer any questions.

Alan Clendenin

5:42:04PM Does council have any questions? I do. I think one of the differences I've seen between this presentation and the previous application was you were not Planning on approving that storm drain in the previous application.

Steve Michelini

5:42:20PM That's correct. We also increased the greenspace. We provided additional buffers on the south side, and we modified the access so that it was consistent. I have the turning radius plans which we did not have before, which shows that you can make the turn for the Solid Waste Department to access this Solid Waste container here. And then you see these turning radiuses here show that it meets the entrance requirements on both either way, whichever way you come in.

Alan Clendenin

5:42:58PM Part of the proposal to improve that storm drain, because that was one of my concerns at the first hearing, the first application. Part of your proposal, because there is a significant elevation change.

Steve Michelini

5:43:10PM That's correct. We'll be correcting that so the front doors will actually have a sidewalk that's interior. It's not in the right-of-way. It's on our property, but we'll have to provide an easement for access for pedestrians. That stormwater area is difficult to deal with because of that grade change that you pointed out, but we'll be correcting that and it will all be handled at permitting with a specific stormwater permit. It's in the right-of-way. So we have to --

Alan Clendenin

5:43:41PM That was part of our discussion I think the first time around. I remember that. So this elevation is significantly more interesting and attractive than the elevation you had in the application.

Steve Michelini

5:43:51PM Yes, sir. That's the connections in the rear, along -- that's for the units 6 through 9.

Alan Clendenin

5:44:00PM The architectural detail included, is this the architectural detail or the PD that you're submitted --

Steve Michelini

5:44:06PM We're submitting that for the record. And I've provided that to the staff for their -- I mean, you may have some minor changes in the actual design, but that's the intent.

Alan Clendenin

5:44:19PM It's a very pretty picture.

Steve Michelini

5:44:21PM The intent is to keep it consistent with that.

Samuel Thomas

5:44:25PM Development Coordination. Just for the record, elevations as part of a PD rezoning are not binding unless we craft a note for the site plan saying they are.

Alan Clendenin

5:44:33PM The stormwater improvements, how are those handled?

Samuel Thomas

5:44:39PM So, originally there was no sidewalk proposed along this portion of West Paul Avenue. Since the site will be brought up for -- per building code, the site will have to be brought up. When the site is being brought up, they can take care of the stormwater stuff and can put in the sidewalk since the sidewalk is shown on the site plan, it will be required as part of the building plan as well.

Alan Clendenin

5:45:06PM So we're covered.

Samuel Thomas

5:45:07PM Yes, we're covered with the sidewalk.

Alan Clendenin

5:45:10PM Anything else?

Steve Michelini

5:45:13PM I concluded my presentation, unless you have more questions.

Alan Clendenin

5:45:16PM Anybody have questions? We had a lot of people come in since we first opened this. If you're Planning on testifying on any of the cases this evening or speak about any of the cases this evening, stand up, raise your right hand and be sworn in, please [oath administered]

5:45:43PM Anybody in the public that wishes to speak to item 5? Come on up. I'm sorry. Item 6. My name is lori rogers. I am speaking not only as a realtor of 25 years in South Tampa, but I'm also a homeowner in the area. I've been a resident there since 2003. I strongly encourage you to approve this rezoning of this application, allowing a commercial building in this property I believe would negatively affect the values. And it is consistent with the surrounding areas. Thank you.

5:46:30PM Thank you so much. Anybody else who wishes to speak on this item? Come on up. My name is pia hovgaard ellison. I used to be a resident in the same area. Not only am I also living in Tampa, been here for 23 years. I've seen the development down there. Since the project is consistent with what is already surrounding it, I strongly encourage you guys to approve it. Thank you.

5:47:03PM Thank you. Is there anybody else? My name is shamus garrett. Proud resident of the South of Gandy community. I haven't lived here 26 years, but I served in the military for 28, retiring here in Tampa because it is such an amazing city. I've known Mr. Hill and the applicant for a period of time now, I would suggest to you this is a great project. I wish I could have lived in that district when I was looking for a home. Everything turned out the way it needed to. But I think this is a great project and I hope you approve it.

5:47:37PM Thank you for your service. I'm assuming you're not going to want to rebuttal after all the glowing.

Steve Michelini

5:47:51PM I was going to say thank you for your consideration.

Samuel Thomas

5:47:55PM Sam Thomas Development Coordination, for clarification, would council like staff to craft some type of note to make the elevations binding for the south side?

Alan Clendenin

5:48:05PM Would that be amenable with you -- those are not architectural drawings.

5:48:12PM Consistent with what the proposal will be?

Steve Michelini

5:48:14PM They would be schematic. That is the phrase. It would be similar to that depending upon how the architect actually designs and draws them. But that's the intent, yes.

Alan Clendenin

5:48:26PM Cate, is that sufficient?

Cate Wells

5:48:30PM We'll add a note to the site plan.

Samuel Thomas

5:48:33PM Development Coordination, when the motion is made, can that be included along with the revision sheet?

Alan Clendenin

5:48:38PM We also have a revision sheet. Yes. Very good. Applicant, would you like to say anything else?

Steve Michelini

5:48:43PM No thank you. Respectfully request your approval.

Alan Clendenin

5:48:48PM Learn to quit when you're ahead. Motion to close from Councilman Maniscalco. Second from Councilwoman Hurtak. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Ayes have it. Councilman Viera, there is a revision sheet and note attached.

Luis Viera

5:49:01PM I hereby move ordinance with revision sheet and the ordinance, rez 25-43 presented for first reading consideration, rezoning property in the general vicinity of 4904 West Paul Avenue and folio number 131914-0000 in the studies of, Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from zoning district classification CI commercial intensive to PD Planned Development, residential, single-family, attached, providing an effective date.

Alan Clendenin

5:49:28PM Motion from Councilman Viera, second from Councilman Maniscalco. Councilwoman Hurtak.

Lynn Hurtak

5:49:31PM I just want to say I appreciate the thoughtfulness and the changes and the consideration. We're seeing that a lot more and that's a good thing. Just like to give credit where it's due.

Alan Clendenin

5:49:50PM All those in -- was that a motion with the revision sheet and the note?

Luis Viera

5:49:58PM Yes, it was. Thank you for that.

Alan Clendenin

5:50:00PM All those in favor aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

Steve Michelini

5:50:03PM Thank you, council.

Alan Clendenin

5:50:04PM Before we move on --

The clerk

5:50:08PM Motion carried unanimously. Second reading and adoption will be held on August 28, 2025 At 10 a.m. at old city hall located at 315 East Kennedy Boulevard, third floor, Tampa, Florida, 33602.

Alan Clendenin

5:50:23PM Thank you. Items 2, 3, 4, 10, 11, I need to state that they are continued to the respective dates and will be heard at 5:01 p.m. at 315 East Kennedy Boulevard, 33602.

The clerk

5:50:49PM Second reading and adoption will be held on August 28, 2025, At 10 a.m. located at old city hall, 315 East Kennedy Boulevard, third floor, Tampa, Florida, 33602.

Samuel Thomas

5:51:04PM Agenda item number 7 is rez-25-46, request to rezone 1901 West Platt Street, 211 and 213 South Fremont Avenue from commercial general and residential multifamily 16 to Planned Development for residential single-family attached. I'll start with our aerial map here. Here is the subject site outlined in red on fremont and Platt Street. The subject site is located in close proximity to the Hyde Park national historic district just on the other side of fremont. You have the Hyde Park national historic district and on the other side of the alley here. Directly south of the subject site, you have CG zoning along Platt Street with commercial strip center here. To the east you have a Planned Development, which is PD z01-119 which is approved for a restaurant. And then you also have a single-family detached home and then a semi-detached home. To the north, you have single-family semi-detached and detached homes, and then to the west, you also have RM 16 zoning and CG zoning, and that is developed with residential multifamily development. As you move to the east on platt, you have some PD approved for multifamily development, and then to the south, you have mix of PDs and residential multifamily zoning that has single-family detached homes, single-family attached, and semi-detached uses and then multifamily as well. Along of North Platt Street, you mainly have single-family detached and semi-detached versus those attached and multifamily, bigger multifamily uses. So we'll go into the site plan provided by the applicant now. So the applicant is proposing three structures with a total of 14 single-family attached units. Units 1 through 5 are located to the east with front doors oriented toward south Fremont Avenue. And then pedestrian connections are provided to south fremont sidewalk, the existing six foot sidewalk on south fremont. Units 6 through 9 are oriented to the west along the alley, and then pedestrian connection is provided here, that is three feet and then connects to a five-foot pedestrian connection here and then a crosswalk that connects those units out to the sidewalk on South Fremont Avenue. Then units 10 through 14 are located on the south portion of the subject site with front door units oriented towards west Platt Street and then they each have their pedestrian connection as well to an existing six-foot sidewalk. Vehicular access to the site is proposed via the alley here. And then via south Fremont Avenue. There are 32 parking spaces required and 32 are provided. Each of the units have their two-car garages, access via the drive aisle here. And then the drive aisle there as well. And then there are four guest parking spaces proposed here. The maximum building height is 45 feet or four stories. 350 square feet of greenspace per unit is required and 288 square feet of greenspace per unit is provided. Now we will move into the pictures. Or the elevations. I always want to skip the elevations. Here's your alley ones and then your Platt Street. This is fremont here, west platt. We are looking on West Platt Street at the intersection. This is the subject site right here. We're looking back east towards downtown. That is the PD with the approved restaurant on it. Looking further west down platt now, you can see the alley right here. This is the subject site. Looking to the south at platt, away from the subject site, small commercial strip. Move further west, where the intersection of platt and the alley are. This is the multifamily that I spoke about earlier that's in the CG zoning, and then moving north in the alley now, still looking southwest. Here are some additional multifamily that's within the RM 16. This is looking northwest in the alley. Site is over here. Now we're looking back east. This is the subject site. You can see the single-family detached homes here, and then semi detached. And then the PD with the restaurant. This is looking north from the subject site. This is the semi detached development here. Looking a little bit further east towards fremont, you can see the single-family detached homes across the street. Looking north along fremont, subject site is here. Looking a little bit farther north of fremont, north of the subject site to kind of give a feel of the single-family detached homes. And then now we're getting close to cleveland, further north, this is some of what the semi detached development looks like. Heading back south, semi detached units directly north of the subject site which is located right here. This is the single-family detached home. This is looking across the street to give you a better view of what the semi-detached closest to the subject site looks like. Now we're looking southwest, back towards Platt Street and at the subject site. Put the site plan back up. Development Coordination and compliance staff reviewed the application and find the request to be consistent. See the findings from natural resources, Planning Commission, and Development Coordination. The requested use of single-family attached is appropriate in location, but the scale and massing of the 45 feet or four-story structures are out of character with the development pattern on this block and the block adjacent to the alley. Notwithstanding staff's finding of inconsistency, should it be the pleasure of City Council to approve the waivers as identified in the report and the application, modifications to the site plan as shown on the revision sheet must be completed between first and second reading. I'm available if there's any questions. If not, I'll turn it over to Danny.

Alan Clendenin

5:57:31PM Any questions? Mr. Collins.

Danny Collins

5:57:38PM Danny Collins with your Planning Commission staff. I was sworn in. This case is in the central Tampa Planning district and within the South Howard neighborhood. The subject site is within evacuation zone c. It currently has two land use -- future land use designations. On the south side CMU 35 and north side it's residential 20. CMU 35 is predominantly found along Platt Street and the avenue over here. The applicant is utilizing lu policy 5.1.6 to proportionally weigh the density across the entire site through a Planned Development zoning district. If approved, the Planning Commission staff requests that the applicant add a note on the site plan between first and second readings indicating that they are utilizing lu policy 5.1.6. The subject site is located within a mixed use center and corridor and subject to meeting the relevant design standards. These areas are intended to support walkable pedestrian oriented development that enhances the public realm. However, the proposed site plan does not meet several key design principles I want outlined in the plan. Specifically, it does not align with policies that promote pedestrian oriented development and active street frontages. As proposed, units 6 through 9 face an alley, and there is no sidewalk connection along the northern property line to link the northern buildings. The only pedestrian connection between units 1 through 5 and 6 through 9 crosses over a drive aisle which is inconsistent with policies that call for safe, direct pedestrian access, promote multimodal connectivity and introduce pedestrian vehicular conflicts. While the comprehensive plan supports infill development and increased housing supply, it also places a strong emphasis on content sensitive design and compatibility with the surrounding development pattern. The current proposal does not reflect the established surrounding development pattern. It lacks orientation, street facing design and site integration within the mixed use centers and corridors. Based on the above considerations, Planning Commission staff finds the request inconsistent with the City of Tampa Comprehensive Plan. And that concludes my presentation. Available for any questions.

Alan Clendenin

5:59:55PM Thank you. Any questions for the Planning Commission? Do we have an applicant? Start with your name please. Avenue. I have been sworn. Thank you. This project is in the middle of a busy corridor. It's on Platt Street. This area of Platt Street, it is peppered with PDs and multifamily commercial. It's kind of what a city wants to be. A number of uses with lots of different housing stocks. We have some single-family. We have semi-detached, we have multifamily. We have some pretty good size apartment buildings to the east, both on the north and south side of platt. So in starting, this is our site plan, of course. The site plan, we went through the de, and we got very good comments from the de -- sorry, with the DRC. The most important thing for me, I guess, is debating what happens with the unit to the back here. I think everyone is very happy with the design. Everyone is very happy with our project. We had really just two issues. One is a tree here. And the Planning Commission really wanted us to investigate a sidewalk on the very north side, right next to a residential development. And natural resources, they really wanted to keep the tree. So we tried to find a happy medium. The happy medium was going to possibly be if you see midblock, we have a -- a sidewalk there. And we have a sidewalk that runs along the right-of-way and in the alley. So we have two connections to those town houses. One from platt and one from fremont. But more importantly, we have an extremely attractive project. So this is kind of what it looks like with the rest of the infill. All of our vehicular access is all from the interior. There is no front yard, you know, access. It is all pedestrian. All vehicular from the rear. This is -- this is what our project looks like on the corner of platt and fremont. It's -- it is predominantly three stories. Only the back one-third is a bonus room. And that is for a rooftop garden. So the rooftop garden, of course, is additional living space and outdoor space, as well as, we have a second-floor balcony. Tremendous amount of outdoor activity allowed for these units even though we are slightly below the green space requirement by only about 50 or so square feet per unit. This is the facing Platt Street. Again, we tried to bring it right down the scale of the architecture. As you can see, it -- it looks like a three-story building. Staff -- what the city was concerned about is scale and massing. I think we did a great job of breaking down the scale and massing of this project. This is looking down fremont from across the street, actually further back from the sidewalk. And you can see it looks like a three-story project on the street. The very, very middle of project is where we will be investigating any additional height. But, also, there are two other structures very close two blocks down the road that are five-story-tall buildings. So this is not inconsistent with what is going on in the Platt Street corridor. This is a little -- yeah, animation for you of kind of what the project looks like. How it can be a very good neighbor and how can, you know, it be a great addition to -- to what is, I think, going to be a very cool street. There are other projects that are coming on board. The pioneer building two blocks down that has some similar characteristics. Isn't quite that fancy. And, of course, this is the building two blocks down. It's a five-story apartment building, full city block. Clearly, it is taller than what we are. And then a little public storage building further down, which is four stories which isn't great, but, of course, it is next to the crosstown. So let me address the waivers. So really, again, when I talk about earlier with the waivers for the four units out of the 14 units that are off of the alley. We do provide pedestrian access in two different locations to there. And we think it is going to be a great asset. And then only on the alley the required vua is being reduced from eight to five. Everywhere else we have at least eight but mostly more on -- of course, on platt and fremont. And then, again, the other thing I addressed is that we are below the green space, but not a lot, and we are in an urban corridor and providing lots of outdoor activities for our residents. It is not like we are in a three-story block. We have rooftop gardens. We will have a second-floor balcony that is large and inviting and actually activates the street. Like a front porch but just on the second floor. I don't think someone wants to be on a porch on Platt Avenue anyways on the first floor. So then, I -- everybody else, transportation, Solid Waste, stormwater, Tampa, everybody else finds us consistent. I really think the two issues that staff, between the Planning Commission and City staff have are exactly how we treat these four units in the back. And then, of course, the height. I think the height is extremely appropriate. We have broken scale down. Height is only in the center of this block. Again, 99% of time you only see a three-story building and that is really an integral part of the design to get you to have a small space in the back that you can use while you are enjoying your rooftop garden. So I think, again, council, we have a great project. I think the -- the architecture is it going to be complementary. It is something that I think the neighborhood would be proud of. I did not get any -- anyone calling me when we noticed that wasn't supportive. I am not sure if there is anyone here tonight or not. But with that, that concludes my presentation and I will take questions.

06:08:11PM Any questions? Council member Maniscalco.

Guido Maniscalco

06:08:14PM Real quick. Thank you very much. So you are talking three stories and you gone into that. Two blocks away it is five stories, is that correct?

06:08:25PM You have the storage facility that is three stories.

06:08:29PM Four stories and that is commercial space which a couple of cars might go in and out. It is a storage facility. I really like this design. I know platt is a very busy street. Compliments to the architect. I think a very cool design. The brown paneling. Is that wood panels. Looks like wood.

06:08:52PM The design is great. The rooftop garden, I guess you were saying, is nice. The balconies, you know, not just a boring block. I mean, we see a lot of that. This is something where, you know, the effort was made to make it stand out. And I think it will activate, you know, the -- you know, the frontage. Now in the -- in the animation, those are trees that are going to be planted? In interest of time, we didn't have time to run a rendering animation. A modeling animation.

06:09:34PM But you plan to put some shading and all that. If you put every tree in front, you can't understand the building and don't know what is going on.

06:09:44PM Thank you very much.

Alan Clendenin

06:09:47PM Councilwoman Hurtak.

Lynn Hurtak

06:09:48PM I also like the design alley. Front entrances don't bother me because following the adu where we are trying to have people go in. That is not an issue. I don't think the height is an issue. Not a full four stories, that part does not bother me. I heard that you told council member ordinance those are rendering trees. No palm trees. Palm trees are terrible.

06:10:23PM You have to put in something that provides -- if you want to have that many people which -- by the way, I never seen that many people in a rendering before. Literally did a casting call.

Alan Clendenin

06:10:37PM I thought the same thing.

Lynn Hurtak

06:10:38PM You chose every type of person and I thought that was funny. I appreciate that. But none of them are shaded. So I want to point out that as we are putting vegetation, please make sure it is vegetation that can grow properly so a type I tree is not going to fit there but what appropriate type ii tree can we put are put there hoping that you can work with natural resources for that. My only other concern is the garage size. What size are the garages? Because one them was kind of tight. We are -- we are 20 foot clear side to side.

06:11:24PM Can you put it up on the wolf so we can see that?

06:11:29PM Yeah, I had questions about this. 20 foot clear and depth of 20 foot, 6.

06:11:43PM You are saying -- is it the roof of the unit? The actual garage is 20 feet.

06:11:55PM Okay. You know, I have to ask, because it is a thing now.

06:12:00PM Especially as we are really trying to rein in parking. And this particular area is -- is tricky for parking. Parking.

06:12:20PM Okay, thank you.

Alan Clendenin

06:12:21PM So on the site plan, what type trees are designated -- are they on the site plan?

06:12:30PM Shade trees can we get --

Erin Maher

06:12:42PM Erin Maher, Development Coordination. I believe there are wires on one of the sides of the street. But I have asked them to plant type I shade trees in where there are no wires. So it is on his sheet to change between first and second reading.

Alan Clendenin

06:12:58PM Perfect. Excellent. So if there are no other questions, I will finish with my comments. I concur with my fellow council persons of the project. In this neighborhood, next to one of the best restaurants to Tampa. If you can walk there, that is a bonus. The sidewalk will continue the full length of the project?

06:13:21PM Yeah, remember don't -- honestly, I don't have an issue for storage here. They say it doesn't have street access of building the height. Had I been on council, I would have street access to those opportunities make a walk to the neighborhood. But, yes, this is good. This is nice. I like the eclectic vision you have here for blending in to what now is kind of a hot mess. And -- because it is a fascinating street. There are a lot of things to do here.

06:13:55PM A lot going on. Kudos. Good job on IT. Staff.

Samuel Thomas

06:14:05PM Sam Thomas, land Development Coordination. Couple of elevations are not binding unless we craft a note to make them binding . The elevations show 45 feet just in the rear, the entire project can be built to 45 feet for four stories. That will also be a note we would have to craft to limit where the four stories can February that is the wish of council. And then another clarifying point that while the site plan here does show the garage sizes being this width, the table lists that the garage sizes will be 8 x 19.

Alan Clendenin

06:14:45PM So that needs to be fixed. Our garages are 20 x 20.6.

06:15:02PM Between first and second reading that will need to be changed.

06:15:10PM With that will be a stipulation. I don't have a problem with the height.

Lynn Hurtak

06:15:14PM Mr. Thomas, what would we need -- what exactly do you need for me to say.

Samuel Thomas

06:15:22PM Yes, ma'am, between first and second readings site data table to remove the 9 x 18.

Lynn Hurtak

06:15:29PM Site data table.

Samuel Thomas

06:15:32PM Note to make the elevations binding and a note regarding where the 45-foot max building height can be for the fourth story. And then I can work with cate, based on those motions to craft those notes.

Lynn Hurtak

06:15:46PM I missed the last one, elevations --

Samuel Thomas

06:15:50PM Where the building can be 45 feet. Making sure the 45 feet where the fourth story is set back like in the elevation.

Lynn Hurtak

06:15:58PM Where the building can be 45 foot. Got it.

Alan Clendenin

06:16:03PM Any further questions? Okay. Anybody in the public who wishes to speak to this item? We have a motion to close from council member Maniscalco. A second from Councilwoman Hurtak. Councilwoman Hurtak -- sorry, all those in favor say aye.

Lynn Hurtak

06:16:20PM 25-46, ordinance of first reading consideration. Ordinance rezoning properties in the vicinity of 1901 West Platt Street and 211 and 213 south freemont, avenue, in the City of Tampa, Florida, more particularly described in section 1 from zoning classification CG, commercial general, and rm-16, residential multifamily to PD, Planned Development, residential single-family detached. Providing an effective date including a revision sheet and changing the site data table from 19 x 18-foot garages, making the elevations binding. And stating where the building can be 35 feet tall.

Guido Maniscalco

06:17:05PM Second.

Alan Clendenin

06:17:09PM Motion by Councilwoman Hurtak. Seconded from council member Maniscalco. All in favor, say aye. Opposed? Ayes have it clerk motion carried unanimously, second reading and adoption August 28, 2025 at old city hall, 315 e. Kennedy, third floor, Tampa, Florida, 33602.

06:17:31PM Okay, here we go. Item number 8.

Samuel Thomas

06:17:36PM Samuel Thomas, land Development Coordination. Agenda item number 8 is rez-25-52. Request to rezone 2801 North Tampa Street from commercial neighborhood to have Planned Development for residential single-family attached. And look at our aerial review and surrounding uses. East Rome and North Tampa and East Gladys Street. To the north of the subject site, rm-16 with single-family detached uses. To the south is a Planned Development approved for a single-family semi-detached and attached uses. Rm-16 zoning as well with multifamily uses and CI zoning which will develop the single-family attached uses. Across the street from the subject site, rm-16. And a small commercial building right here. And some more single-family detached units there as well. Here is the site plan provided by the applicant. Let's see here. So you have units 1-4 that are oriented toward the north along west warren. Sidewalk connections and the spacing of west warren and an existing six-foot sidewalk there. To the south facing west, semi-detached units facing North Tampa Street with the pedestrian connections with the existing sidewalks on Tampa Street. Vehicular access provided from East Gladys Street and a two-car garage and 14 parking spaces and required. Two guest parking spaces to the north of the stormwater pond and the applicant is providing type I tree's long the eastern property line due to overhead lines surrounding the subject site and the right-of-way, so this is the only place that type I trees because of the overhead wires. Maximum height is 50 feet for three stories. These are the elevations for the units facing west -- east warren and the elevations for the units facing North Tampa Street. Jump into our pictures now. This is looking north on warren. Subject site. Detached units across the street and a multifamily structure to the east of it. Looking south on warren. West on warren. The single-family detached and the other multifamily units in the commercial building directly across the street from the subject site. This is looking northwest at the single-family homes across the street. Now we are looking on North Tampa Street. This is the subject site here on the corner. Now we are looking on South Tampa Street with the subject site here, multifamily and semi attached further down. Moving closer to it the existing Place of Religious Assembly is located on this site. Across the street of the multifamily and the commercial structure. This the existing Place of Religious Assembly on the subject site. This is looking on North Gladys Street at the subject site now moving east. The PD with semi attached and detached units approved and here is the subject site. Now we are looking back on West Gladys Street toward symphony detached -- actually this is multifamily this is multifamily as well. And looking east, and this is a view of some of the attached units on Florida Avenue. I will put the site plan back up. Development review and compliance staff review the application and finds the request to be consistent. Should it be the pleasure of council to approve the application, modifications of the site plan between first and second reading and a revision sheet must be completed between first and second reading unless there are any questions. I will turn it over to Danny. Sorry, I could not get that to focus.

Alan Clendenin

06:22:17PM Any questions? Hearing none? Planning Commission.

Danny Collins

06:22:21PM Danny Collins with the Planning Commission staff. This case in the central Tampa Planning district within the Tampa Heights urban village. Subject site within evacuation zone e and the residential-20 designation to the north, east, south and west of the site. Approximately, one block of north West Florida Avenue that he contains cc-35 designated parcels. The comprehensive plan encourages single-family attached housing to be designed with the front doors facing a public either a sidewalk or street. The proposed PD alliance with this policy directions units 1-of 4 East Warren Avenue and units 5 and facing 6 North Tampa Street. Furthermore, the comprehensive plan supports residential infill, particularly in area within proximity of commercial services. This area has a broad range of services and employment opportunities along N. Armenia Avenue. Introducing single detached home, the proposed development -- sorry, the single-family homes on the site, the proposed development contributes to a diverse housing mix and supports the compact form and vision of the plan. The plan's housing that correct to the overall housing supply particularly within the Tampa Heights urban village comprehensive plan is the greatest share of growth to the urban villages. The Planning Commission staff finds the request consistent with the City of Tampa Comprehensive Plan. And that concludes my presentation.

Alan Clendenin

06:24:02PM Thank you, Mr. Collins. Any questions? Hearing none. Applicant. This has a land use designation of residential-20, which anticipates higher densities beyond single-family. We looked at the aerials on the site plan and you can see this area is surrounded by multifamily and townhouse projects. This is an aerial showing the subject site -- these are duplex townhouse style. Now you have here the same thing, and this was approved for another town house project. A little closer view showing you the same orientation. This is the proposed subject site for redevelopment here. The intensity of this site is for religious assembly which is very intense. The project that we are proposing is less intensive. The subject site on the right side. Town houses across the street. This is located on a transit corridor, which is, according to your discussions and policies, where you are trying to encourage other types of development that transition between single-family, which is further to the east allowance of multifamily and town house projects along those corridors. The site is approximately 15,000 square feet and providing 2533 feet of green space with exceeds the requirements. The circulation is internal to the site. Which takes off of gladys and exits here. We also have visitor spaces are here. The garages are 22 feet x 22 feet wide so that we are trying to encourage as we come forward with different projects to make those garages wider to address the concerns that council has had. It is attractive infill project that is a great transition of the heavily traveled Tampa Street and the rest of the residential further to the east. As we said, we are located on an arterial. The type -- planting type I trees along the east side where we don't have is a conflict with the overall lines. With respect to the comprehensive plan and the city -- the city and the staff report, we are consistent and this is an appropriate transition. With respect to the criteria we have to meet for PDs, promote the standard use of land and a reduction in intensity and provides for needed housing. With respect for flexible land use development criteria, we exceed the green space which provides that buffer, particularly along the east side and enhance with the larger type trees. The development and character meets that criteria. This is a residential-20 land use classification which allow for this type of development. Promote valuable living conditions. We think we provided that. And also all of the accesses are fronting right-of-ways. And so there is no waiver that will be requested. The architectural features are consistent, and no waivers are being requested. With respect to the Planning Commission report, again, I will just read the highlights of the -- of the different criteria we have found consistent with. The goals and objectives with the City of Tampa Comprehensive Plan, goals and objectives of policies of the Tampa Comprehensive Plan of city design. The urban villages goals, objectives and policies, the land development regulations, overall goals, objectives and policies. Multifamily low and residential objectives. Adequate housing and infill. Infrastructure goals policies. Providing multimodal options. I forgot to mention we have a bus stop within a quarter of a mile of this site, which is going to encourage the use of transit. We are proposing six units on this site, which is consistent with the land use designation. I will be happy to answer any questions.

06:29:21PM Councilwoman Hurtak.

Lynn Hurtak

06:29:22PM Thank you. And again, this is a lovely development from site plan-wise, but I didn't hear any mention that Tampa Heights overlay. The -- the renderings were kind of bare. It is no this. To the Tampa Heights overlay and those elevations, again, they are represented in their schematic and they are not final. Urban design will have to sign off on all the design criteria and consistent with Tampa Heights.

06:30:03PM Because you have a chance -- the PD we approved just south of it has porches, like wrap-around. I remember that very distinctively because the beginning of some of the change of the architectural features. He wanted to make sure I mentioned that because I haven't heard the Tampa Heights overlay, but appreciate the one way in, the keeping off of Tampa and warren. So your on-street parking is minimized.

06:30:34PM Exactly. Just wanted to ask about that. Thank you very much.

06:30:45PM That's okay. It is newish.

Alan Clendenin

06:30:48PM Anyone else? Exactly what Councilwoman Hurtak said. At least 50% of these things for us. Especially for in the PDs. You know what I feel about PDs. Starting to warm it up when you present it as an entire package for the design elements of a PD because you are asking it as not a again. Important to sell us on those elements not so black and white. It's good to have -- to have those design elements included in those PDs and have it binding so we know -- maybe we are following give an inch here when we will give an inch over there. So I like seeing those things. It is a shame we don't have of this along the corridor how livable with nice sidewalk and underground utilities and sidewalks and these redevelopment area. That is not your business but I echo what Councilwoman Hurtak. Developer and recommend that they consider underground utilities.

06:31:58PM Anything else? Now you sound like me. Is anybody in the public who wishes to speak to this item? A motion to close from Councilwoman Hurtak. Seconded from council member Viera. All in favor, say aye. Opposed. The ayes have it. Council member Maniscalco.

Guido Maniscalco

06:32:24PM Thank you. I have -- an ordinance in the general vicinity of 2801 North Tampa Street more particularly described in zoning classification CN, commercial neighborhood to PD, Planned Development residential single-family attached of tan effective date and including a revision sheet.

Charlie Miranda

06:32:44PM Second.

Alan Clendenin

06:32:45PM Motion from council member Maniscalco. Seconded from council member Miranda. Councilwoman Hurtak.

Lynn Hurtak

06:32:50PM Just because people have asked, this is file number rez 25-52.

Alan Clendenin

06:32:57PM What she said. Sam, do you have something to add? Oh, he is ready. So we have a motion from council member Maniscalco. Second from council member Miranda. All in favor, say aye. Opposed. The ayes have it.

Clerk

06:33:10PM Motion carried unanimously. Second reading and adoption will be held on August 28, 2025 At 10 a.m. located at old city hall, 315 e. Kennedy, third Florida, Tampa, Florida, 33062.

Alan Clendenin

06:33:29PM Last item. Sam Thomas.

Samuel Thomas

06:33:33PM Samuel Thomas, land Development Coordination. Just to tell Councilwoman Hurtak, the Tampa Heights overlay doesn't have any architectural features in it.

Lynn Hurtak

06:33:44PM Really?

Samuel Thomas

06:33:46PM Yes, ma'am.

Lynn Hurtak

06:33:46PM I am surprised.

Samuel Thomas

06:33:49PM I am surprised every day. Agenda item number 9 rez-25-55, 12318 west north b. Street to rm-16 to PD single-family semi detached. Go to our aerial map. To the west is a Planned Development that is approved for single-family semi-detached. To the north rm-16 with detached units with single-family. Same for the south side of the block. As you move south, you have this plan developed with office and a plan z-0480 which is single-family and semi-detached uses. Then as you move further down, you get to Kennedy Boulevard. Go into the site plan. Here it is. The site plan provided by the applicant. The applicant is proposing two semi detached units. This does require a bonus agreement that the applicant has entered into. The front doors are oriented toward north b. Street with pedestrian connections to the existing sidewalk that is six feet and pedestrian access provided from a rear alley. Two parking spaces provided for each unit. Maximum building height is 35 feet or three stories. And the pictures that you see after this quite a few pines in the front yard that the applicant is proposing to preserve quite a number of them. Here are the elevations provided by the applicant. There are the pines that some of them that will be preserved. The PD to the west of it currently under construction. Looking south at the subject site. Now we are looking east on west north b. Looking west on north b. You can see those units under construction. Looking north from the subject site across the street single-family detached. This is from the alley looking west. Of the subject site here. Looking south from the alley. That is the PD that was just to the south of it with a semi detached and attached uses and the office building here. Looking east down the alley with the subject site over here. And then this is looking north from the alley back toward north b. Street interior to the site. Development Coordination staff review and find the request consistent. Should it be the pleasure of council to approve the application, modifications to the site plan of the revision sheet must be completed between first and second reading. I am available if you have any questions.

Alan Clendenin

06:37:00PM Any questions as soon as all right. Planning Commission.

Danny Collins

06:37:07PM Danny Collins with your Planning Commission staff. The last case is in the central Tampa Planning it is strict with a North Tampa urban village. Within the coastal Planning area. Evacuation zone e. Within the r-20 destination to the north, east and west and cmu-35 to the south. Cmu-35 is present on Howard Avenue and a couple of blocks of North Kennedy Boulevard. Planning Commission staff found that the rezoning was both comparable and compatible with the surrounding a area. PD will provide a transition in intensity between the commercial uses within south and west along N. Armenia Avenue and the single-family developments of the north and east of the site. The PD incorporates design elements that are oriented toward north b street. The request supports the city's compact urban strategy. This encourages housing that encourages walking and transit use particularly near employment centers, community amenities. Well, such situated just to the of North Kennedy Boulevard and to the east of N. Armenia Avenue both of which are designated transit corridors. And addresses the plan's housing categories by contributing to the city's housing supply particularly in the West Tampa urban village. Comprehensive plan has the greatest share of growth. Based on those considerations, the Planning Commission staff finds the request consistent with the City of Tampa Comprehensive Plan and that concludes my presentation.

Alan Clendenin

06:39:00PM Any questions for the Planning Commission? Hearing none. Applicant. Steve Michelini representing the petitioner. This is for essentially what used to be called a duplex. It is an infill project. And I am going to show you an aerial. This is the subject site. You can see we have town houses and apartments all the way around this. This is -- thes are a little bit closer view closer view -- to me adjacent to a multifamily project. When the staff is looking at this and they find it consistent, both the City staff and the Planning Commission staff, we put in a project that was quint that and as the staff pointed out there are a number of pine trees. And they will be selectively called out depending on which one is nicer and deserved being saved and which ones are not. The garages are 19 and a half feet wide by 22 feet deep. And with that issue out of the way. And tell you this 9 x 18. Shows on the school it plan those are the dimensions. Of two residential units. R-20 land use designation, the criteria is to promote the efficient and sustainable use of land. Site is to savior the existing character of the pine trees located near the northern boundary and the setback of 17 feet allow for tree protection. We are going to protect as many as we can and take out the ones that are not healthy or at least not as healthy as the others. Promote and encourage development where appropriate in location to character and residential multifamily zoning is located to the north and east and commercial district is located to the south. Again, this is in close proximity to Kennedy Boulevard which also has transit access, which is one of the issues that the council has been encouraging. The desirable living conditions, symphony detached for development of two units that is not allowed under the current rm-16 zoning which is why we need the bonus provision and requesting that through the PD. Promote the architectural standards. We will have to meet -- I will get to that West Tampa overlay guidelines. We have to meet the design guidelines for that. There won't be any exceptions and you couldn't wave that anyway even if we requested it. The subject is within the residential-20 land use category and the surround area contain as mix of commercial residential uses. Closest park is vila brothers, which is a quarter of a mile away. It is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the city's design line and the comprehensive plan. City Planning strategies, public realm strategies, urban realm strategies, overall residential development and redevelopment strategies. Low medium density low area strategy props vied multimodal options and adequate sites for accommodating housing needs and infrastructure, goals and policies and insurance structures and shelters. And staff found it consistent. They also noted in there was some design criteria we could not achieve without going for a PD. I know you will like the euclidians when we can do that, however, some criteria we must go through a PD to achieve. I respectfully request your approval and will be happy to answer any questions.

06:43:04PM Questions? Councilwoman Hurtak.

Lynn Hurtak

06:43:08PM Not a question, just a statement as we are looking at basically with infill and I am appreciative the way we are looking at some infill in some positive ways. Of South Tampa. All three of the projects this evening are outside of the South Tampa, quote, unquote, district. And you are seeing some movement there and they are trying to make them a little more attractive. Listening to the comments that the council is making over the weeks and months and trying to incorporate those up front so we don't have those issues and you don't have to ask the question about, you know, what are you doing being this and that and the garage widths, increasing of landscaping, preservation of trees and going to type 1 trees knowing that we are ren and her crew, she home run she doesn't badger me but reminds me to have try I tree.

Alan Clendenin

06:44:08PM Ramp up on that badger.

Lynn Hurtak

06:44:11PM A little more. And try to resolve them so we are not having to have that dialogue with you, you know, at podium. You know we thought about it we listened to you and incorporated it in the plans.

06:44:29PM I with a tonight say we notice and appreciate it.

Alan Clendenin

06:44:34PM I can't go without garage sizes.

06:44:40PM Garage sizes. You see we have these great projects. I get at the a small parcel and surrounded by multifamily. I get all of that. The other size of this, that street parking is terrible. Not a lot of stuff. As someone who lives in a garage of a place at this time. I can tell you it is a one-car garage and a car sitting in the driveway. That is just the way it is. So you got -- presenting this thing and really push these plans and to get garages, especially because -- it is not because I just want everybody to have a garage. It is because we don't want parking over bicycle los angeles. We don't parking over sidewalks. We are trying to clean that site up, and by doing that getting people in a properly sized garage. Also -- you know, we don't have trash cans out. And it is an enforcement issue. So I am -- I don't hear concerns from council about that. Soil leave it at that. I am very appreciative of all the other projects that you deal with City Council's wishes. Just respect your approval. I think that is all of the project.

06:45:56PM Very good. Anybody in the public who wishes to speak to this item? Hearing none -- and I hear no rebuttal. Motion to close by -- sorry, you are on the line. -- sorry about that. Todd, we can't see you. So hold on, you don't look like lauren. You haven't been sworn in yet? Raise your hand [swearing in]

Clerk

06:46:42PM Great, thank you. Mis>>Alan Clendenin: start with your name. And I want to express my opposition to rezoning rez-25-55. Go over immediate neighborhood impact and talking of the loss of privacy. The proposed rezoning will introduce a structure encroaches on adjacent properties such as my own that erodes a sense of privacy that he is throughout our neighborhood. The only adjacent three-story -- I believe they are apartments -- in the back side of the property that already kind of promote that reduced privacy. And another example was shown earlier as residential home on the corner of Armenia and north b. Street. Basically will be the treetops and if I am not mistaken, you would also have a rooftop terrace which is a rooftop terraces that you will see over the tree tops and basically looking down on your neighbors. Next point of discussion will be the disruption of -- the constructions are often oversized and out-of-scale buildings. Traditional bungalow style homes that take away from the architectural integrity in the visual of the area. Moving into the third topic is reduction of natural lights. These taller structures are on we will definitely smaller lots. They block quite a bit of sunlight from neighboring homes that can lead to issues and other things of that nature. And I think you mentioned that that there is insufficient parking and the street overcrowdedness. Our streets are strained as it is and this basically exacerbates it. I have seen it multiple times where people's cars have gotten hit -- basically hit with accidents. We are dealing with that issue. Which can also promote -- issue for emergency vehicles and designs. Traffic and safety concerns -- our block functions as cut-thru between two one-way streets and Howard and Armenia. Multiple vehicles. Like I mentioned earlier. It is just a common area where a lot of high-speed people and speeds are adding more vehicles and more homes there. And more purpose in that case. Just the last thing on the kind of local impact. I think that adding additional multifamily home in our area can hurt schools. In Hillsborough, a school rezoning in response to the building increase and housing development. I think a growing concern that continuing this trend can promote an overburden on our school systems. And unnecessary use of taxpayer dollars to continue to refund rezoning efforts. And current and future students.

Alan Clendenin

06:50:26PM Thank you. Your time is expired now. Thank you. Mr. Shepherd, you do not have camera online. Are you able to get online? I am working with Kevin with support, but I cannot get my camera to work. It is showing on and everything, but --

06:50:51PM Unfortunately, I don't believe we can take your comment without -- it would have to be online and visible for us to take your testimony. I will give you another 30 seconds to resolve it. Okay. I appreciate that.

05:51:10PM He has been waiting all this time. I am not seeing any results from that. I am very sorry, Mr. Shepherd, but thank you for managing that attempt. Would you like a rebuttal, please? The original presentation. The access for this is off the alley. So the garages are off of the alley here and are providing the 18 feet from the back of the building and the face of the alleyway. So according to some of the new discussions you had, the 18 feet is sufficient for the additional cars and visitors. And again coming off the back and preserving these pine trees in the front. One other thing I was going to point out is that the guarantee of privacy is not part of the city code. It is no at technical standard. And light and air is not one either. But the making and meeting the parking code is. And we -- from them pointing that out, we do meet the parking requirement and we provided additional space in the driveway for visitor parking. So I appreciate your consideration and we respectfully request your approval.

06:52:48PM Thank you for bringing it to our attention. The length of the project. I thought it was shorter. Council have any other questions? A motion to close from council member Maniscalco. Seconded from council member Viera. All in favor, say aye. Ayes have it. Council member Miranda. And the revision sheet.

Charlie Miranda

06:53:09PM Item number 9, rez-25-55 presented for first reading and reconsideration. Rezoning of property 2318 north b. Street from the City of Tampa, Florida, of zoning district rm-16, residential multi family to PD, single-family detached providing an effective date Maniscalco second.

Alan Clendenin

06:53:34PM Motion from council member Miranda. And second by council member Maniscalco. All in favor, say aye. Opposed. Ayes have it. Have a lovely evening.

Clerk

06:53:46PM Motion carried unanimously. Second reading and adoption will be on August 28, 2025 At 10 a.m., located at old city hall, 315 e. Kennedy, third Florida, Tampa, Florida, 33602.

Alan Clendenin

06:54:02PM Is it raining outside? That is -- that our last public hearing. We move on to new business. Any new business, Mr. Carlson?

Bill Carlson

06:54:11PM No thank you. But it looks like it will rain for an hour.

Alan Clendenin

06:54:15PM Council member Viera.

Luis Viera

06:54:17PM Time to take up all my back-up commendations. [Laughter] I am joking. So actually, I do have a couple of motions. One is I have to move the fire fighter of the quarter commendation from August 7 to September 4, please.

Alan Clendenin

06:54:33PM Motion from council member Viera. Seconded from council member Miranda. All in favor, say aye. Opposed. The ayes have it.

Luis Viera

06:54:41PM A couple of written reports because of the transition in mobility and parks. I motion for a written status report on the status of the k-bar ranch park community outreach. There is this big -- whatever it is -- 60-acre park in k-bar ranch that they are building and supposed to do community outreach and wanted to know of the status. Written report August 28.

Alan Clendenin

06:55:05PM A motion from council member Viera. A second from council member Maniscalco. All in favor, say aye. Opposed? Ayes have it.

Luis Viera

06:55:12PM Thank you, council. With mobility, 1678 miles of it will be repaved. And I will move for a status update on that. Written September 4 of 2025.

Alan Clendenin

06:55:23PM A motion from council member Viera. Seconded from council member Miranda. All in favor, say aye. Opposed. Thank you.

Luis Viera

06:55:31PM I don't know if you know what an owner-representative is. I assume you do. Advocate on the job to get things done. Doesn't do the day to day work that a project manager does. I spoke with some individuals -- some owner, groups and some of the folks over at Tampa Fire Rescue -- strike that at Tampa fire fighters Local 754 on this. And we have a really good chance in the City of Tampa to, number one, finish station 24 by the year 2006 I think -- no, I am joking. To finish it by the time we leave as well as make some real movement on fleet maintenance. We have property for that and we can move that forward. And I would hate to see the delay we have seen in fleet maintenance. So, therefore, I do more for written staff report of that includes our Tampa Fire Rescue to assist in the construction efficiency of station 24, as well as more on point fleet maintenance. I am sorry September 18 written report.

Bill Carlson

06:56:35PM Do you mean an external representative or internal representative.

Luis Viera

06:56:45PM Externally, I am thinking, but we will find out more.

Alan Clendenin

06:56:50PM Motion from council member Viera and second. Motion carries.

Luis Viera

06:57:00PM You remember the personnel chief for Tampa Fire Rescue. The greatest guy. When left the City of Tampa. We never honored him and 45 years since jase covan began with Tampa Fire Rescue. It is personal to me. I met jase in 2011, and got me connected with the fire union long ago. And did some good undercover political work for me in my first campaign. I can say that. So I motion to have a commendation -- I have spoken with Tampa fire fighters about this. I will get with Chief Tripp -- I am sure she will want to be here to give jays a commendation on 45 years.

Guido Maniscalco

06:57:42PM Second.

Alan Clendenin

06:57:44PM All in favor, say aye. Opposed. Ayes have it.

Luis Viera

06:57:47PM That's it. I filled up some time. Thank you.

Alan Clendenin

06:57:51PM Councilwoman Hurtak.

Lynn Hurtak

06:57:53PM Motion for the mayor's Hispanic committee to give a five-minute regarding their his spanish heritage month. And the City Council under commendations and presentations.

Alan Clendenin

06:58:07PM Motion from Councilwoman Hurtak. Seconded from council member Miranda. All in favor, say aye. Opposed.

Guido Maniscalco

06:58:12PM Nothing to report.

Charlie Miranda

06:58:14PM Motion to receive and file.

Alan Clendenin

06:58:17PM Motion and file. All in favor say aye. We are adjourned. Disclaimer: this file represents an unedited version of realtime captioning which should neither be relied upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript. Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the proceedings may need to hire a court reporter. ▶ meeting video community Redevelopment agency - 07/24/25published: July 25, 2025▶ watch on youtube the information contained in these pages represents an unedited version of realtime captioning which should neither be relied upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript. Persons requiring a verbatim transcript may need to hire a court reporter. © - City of Tampa (813) 274-8211