On the agenda

1. 0.aRoll Call▶ 0:00
2. 0.b

   Pledge of Allegiance

   Pledge of Allegiance recited.

   ▶ Jump to 0:31 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:33] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for [00:00:47] which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

3. 0.cApproval of Minutes: May 19, 2016▶ 0:51
4. 1

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “Commercial Planned Development subcategory” — transcript expanded below

   Rezoning Application REZ2016-02/Preliminary Site Plan Application PSP2016-02 - North Bay Hospital – 6600 Madison Street

   discussed

   The LDRB held a public hearing on a rezoning application (REZ2016-02) and preliminary site plan (PSP2016-02) for North Bay Hospital at 6600 Madison Street, to rezone a 15.41-acre property including a R3 parcel at 6715 Jackson Street into PDD/Commercial planned development for hospital expansion including emergency department remodeling, a new main entrance, and additional employee parking. Representatives from AFIRE of Pasco County raised concerns about a proposed parking lot driveway on Ohio Avenue across from their facility's driveways, citing traffic and safety issues with their passenger vans. The applicant and staff defended the two-access-point design as required for fire access and traffic distribution.

   Ord. Ordinance #2016-2085

   • direction:Staff offered to meet with AFIRE to coordinate on their expansion plans and ensure safe parking and traffic operations. (none)

   📍6121 Ohio Avenue📍6131 Ohio Avenue📍6600 Madison Street📍6715 Jackson Street🏢AFIRE of Pasco County🏢BayCare🏢Department of Engineering🏢North Bay Hospital👤Debra Bartley👤Denise Haystrand👤Gus👤Jesse Blackstock👤Lisa Virgilio#Commercial Planned Development subcategory#PDD (Planned Development District)#PSP2016-02#R3 residential district#REZ2016-02#unity of title condition

   ▶ Jump to 1:45 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:01:45] Our first case is a rezoning application, REZ 2016-02, preliminary site plan application. [00:01:55] PSP 216-02, North Bay Hospital, 66 Madison Avenue. [00:02:02] What do we have, Gus or? [00:02:05] You have Gus today. [00:02:06] Good afternoon. [00:02:08] The request before you tonight, or I'm sorry, this afternoon, is a request, a rezoning application. [00:02:16] Excuse me a minute. [00:02:18] Anyone has any cell phones? [00:02:20] Please silence them. [00:02:22] OK. [00:02:23] Thank you. [00:02:25] The applicant is seeking approval for rezoning from a PDD, planned development district, [00:02:31] with the commercial planned development district subcategory, and an R3 residential district [00:02:37] to a PDD, planned development district, commercial planned development subcategory, and a site [00:02:44] plan. [00:02:45] You can see the location of the property within the city. [00:02:53] Aerial that shows that it's 15.41 acres located on the northeast corner of Indiana Avenue [00:03:00] and Madison Street. [00:03:06] Here it shows the existing zoning. [00:03:08] The majority of the property is already zoned PDD with the commercial planned development [00:03:13] subcategory. [00:03:14] I put the 6715 Jackson Street is R3, and that's the parcel that they're trying to pull into [00:03:24] their existing zoning. [00:03:30] Here is a site plan that I've tried to doctor up here showing the property and the structure [00:03:39] itself. [00:03:41] That little oval area is the emergency room, the emergency department area that they're [00:03:47] going to be doing some remodeling on. [00:03:49] And then you also see kind of in that north...where's my pointer? [00:04:00] It's the top button. [00:04:01] Okay. [00:04:02] Oops. [00:04:03] Let's go back real quick. [00:04:04] I'm sorry about that. [00:04:05] Am I going back? [00:04:06] Back, back, back, back, back, back. [00:04:07] No, I'm not going back, back. [00:04:15] So in this area here you've got the new front entrance that they're going to be also proposing. [00:04:22] Here's a blow-up of the floor plan of the emergency department. [00:04:28] So I went out and I took some photos of the existing structure. [00:04:32] So you've got the emergency room entrance from another angle, and then you've got the [00:04:38] medical arts building. [00:04:41] So here's a rendering of what they're thinking about for the new main entrance of the hospital. [00:04:47] And then a rendering of the emergency room entrance. [00:04:54] And then here you have the development standards. [00:04:57] These are included in the ordinance, and they regulate a number of standards like the setbacks, [00:05:07] parking, and landscaping. [00:05:08] So that's all part of the ordinance that would be adopted. [00:05:13] There was one condition that was adopted by the LDRB and staff is that unity of title [00:05:20] be completed that would then pull that Jackson Street property into the PID or into the existing [00:05:26] properties that the hospital owns. [00:05:31] And then as a rezoning request does meet the concurrency requirements and is also consistent [00:05:36] with the comprehensive plan. [00:05:39] This is a public hearing, and the applicants are taking up the front row. [00:05:44] They are present. [00:05:50] Is that it, Gus? [00:05:50] Yes, it is. [00:05:51] Anybody have any questions of staff? [00:05:55] Yep. [00:05:56] Yep. [00:05:57] All right. [00:05:58] Who's someone here to speak in favor of this project? [00:06:01] Anyone here to speak in opposition to the project? [00:06:05] Would you please come forward and state your name and address, please, for the record? [00:06:12] One at a time, I guess. [00:06:15] Thanks. [00:06:20] I'm Lisa Virgilio with a fire of Pasco County, which is at 6121 and 6131 Ohio Avenue. [00:06:29] 6131 Ohio Avenue. [00:06:32] Can you spell her name for me? [00:06:34] Last name is Vias and Victor. [00:06:36] I-R-G-I-L-I-O. [00:06:44] A fire? [00:06:45] A fire of Pasco County. [00:06:46] Yes, sir. [00:06:46] I'm the transportation coordinator. [00:06:49] I am also on the board of directors. [00:06:52] We are not per se opposed to this. [00:06:55] What we are opposed to is, I've got a little speech here. [00:06:59] We've been in existence since 1987. [00:07:02] Most of that time has been at 6121 and 6131 Ohio Avenue. [00:07:08] We are a non-profit adult day training facility for the intellectually and [00:07:12] developmentally disabled. [00:07:14] We currently have 60 students and we're at capacity in this current location. [00:07:20] We're good neighbors and we're good community partners. [00:07:23] We are not opposed to North Bay Hospital expanding either its building or [00:07:27] its parking facilities. [00:07:29] We're excited that they have the opportunity to make the hospital bigger and [00:07:33] better. [00:07:34] They've been a good neighbor to us. [00:07:36] We want them and their employees to grow and prosper, but [00:07:39] we also want to grow and prosper. [00:07:41] We are, however, concerned with the positioning of access to the new parking [00:07:45] lot going in across the street from us on Ohio Avenue. [00:07:49] After reviewing the plans at the development department within City Hall, [00:07:53] we discovered that one of the accesses to the new parking area is directly across [00:07:58] from our driveways. [00:07:59] We have six, 12, and 15 passenger vans, and we are soon expanding our fleet to seven. [00:08:08] We also have private transportation companies that come in that also include [00:08:14] 15 passenger vans, and soon we're going to have a cutaway van for wheelchair access. [00:08:21] Our vans leave our facility between 6.30 and 7.30 in the morning and return roughly [00:08:27] at 8.30. [00:08:29] Those same vans leave again at 2.30 and return between 3.30 and 4.30. [00:08:35] Hospital shift changes typically occur on eight or 12-hour intervals. [00:08:40] This would mean additional traffic on Ohio Avenue between 6.30 and 8.30 a.m. [00:08:44] and again between 2.30 and 4.30 p.m. [00:08:49] Because Ohio Avenue is so narrow, we have to have a staff member directing our vans [00:08:55] in and out of our driveways. [00:08:57] Our 15 passenger vans are approximately 20 feet long and 6.5 feet wide. [00:09:03] Ohio Avenue is only 20 feet wide. [00:09:06] This leaves zero room for error on either our part or the part of any of the employees [00:09:12] coming out of that parking lot. [00:09:16] Our vehicles are backed into and off of our driveways. [00:09:21] Obviously, a vision issue, people are impatient to get to work or from work. [00:09:27] That's going to create some issues traffic-wise. [00:09:34] We also take our vans one time a week out into the community, take our students, our [00:09:38] consumers out for learning events. [00:09:41] The times vary, but those vans are in and out all day long. [00:09:46] The current plan for the hospital parking lot has one entrance and or exit on Forest [00:09:51] Avenue and one on Ohio Avenue. [00:09:54] We propose that Forest Avenue is a better option for incoming and outgoing traffic. [00:09:59] Forest Avenue and its residents are more accustomed to the traffic, whereas Ohio Avenue residents [00:10:04] are not. [00:10:05] Forest Avenue is wider than Ohio Avenue. [00:10:09] Also, I don't know if anyone has been down there during rain. [00:10:14] It is not uncommon after a good, healthy rain for the person directing vans in and [00:10:18] out of our parking lot to be standing ankle-deep in water to make sure that our students get [00:10:23] in and out safely. [00:10:25] That's going to also affect the employees that are coming in and out of that parking [00:10:30] lot, as well as our vans. [00:10:33] Hi, I'm Denise Haystrand, H-A-Y-S-T-R-A-N-D, and I'm the administrator of the fire of Pasco [00:10:53] County, and a board member, as well. [00:11:02] Thank you. [00:11:03] Does anyone have any questions? [00:11:04] I think if we could see if we have an overhead that you can show of the intersections you're [00:11:16] talking about so we can look at it, I'd help you tell us what we're talking about. [00:11:29] Well, there's the bus one that we've got here. [00:11:37] Right there is their property. [00:11:38] And I believe where that red line is, or just looking at this to the left or to the west, [00:11:39] is where they have dug out for the driveway, which ours is circular directly across the [00:11:40] road. [00:11:41] If I could just comment on it just briefly, and I'm going to bet the engineer representing [00:12:08] the hospital would probably want to jump in, too. [00:12:11] But the way the hospital has designed their employee-only parking is, again, at the direction [00:12:18] of the city, we thought it was necessary for them to have two access points. [00:12:23] There's 100 parking spaces that probably would be better served by two access points and [00:12:27] not just a singular one. [00:12:28] But keep in mind that regardless of the time of day that the employees will be traveling [00:12:33] to and from, and if they choose to use the Ohio Avenue portion, they will be traveling [00:12:37] in a forward-moving position. [00:12:40] They're going to have to go in and out in a forward-moving position. [00:12:42] I'm sure they'll be mindful of anyone that might be backing out into Ohio Avenue, as [00:12:47] the representatives from AFIRE have said that's what they do. [00:12:51] I'm guessing that no one, no employees is going to want to pull into Ohio if someone [00:12:55] else is backing out at the same time. [00:12:57] So, if there's some other way to ... If you guys do want to respond, you'll need the podium. [00:13:10] Do you want to address it to the podium? [00:13:16] Yes, sir. [00:13:17] Your name? [00:13:18] Come forward. [00:13:19] Sure. [00:13:20] No problem. [00:13:21] Good afternoon, board. [00:13:22] My name is Jesse Blackstock. [00:13:23] I'm from the Department of Engineering, located at 5405 Suite 290, Tampa, Florida, 336099. [00:13:28] I represent the applicant. [00:13:30] With respect to ... Gus, could you pull up the aerial? [00:13:35] And if you could speak into the microphone. [00:13:38] Yeah. [00:13:39] Slow down just a little bit. [00:13:40] Yeah. [00:13:41] No problem. [00:13:44] So, this is probably the best we're going to get, as far as existing. [00:13:47] So, I heard them say they have six existing vehicles now, and they're looking to expand to seven. [00:13:53] Looking at Google Street View and looking at the site, I think they have three to four parking spaces, [00:13:57] so that tells me they probably have some vehicles stacking in Ohio during peak times, I'll call them. [00:14:03] And then, looking at our proposed driveway, it's actually in correlation with the existing driveway [00:14:08] that serves an existing construction office there now. [00:14:11] So, our proposal is actually bettering the situation that they have. [00:14:16] The existing residence that's there now is serving as a construction office for Baycare. [00:14:20] It has a driveway. [00:14:21] So, we currently have vehicles coming in and backing out and basically doing a three-point turn, [00:14:26] which is essentially what they have onto the North Coast. [00:14:29] So, in our proposed condition, we'll have a driveway in the same location, meets criteria, [00:14:34] meets separation criteria for this intersection there at the forest in Ohio. [00:14:39] And again, we won't have the three-point turn no longer in existence. [00:14:42] As Lisa put it, we will have vehicles coming to and from our site. [00:14:48] So, I don't see the cause for concern. [00:14:53] It's actually bettering the situation, and it meets all applicable criteria. [00:14:58] I would just like to also offer. [00:15:00] that staff would be happy to meet with the AFIRE people about what their expansion proposal [00:15:04] is so we can make sure that they're parking and traveling safely with their operation [00:15:10] too. [00:15:11] Then we also have the new bicycle trail running down that same intersection, or is the next [00:15:16] one over? [00:15:17] The trail goes south on Kentucky. [00:15:20] One of the other concerns, I think, if you go back to the site plan, we mentioned there's [00:15:26] two points of access, an egress and egress to the site. [00:15:29] That is important for the fire department. [00:15:33] If we don't have two drives, they're going to have a tough time getting there, especially [00:15:36] if the car is on fire at one driveway, you won't be able to get into the other driveway. [00:15:41] That was the other reason behind two access points. [00:15:43] How big are they? [00:15:45] Access points? [00:15:46] They're 24 feet, two 12-foot lanes. [00:15:50] In Ohio, a meeting 20-foot width is actually not narrow, it's the minimum local street [00:15:54] width for the city. [00:15:58] And the entrance off Ohio is 24-foot wide? [00:16:02] Correct. [00:16:03] Our drives are 12-foot. [00:16:04] Once you get beyond the two-way driveways, we have one-way angled parking, as you can [00:16:09] see. [00:16:10] Those are 18-foot in width, but those are one-way. [00:16:12] The driveways are two-way. [00:16:16] What's the total length from your southernmost part of this parking lot up to Ohio? [00:16:25] What's that length? [00:16:26] I don't know the exact number, but I know it's at least 450 plus, more than a football [00:16:33] field. [00:16:34] And it wouldn't make sense traffic-wise, I'm trying to find out whose idea is it that you [00:16:41] have another entrance over there instead of having two on Forest? [00:16:44] I think that was their question. [00:16:48] But if you had one in the middle, if you had one down a ways, so you had room stacking [00:16:54] properly from both ends, would that work or not? [00:17:03] It could potentially. [00:17:08] One of the benefits of it, and it's hard to see in the site plan graphic, it might be [00:17:12] better to show, and I hate to keep going back and forth, but the aerial view, the driveway [00:17:18] that's the middle, basically there, that's good. [00:17:21] And the road's not identified, I forget the name of it. [00:17:35] One of the things I was going to point out is the driveway that we're proposing is basically [00:17:39] in concert, in line, in alignment with this existing path here. [00:17:43] By us putting this driveway, our driveway for Forest actually matches up with the driveway [00:17:47] for the hospital. [00:17:49] That's important from a pedestrian standpoint and safety. [00:17:52] Most of the, everybody's going to be crossing right here, we have a mid-block crosswalk. [00:17:56] If we introduce two points, we're not only going to have two points of crossing for signalization, [00:18:02] if you will, not signals, but pedestrian signalization, you're also going to be taking away the fact [00:18:06] that we could potentially have a cross-connection. [00:18:10] There's no intent currently to gate any of this out here and make this, even though this [00:18:14] is a team member only, this eventually could be a thruway. [00:18:19] If you go and you make two points of connection, you take that away. [00:18:23] Not to mention you open yourselves up, or they do, for more liability, having two points [00:18:27] of connection across the public road, at least in my opinion. [00:18:34] I mean, another option would be to give them connection here, Jackson, versus here, but [00:18:40] that's really the same, in my opinion, as far as proximity to their drive, the north. [00:18:47] Takes it further away from the corner, it wouldn't, you know, it doesn't create a stacking [00:18:52] problem that's not too close to the intersection for an exit. [00:18:56] No. [00:18:57] To put it here versus there? [00:18:58] Is that what you're saying? [00:18:59] Yeah, if you moved it further east. [00:19:03] No, I don't think it's a bigger issue if we put it here versus there. [00:19:08] I guess my, one of the things I look at, just look at it, is you've got 100 parking [00:19:11] spaces that are proposed here, and you have roughly 500 parking spaces that will be post-construction [00:19:17] available here. [00:19:18] So you're still going to have roughly, I don't know the traffic counts, this driveway versus [00:19:23] that driveway, but you have a lot more traffic coming into this hospital and this parking [00:19:26] field than you ever will here. [00:19:29] And the other thing to point out is the traffic coming into this hospital is all day, 24 hours [00:19:33] a day, coming and going. [00:19:35] This is team member only. [00:19:36] For the most part, team member only means it's shift change. [00:19:39] So you're only going to have cars coming and to and fro twice a day, with the exception [00:19:46] of employees and team members that work at other hospitals. [00:19:49] And the importance there is, or the significance there is, they would be leading from this [00:19:53] section and heading south. [00:19:55] Baycare doesn't have any facilities north of here. [00:19:58] Even though we have the access point to the north, it's really a release valve, if you [00:20:01] will, not a main point of connection. [00:20:05] So we felt it was necessary to have two points of connection, as did the fire department. [00:20:08] I'm sorry to interrupt. [00:20:09] No, that's fine. [00:20:10] To their point, though, two of the times they are busy is shift change. [00:20:16] So typically, it's pre-largement. [00:20:29] Yeah, to their point, I guess they would have vehicles actually parked in the road, in the [00:20:37] right of way. [00:20:38] They've only got three to four, I think, parking spaces, and they're going to have upwards [00:20:41] of seven vans that are backing them. [00:20:47] So if you use the new driveway. [00:21:01] Now, they could always move. [00:21:12] You want to have any questions? [00:21:22] Do you have anything else you need to say? [00:21:28] Can you come up? [00:21:31] We'll let you speak, but you just have to roll up here and do it. [00:21:38] Back to that overhead that he had, he was pointing at Forest Avenue, the parking area [00:21:42] coming out. [00:21:44] The impact is that the traffic comes from Massachusetts down Forest into the side. [00:21:50] It doesn't use Ohio. [00:21:53] There's very little traffic on Ohio. [00:21:56] So when he was talking about using that side lot, which is near the helipad, I believe, [00:22:02] that traffic comes in off of Forest. [00:22:04] It does not come in off of Ohio. [00:22:06] I'm saying I'm there from 630 in the morning until 3 o'clock in the afternoon, and I may [00:22:12] see 20 residential, 20 vehicles come up and down that road, with the exception of their [00:22:19] construction vehicles. [00:22:20] And I did have a question. [00:22:21] Down what road? [00:22:23] Down Ohio. [00:22:24] Okay. [00:22:25] I also had a question. [00:22:26] You said that they were using the driveways currently that were there. [00:22:30] Are you talking about the ones on Ohio? [00:22:32] Yes. [00:22:33] Those have been blocked off for more than two weeks. [00:22:36] There's Bisqueween. [00:22:39] So they have not been accessing Ohio. [00:22:42] We do know that in the afternoons they have been parking the construction equipment on [00:22:46] Ohio, directly in front of our buildings. [00:22:49] But they're not accessing those two, what used to be two residential home driveways, [00:22:55] have been blocked off for more than two weeks. [00:22:59] How's your partnership with Biscueween going? [00:23:01] I beg your pardon? [00:23:02] How's your partnership with Biscueween going? [00:23:04] No, I'm just speaking from experience. [00:23:06] Okay. [00:23:07] Thank you. [00:23:08] My only concern, it sounds like you answered your problem then, because if most of the [00:23:14] traffic is on Forest and not on Ohio, then it would make more sense to have the outflow [00:23:22] or pop-off exit on Ohio. [00:23:25] And we already got one in and out on Forest. [00:23:28] So if there's most traffic's on Forest, why would you want to put more traffic? [00:23:34] It's on the opposite. [00:23:35] Sorry. [00:23:36] Can I get that map back on? [00:23:38] Do you understand? [00:23:39] Yeah. [00:23:41] Does this sound like the answer to your own question? [00:23:43] No. [00:23:44] They're proposing using Ohio Avenue as an exit. [00:23:47] They're using Forest before Ohio. [00:23:50] Can I just clarify? [00:23:51] I'm sorry, just for the record, it's not an exit on Ohio. [00:23:54] It's ingress and egress. [00:23:56] It's both. [00:23:57] So they're not going to just all funnel out onto Ohio. [00:23:59] They can either come in and leave on Ohio, or they can do the same thing on Forest. [00:24:02] So they have options, and I'm going to bet the behavior of the people that use that parking lot, [00:24:07] they'll know when to use it and when not to based on the access from the AFIRE folks. [00:24:13] It's a guess. [00:24:14] I understand. [00:24:15] I think from a human standpoint, they're going to park as close as they can to the hospital [00:24:20] when they park, like everybody else does. [00:24:23] They're going to walk to that hospital from the closest point they can. [00:24:27] It's just human nature. [00:24:29] So I think it's going to be, unless they've got that many employees that's going to fill it all up all the time, [00:24:35] there's not going to be that many going that far north. [00:24:39] Anyway. [00:24:41] It makes sense to me. [00:24:45] But I understand what you're saying. [00:24:48] I think everybody here understands it, but I don't. [00:24:53] As much room as there was on Forest Avenue from Ohio to Indiana, [00:25:00] as twice the amount of what's on Ohio, that would be a more logical entrance. [00:25:10] Thank you. [00:25:11] Okay. [00:25:15] Anybody else here to speak for or against the project? [00:25:20] Yes, ma'am. [00:25:21] Please come forward and state your name and address, please. [00:25:27] I'm Debra Bartley. [00:25:28] I'm the construction manager. [00:25:38] The parking lot for the team members, in essence, [00:25:41] I feel the team members are mostly going to be on Forest Avenue [00:25:46] because it's only going to be somebody that's living in the north side of the hospital that would probably use Ohio. [00:25:54] Most of our people come from the south and go south if we're parking there, [00:26:02] and the other people that will be parking there are people like myself that work at multi-campuses. [00:26:08] So I would park there because I don't want to take up another spot, [00:26:11] and I'm in and out various times throughout the day. [00:26:17] But all of our hospitals are in the south. [00:26:23] And I do agree with the statement that if our team members see that at certain times that the bottleneck right there at Ohio, [00:26:32] they are going to go and use the other one because they're not going to want to mess with that and not get in that mess. [00:26:39] So I really feel that much more than that. [00:26:45] The crosswalk by the entrance at Ohio, I mean at Forest, just to kind of keep everybody over there. [00:26:52] Not going to want to walk any further than they have to, so they're in all spots by Forest. [00:27:08] Okay, one last time. [00:27:09] Does anyone hear us if this is a public hearing? [00:27:12] Is there anyone here to speak for or against this project? [00:27:18] And did we do the disclosure for everybody? [00:27:23] No one here has had any contact with it? [00:27:26] It should be announced. [00:27:28] Will you do it? [00:27:31] If any of the board members have had any contact with the applicants, [00:27:35] now would be the time to disclose it as well as any conflicts that you may have. [00:27:41] I have to have a conflict of interest set on the board of the hospital. [00:27:48] Okay, so you'll need to fill out the appropriate form for the city clerk to document. [00:27:57] I'm a board member of the Red Apple School, which is a competitor for the fire. [00:28:03] Okay. [00:28:09] I don't see that as a disqualifying factor, so I believe you'll be allowed to vote on this, sir. [00:28:15] Good. [00:28:18] Okay, anything further? [00:28:20] Lisa or Gus? [00:28:24] The motion's approved. [00:28:26] The motion's made. [00:28:27] Is there a second? [00:28:31] Second. [00:28:32] Seconded by? [00:28:33] Okay. [00:28:35] Any further discussion among the board? [00:28:38] Seeing none, can we have a roll call vote, please? [00:28:40] Mr. Perlow? [00:28:42] In favor. [00:28:44] Mr. Gray? [00:28:45] Yes to the motion. [00:28:46] Mr. Masellas? [00:28:47] Yes to the motion. [00:28:48] Dr. Cato? [00:28:49] Yes to the motion. [00:28:52] Okay. [00:28:54] We have in favor of all in one abstention due to a possible conflict. [00:29:00] Okay. [00:29:07] Next.

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

5. 2

   Land Use Plan Amendment Application LUP2016-02 - 6050 Indiana Avenue

   denied

   The Land Development Review Board considered Land Use Plan Amendment LUP2016-02 for property at 6050 Indiana Avenue, changing the future land use from RO (residential office) and LMDR (low medium density residential) to public/semi-public, including a request to vacate a portion of an alley. Board members raised concerns about the alley vacation's effect on neighboring property rights and tax base impacts of non-profit hospital expansion. A motion to approve as-is failed for lack of a second; a subsequent motion to approve everything except the easement closure failed on a 2-2 tie vote.

   • motion:Motion to approve LUP2016-02 as is, including the alley/easement closure. (failed)
   • vote:Motion to approve the land use plan amendment except for the closure of the easement/alley vacation. (failed)2–2

   📍6050 Indiana Avenue📍Southeast corner of Indiana Avenue and Monroe Street🏢BCC Engineering🏢Duke Energy🏢Frontier Communications🏢Jeffords👤Dan👤Deborah Bartley👤Dr. Cato👤Greg👤Jesse Blackstock👤John👤Lisa👤Mr. Gray👤Mr. Masellas👤Mr. Metler👤Mr. Perillo#Alley vacation#LMDR (low medium density residential) future land use category#LUP2016-02#Public/semi-public future land use category#RO (residential office) future land use category

   ▶ Jump to 29:11 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:29:11] We got the land use amendment. [00:29:17] This case is the land use plan amendment application, LUP-2016-02-6050, Indiana Avenue. [00:29:28] Okay. [00:29:30] What you have, again, this afternoon before you is a request for a land use plan amendment taking properties from a RO, [00:29:39] residential office category, and a LMDR, low medium density residential category, to a public, semi-public category. [00:29:50] The location of the property is there. [00:29:53] It's up just south of the hospital on Indiana and Monroe. [00:30:00] It's 0.31 acres located on the southeast corner of Indiana Avenue and Monroe Street. [00:30:11] There's the aerial there. I've got some photos of the site. That's looking across Indiana [00:30:18] Avenue, looking down Monroe Street. Now there's an alley that they're looking to vacate a [00:30:26] portion of it. That's looking at the undeveloped portion of the alley across Monroe Street, [00:30:32] which would be between the two properties that we are looking at. This is looking southwest [00:30:41] across the vacant lot that is south of 6050, southeast. And this is looking along Pennsylvania [00:30:49] Avenue. Actually the property is south of the hospital, existing hospital. Correct. [00:30:55] It runs from Indiana to Pennsylvania. Correct. And what you have here then are the properties. [00:31:05] You've got the existing future land use and then the proposed future land use, which is [00:31:11] the public semi-public. The land use plan amendment meets the concurrency requirements [00:31:18] consistent with the comprehensive plan. And again, this is a public hearing and the applicants [00:31:24] are present to speak to the request if you have questions. Any questions of staff first? [00:31:32] Okay. Anyone here speak in favor of this? Okay. State your name again please, your address. [00:31:39] Deborah Bartley. Properties that purchase the house and the property. [00:32:10] Alley East. Okay. Anyone else speak in favor of this? Anyone wish to speak in opposition? [00:32:31] Questions from the board? I have a question for staff. How does that impact the tax rolls? [00:32:40] I would hope it's a positive way to look at the analysis of the law, but I don't understand [00:32:49] probably from the residential to the non-residential that has a tax base. [00:32:54] Just in the future we might want to take a look at as a point of reference so that we [00:33:02] are aware. But I would agree with you. Wouldn't it depend on how it's used by, isn't this [00:33:09] a non-profit hospital? Huh? So it would depend on how it's used because it could have a negative [00:33:17] effect. That's correct. The question I have is, I don't have any problem with any of it [00:33:27] except I'm questioning the closing of the alleyway because that could affect the rest [00:33:34] of the people that have the right to use that alley. And all of a sudden to have that [00:33:39] shut off, I don't think that sounds good to me. I wouldn't like it if I were down there. [00:33:46] I think that, you know, my point of asking the question initially was I just think we [00:33:51] need to look at it from the standpoint of as we continue to grow, and I'm not at all [00:33:57] not in favor of us having a great facility here in town, a great facility that pays no [00:34:02] taxes, continues to put a burden on, you know, the financial structure of the city. I think [00:34:09] we need to address that from a long-term standpoint. And to John's point, you know, anytime we're [00:34:16] dealing with not just not-for-profits but churches or anything else, we have to, I think, [00:34:23] start to address how much of this property we want to have go to that kind of situation. [00:34:31] So that's my point. [00:34:34] I think if I'm not mistaken, you know, I'm very much in favor of them having a hospital [00:34:41] and grow it. I think the only thing that they have to pay taxes on are the MOBs and the [00:34:46] office buildings, am I right? But the rest of it, I think, is tax-exempt like most churches [00:34:54] and things like that. So to Dan's point, I think that is something we need because it's [00:35:01] still providing the services. [00:35:03] Could I just address the issue you mentioned on the easement vacation, the alley vacation? [00:35:10] It's an unimproved alley currently, so it's really not widely used. City Council will [00:35:16] make that decision when this zoning and land use plan gets to them. They will be creating [00:35:25] an easement for the utility companies to make the utilities there, but it's really not a [00:35:30] popular mode of, popular avenue on which to travel currently. But I'm certain we'll hear [00:35:37] from the neighbors if they have concerns about that, the vacation portion. [00:35:43] Well, I think it has a direct effect on the values of the other properties, because if [00:35:52] you lose the right to that alleyway, it's going to affect your property value. So I [00:35:57] am not in favor of vacating that. And I'm not opposed to the land use change at all, [00:36:05] but I'm not in favor of vacating that easement, that alleyway. Dedicated alleyways are all [00:36:10] through the city, and I don't think it's, unless they buy the whole block, then they [00:36:16] can vacate it. But if they can't, then they're going to affect somebody else's property down [00:36:22] the line, and I don't think that's correct, personally. [00:36:27] You want to say something? Come forward, sure. We're easy to get along with here. Just state [00:36:35] your name again. [00:36:36] I just want to be out of order. [00:36:37] Speak into the mic clearly and slowly. [00:36:38] Sorry about that last time. I was trying to get my name across. Jesse Blackstock with [00:36:42] BCC Engineering, 5405 Cypress Center Drive, Suite 290, Tampa, Florida, representing the [00:36:47] African on this behalf. Regarding the easement, or I should say, regarding the alleyway, you're [00:36:52] correct. It is an alleyway that goes the entire length of that block. That alleyway does not [00:36:56] serve any function currently other than being a home for existing utilities, and the existing [00:37:02] utilities that are in there are power. So you've got Duke Energy in there, and you have [00:37:07] the former Verizon. You have Frontier Communications in there. So you have overhead power lines [00:37:12] with poles and things of that nature. That's what's in that alleyway. It's not a true paved [00:37:17] alleyway where it's serving, say, solid waste or something of that nature. [00:37:20] Looking across the city, you're exactly correct, obviously. You live here. The city is a lot [00:37:25] of platted alleyways. I guess at some point, they were intending to actually pave these [00:37:30] for actual mode of access for the residents. We are not adverse to, and I'll double-check [00:37:37] with my owner here, but I don't see it as a decrease in property values. In reality, [00:37:45] that's a precedent for the rest of the easement, or the rest of the alleyway to be vacated. [00:37:48] And if it were all vacated in its entirety currently, each homeowner that currently resides [00:37:54] there would receive half of it. [00:37:57] That's where it was taken originally. [00:37:59] The lot owner to the north would get 10 feet. The lot owner to the south would get 10 feet. [00:38:03] Currently, our application, we are essentially working as agents for the current owner to [00:38:07] the south, which is not us. It's not the hospital. It's Jeffords. And so they're getting a 10 [00:38:12] feet, and we're going to get 10 feet. Until they close the property, they being the hospital, [00:38:17] will it become all hospital ownership. I don't see it as a decrease in property values [00:38:22] from a pure land. [00:38:25] Well, as a real estate man for 52 years in this town, I do. [00:38:28] Okay. [00:38:29] Okay? [00:38:30] Okay. [00:38:31] And I can tell you that it does have an effect on it, and most, all the alleys in this city [00:38:34] from the time, from the beginning, were not paved. Most of them were just utility alleys. [00:38:40] Some streets, and many streets in this town weren't even paved for years. So my point [00:38:45] is, it's going to have an effect on the lineage of the property as it goes down the way if [00:38:50] the guy down here says, well, I'm going to go ahead and put a drive in there because [00:38:54] I want to access that. Then all of a sudden, he can't access it. It has an effect on people's [00:39:01] property. I don't care what you say. [00:39:04] How does a resident put a drive in a public? They don't own that property. It's an alleyway. [00:39:09] It's not an easement. [00:39:12] It's a public access way for an alley, and they've done it all over the whole city. People [00:39:19] slam rock behind it or whatever they do. There's hundreds of alleys in the city that [00:39:24] people are using every day, and a lot of them garbage trucks go down. [00:39:30] But my point is, I'm all in favor of your project. Don't get me wrong. But I'm not in [00:39:37] favor of diminishing somebody's private property rights down the line arbitrarily. They haven't [00:39:43] had an opportunity to even talk about it. [00:39:47] I think it's going to have some effect. It would to me if I were there, and I don't know [00:39:51] how about the rest of the board. Maybe you feel different. [00:39:54] Is there another alley that goes east and west that connects to that one that goes north [00:39:58] and south? [00:40:00] It is an east and west alleyway. It's not a north. Our property, it basically subdivides [00:40:07] our two parcels in question. [00:40:08] Okay, I see the one. [00:40:10] That's a pretty representative graphic to the right. Existing is with the alley, the [00:40:13] green, the white there, that the city owns. You guys own it. Not the people putting gravel [00:40:18] in there. [00:40:19] Most of the alleys in the city are east and west. [00:40:22] It does provide access to the back of all those properties for whatever reason, if someone [00:40:27] needed to access it. [00:40:28] Right, for dues and for a horizon. [00:40:29] Let's say to park a boat in and out or whatever. I'm not saying that that happens there. I'm [00:40:34] just saying that there are reasons for why have that egress opportunity. I do agree with [00:40:41] John that it would affect the rest of the neighborhood. It could set a dangerous precedent [00:40:46] for the entire city if we start doing that. I would just support John's comment. [00:40:54] Another question. The east-west on the eastern end of that alley, it's cut off on my map [00:41:01] and yours as well. [00:41:03] Is there access from that street on the eastern end of the alley to go into it? [00:41:09] No. On Monroe, which is your western perimeter, and then the eastern perimeter is Jackson. [00:41:16] That is also... [00:41:17] It's not on my map here. [00:41:18] Yeah, that's the eastern access. [00:41:19] There's no access to that alley from Jackson. [00:41:22] It's all curbs. [00:41:23] It goes all the way through to Van Buren. [00:41:24] You've got to jump a six-inch curb, knock down a power pole, that kind of thing. That [00:41:27] easement has existing overhead power poles in it. [00:41:30] I guess what I'm trying to find out is can they get into that alley from the east is [00:41:34] what I'm trying to ask. [00:41:36] No, because the city's lift station is right in the middle of it, in the right-of-way. [00:41:39] It's unimproved. [00:41:40] Yeah, it's an unimproved alley. [00:41:41] Most all of them in the city have been unimproved. They've just gradually been improved as they [00:41:46] went along. The only thing I'm saying is I think it has an effect on... [00:41:51] My property on Indiana and the alley's closed from Adams all the way to... [00:42:00] And that is all utility, city sewer and power, and it was closed in 1952. [00:42:06] Everybody got 10-foot access from Oakland. [00:42:13] That was the part I was trying to make. If you get more property than you have now, I [00:42:16] don't see how that's bringing your property value down. [00:42:18] If your lot's 50-foot wide and you get 10 feet, then you've got 500 extra feet of property, [00:42:22] not less. [00:42:23] I guess it was being utilized for garages in the back and all. That would be something. [00:42:29] That's not to say that it wouldn't be used, and it would not to say that if you bought [00:42:33] a lot and you said, I want to put a garage back there for a boat and come in and out [00:42:37] that way, you could do it. I'm just saying, it's right here. [00:42:43] It'd be tough. I'm sure it's all over the city. I don't question that. I'm just saying [00:42:48] it'd be tough in a specific instance. There's trees and power poles in your way. I don't [00:42:52] know how you physically do that. [00:42:55] I have a question also. The mayor may not be able to answer it. Long-term plans, are [00:43:01] there plans to buy more of those homes along that same stretch? [00:43:09] I can't answer that, but the owner's representative is here. [00:43:14] Thank you. [00:43:17] Thank you. [00:43:20] Deborah Bartley, 79484. Yes, there would be the possibility down that section. Could I [00:43:28] say what it would be? I'm no, but I'd like to keep ourselves open to the possibility. [00:43:44] Any other questions? [00:43:49] I'll make a motion for approval. [00:43:54] As is? [00:43:56] As is. [00:43:57] And let them close the easement? [00:44:00] I'll let the city council decide that. I'm sure they will have to notify the landowners [00:44:05] that are adjacent. [00:44:08] Is there a second to the motion? [00:44:18] Anyone want to offer an additional motion? [00:44:23] Fail for lack of a second. [00:44:28] Greg, you can't. [00:44:38] I'm still struggling with the concept. [00:44:45] I'm not struggling with it. I can make a motion if you want to take over the chair. [00:44:51] I would move that we approve everything except the closure of the easement. [00:44:58] I'll second that. [00:45:00] All right. [00:45:02] Any other discussion about the motion? [00:45:06] Now can we have a roll call vote? [00:45:09] Dr. Cato? [00:45:10] No to the motion. [00:45:12] Mr. Masellas? [00:45:13] No to the motion. [00:45:14] Mr. Perillo? [00:45:15] Yes to the motion. [00:45:17] Mr. Gray? [00:45:17] Yes to the motion. [00:45:21] So it's two to two. [00:45:22] It's a negative vote. [00:45:23] The motion fails. [00:45:24] OK. [00:45:29] This still goes to city council, just with recommendation. [00:45:31] It does go to city council. [00:45:33] Our recommendation. [00:45:35] That's right. [00:45:39] OK. [00:45:40] So with our notations of our comments, [00:45:48] I just want to make sure they understand that we're not [00:45:52] opposing the project. [00:45:54] We're just some hard heads here. [00:45:56] Maybe I have a few things that bother them. [00:46:01] What else do we have, Lisa? [00:46:03] We have another case on the agenda today. [00:46:06] Mr. Metler, happy to present to you. [00:46:10] Please do. [00:46:12] Coordinate. [00:46:19] And this is an amendment to the land development

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

6. 3

   Code Amendment COD2016-07 – Public Notice Requirements

   approved

   Staff presented Code Amendment COD2016-07 to revise public notice requirements for rezoning hearings, removing the requirement that the LDRB's recommendation be included in the public notice (it would still appear in staff reports and minutes) and updating outdated references to the municipal building and Planning and Zoning Commission. After debate over whether removing the recommendation from notices reduces public information, the board voted 3-2 to recommend approval.

   Ord. Ordinance #2016-2088

   • motion:Motion to recommend approval of Code Amendment COD2016-07 revising public notice requirements for rezonings. (passed)3–2

   👤Cato👤Chris👤Gray👤Masellas👤Perlow👤Smith#Budget prep season#COD2016-07#Capital Improvement Element (comp plan amendment)#Public Notice Requirements#Rezoning notice procedures

   ▶ Jump to 46:20 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:46:22] code regarding public notice requirements. [00:46:26] OK. [00:46:27] The public notice requirements for the city council's [00:46:29] consideration of a rezoning request [00:46:32] requires that the public notice contain the land development [00:46:34] review board's recommendation to the city council. [00:46:37] The public notice has to go out 20 days before the city [00:46:41] council hearing date. [00:46:43] If the next city council meeting is less than 20 days [00:46:46] after the land development review board's meeting, [00:46:49] then the public notice requirements can't be met [00:46:52] and the item has to be rescheduled for a later city [00:46:54] hearing date, a later city council hearing date. [00:46:58] Therefore, this can cause a delay [00:47:00] and that can be a problem for a rezoning applicant. [00:47:02] So also in these public notice requirements, [00:47:07] there are some outdated references [00:47:08] to the city's municipal building, which was replaced [00:47:11] by City Hall in 1990. [00:47:15] And there's a reference to the Planning and Zoning Commission, [00:47:18] which was replaced by the Land Development Review Board in 1995. [00:47:22] So we're recommending that you recommend these changes [00:47:25] to the land development code to allow [00:47:28] for a more prompt rezoning hearing process [00:47:33] and to correct these outdated references. [00:47:36] So you're going to change the 20 day to 15 day? [00:47:39] No, we're not going to change the timing requirements. [00:47:43] We recommend that we drop the statement of the land [00:47:47] development review board's recommendation [00:47:50] because we can't make the timing requirements. [00:47:55] OK, I'm confused. [00:47:58] Are you saying that you're not going [00:48:01] to include the recommendation from the board [00:48:04] to the city council? [00:48:06] In the public notice requirements, that's correct. [00:48:13] Why would we do that, Chris? [00:48:15] Why are we here? [00:48:18] It will be included in the staff report. [00:48:21] It just wouldn't be included in the public notice. [00:48:24] Don't you think the public deserves to know what we think? [00:48:28] Absolutely, and that would be provided in the staff report [00:48:30] and certainly would be reported at the city council meetings. [00:48:38] OK, we all know that everyone doesn't attend the city council [00:48:41] meetings. [00:48:44] And so those who might have an interest [00:48:47] in keeping aware of what the board does, perhaps, [00:48:51] perhaps, the one place they get that is in the public notice. [00:48:56] Is that correct? [00:48:57] Maybe. [00:48:58] Is that a fair statement or is that not a fair statement? [00:49:01] Well, they'll still see the legal ads for the LDRB's [00:49:06] meeting. [00:49:07] How often did this happen? [00:49:10] It happens with this particular case [00:49:12] that you just heard today, actually. [00:49:14] The hospital is an example of why we're attempting [00:49:17] to change the code. [00:49:18] So today's June 23rd, and we've noticed 500 seats [00:49:24] at today's meeting. [00:49:26] And in order to get on the next city council meeting, [00:49:28] we would have to include the next notice [00:49:31] with your recommendation in that notice. [00:49:34] That means they won't be able to go to city council [00:49:36] until the second meeting in July, [00:49:38] as opposed to the first meeting in July, [00:49:40] because we have to wait out that longer time frame. [00:49:43] We can't send a notice out until tomorrow. [00:49:46] Today. [00:49:47] So what we're doing is we're saying, [00:49:49] we're going to still send out the notice. [00:49:50] There's going to be a meeting of the city council meeting [00:49:54] recommended on today. [00:49:55] We just are not going to include in that notice [00:49:58] LDRB recommended X. Just going to say there's [00:50:02] going to be another public meeting. [00:50:05] Not have your recommendation. [00:50:07] A very unusual circumstance to include a planning commission [00:50:11] or a local planning agency. [00:50:14] The notice, their recommendation, as Chris said, [00:50:18] the record will be complete in our minutes [00:50:21] with the staff report and the minutes. [00:50:23] We've all had a meeting. [00:50:25] Recommendation. [00:50:26] Just don't embed that in the notice. [00:50:29] But they will get a notice. [00:50:30] Just don't have that embedded. [00:50:34] And because we have to do that recommendation right now, [00:50:37] it just takes up a lot more time than we [00:50:40] think is efficient in terms of zoning applications [00:50:42] that we are processing. [00:50:44] But if I was an interested party, [00:50:49] and what you're giving me then is [00:50:51] an incomplete piece of information on which [00:50:55] I may or may not act. [00:50:57] An interested party, you would contact the staff [00:50:59] and find out what happened in LDRB. [00:51:01] No, no, no. [00:51:01] But I mean, if I normally get a notice, [00:51:04] and the notice is complete with the recommendation, [00:51:08] then I wouldn't have to call staff. [00:51:10] I wouldn't have to bother you, because I'd already [00:51:12] have that piece of information. [00:51:14] I just don't think that it's wisdom [00:51:16] to continue to cut information that we have [00:51:20] been doing forever to people. [00:51:23] I understand we want to streamline processes. [00:51:26] And I don't want the hospital to have [00:51:27] to wait till the second meeting in July. [00:51:29] But I think creating an ordinance [00:51:31] for those kind of things may not be [00:51:33] in the best interest of the public [00:51:35] or the people who are interested in these kind [00:51:38] of situations. [00:51:39] So my personal feeling would be, no, I [00:51:42] would not want this information to be excluded [00:51:47] from the public notice. [00:51:49] That's just my personal view. [00:51:51] I understand that it's available. [00:51:53] And I understand that it's going to be read at the city council. [00:51:55] But I'm just not sure it's in our best interest [00:52:00] to cut that piece of information. [00:52:02] You're talking about one week? [00:52:03] Is that what you're talking about? [00:52:07] Go from a June meeting at LDRB to a late July meeting [00:52:12] at the earliest for council. [00:52:13] You can't just go to the next city council [00:52:15] and you have to wait another couple of weeks [00:52:17] to get that recommendation from you guys in the new notice. [00:52:21] Because what this ordinance says is we will no longer include [00:52:24] our recommendation, period. [00:52:26] In the notice. [00:52:26] In the notice, for any notice, whether it's [00:52:28] going to be in time or whether it's not going to be in time. [00:52:31] Say anything or whether it's not going to be in time. [00:52:33] Specifically, the rezoning requests. [00:52:37] Which is what we deal with. [00:52:47] I'm all in favor of streamlining government. [00:52:52] Do you have any idea of what other cities [00:52:54] do in regards to this? [00:52:58] Frankly, it's only rezonings that [00:53:00] were required to provide your recommendation [00:53:03] to the board on the public notice. [00:53:06] For instance, in our advertising for this code amendment, [00:53:11] it won't include your recommendation. [00:53:14] It's only the rezonings that were required [00:53:15] to show your recommendation. [00:53:18] And that's what we were seeing. [00:53:19] Rezonings and land use changes, both? [00:53:22] No, not land use changes and not special exceptions, [00:53:26] but strictly the rezonings. [00:53:28] Is it posted on the website? [00:53:33] Only in the sense that the LDRB minutes [00:53:36] are provided as part of the agenda packets. [00:53:45] I'll make a motion for approval. [00:53:46] I don't see a big problem. [00:53:48] Thank you. [00:53:50] Motion made. [00:53:51] Is there a second? [00:53:53] I'll second. [00:53:53] Second. [00:53:57] Mr. Gray? [00:53:58] No to the motion. [00:54:00] Mr. Smith? [00:54:02] Yes. [00:54:04] Mr. Masellas? [00:54:05] No to the motion. [00:54:07] I'm so sorry. [00:54:08] Mr. Perlow? [00:54:09] Yes to the motion. [00:54:10] Dr. Cato? [00:54:11] Yes to the motion. [00:54:17] That recommendation is passed. [00:54:18] Anything further to make a point of order? [00:54:22] One item. [00:54:25] It's budget prep season right now. [00:54:29] And you guys have asked to have information about the budget. [00:54:33] They're going to give us a pay raise? [00:54:36] That's what? [00:54:38] Right. [00:54:39] So you have asked in the past to be included in that discussion [00:54:42] because we will be bringing to you sometime later on this year [00:54:47] an amendment to the comp plan that includes [00:54:48] the capital improvement element. [00:54:51] So I wanted to let you know, again, [00:54:52] it's budget prep season right now for staff. [00:54:55] And at your next meeting, which is July 21, [00:54:59] you'll have a draft copy of the capital improvement discussion. [00:55:12] That would be it. [00:55:13] Anything further? [00:55:18] Nope. [00:55:18] All right. [00:55:19] Motion to adjourn. [00:55:21] Second.

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.