City Council - Aug 08, 2024

Welcome to the City of St. Petersburg City Council Meeting. Your elected officials are Mayor Ken Welch, District 1 and Council Vice Chair, Copley Gerdes, District 2, Brandi Gabbard, District 3, Ed Montanari, District 4, Lissette Kanowitz, District 5 and Council Chair, Deborah Fig Sanders, District 6, Gina Driscoll, District 7, John Mohamed. And District 8, Richie Floyd. Good afternoon, everyone. We call today's August 8th. I'm trying to remember. Is it August 1st or August 8th? It is August 8th, everybody. We want to welcome you to the council meeting today, and we're going to go ahead and get started with the roll call. Floyd. Here. Gerdes. Here. Gabbard. Here. Montanari. Here. Hanowitz. Here. Dick Sanders. Here. Driscoll. Here. Muhammad. Thank you. So today we have with us the pastor, Clarence Williams from Greater Mount Zion AME, that's going to bring the invocation. And following the invocation, I'm going to ask that you also join us for the Pledge of Allegiance. So can you please join me in standing? Madam Chair, members of the council and our citizens, let us look to God. Father, we're thankful and grateful for this wonderful privilege you've given us for living in the greatest country on the earth. We're thankful for the diverse and wonderful population in which you've given us. We give you praise for the members of this council, for the families from which they come, the people that you put in their lives to make it sweet. Thank you now for the deliberation of this chamber today. The chamber members and those that are here, whether they be citizens, members of our economic community, or our vendors, whoever they may be, who are bringing service to our citizens, we pray that the deliberation today will be meaningful and progressive and beneficial to all those that come. And finally, we say, lift up our nation, our country, so that by thy powerful hand, your justice shall rule among nations and among men. Amen. We pledge allegiance to the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Please be seated. Thank you, Pastor Williams, for that. You are always appreciated, and you know you're one of my faves. Council members, we have an agenda before us today with the additions of item F1 and D5. I'll entertain a motion for approval. Move approval. Second. Second. Now that we have a motion and a second for approval, can you please open the machine for voting? I'm so sorry. Now that all present, council members have voted, can you please tell and announce the vote? Madam Chair, a motion to approve the agenda passes unanimously with Council Member Muhammad being absent. Thank you. So now we're going to move into our reports, and joining us today is our fire emergency management manager, Ms. Amber Boland. And I see the mayor walking out with her, our mayor. Yes, I'm not Amber. No, you're not Amber, but that's okay. Your eyes are not fooling you. Madam Chair, members of the public who are here, members of our St. Pete team. I just, before our emergency management manager, Amber, gives you a wrap-up on Hurricane Debbie and our preparation and our response, I just want to take a minute to thank our team, because I know they're not going to say it, for the incredible job that they do. If you've had an opportunity, and I know many of you have, to engage with them during the preparation for a storm or during the storm or the recovery effort, our team is really setting the standard for public service. It's essentially our cabinet. And whether it's, you know, sandbag operations before the start or predictions of storm surge, rain, the impact of the tides, projects in these meetings as well. So there's a math component. It is really something to be proud of, the way that our team approaches this, coordinated, collaborative, working with federal, state agencies, and all of our teams in many departments that work to make our community safe and to help us to recover. So I just wanted to thank them on behalf of our city and the council for a job, a great job that they do. And now I'll turn it over to you, Amber. All right. And they could get some applause for that. Good afternoon. As always, it's a pleasure to be with you all today, council. I generally come up here when we have some of those more adverse events, but I do always enjoy coming and speaking with you and come with a little relief also today, because I don't want to say we avoided another big one. But we did avoid some catastrophic damage that some of our neighbors, you know, to the north and to the south got from this storm. But even saying that, we still do have damage, and we still do have residents and neighbors that are still recovering and cleaning up today. So today I'm going to provide a report for Hurricane Debbie on behalf of the city. I'm going to try to keep it streamlined and brief, and then once I cover my points, I'll turn it over to Public Works Administrator Claude Tankersley to talk a little more about the water components and the stormwater piece. So with that, we'll hop in. So in anticipation of Debbie, citywide department storm preparedness protocols were activated. This included Public Works pre-storm checklists that covers the entire city and low-lying areas to minimize storm impacts to the community. Those things include, like, sandbags, street sweeping, cleaning grates, lowering the pond and the lake levels, deploying pumps and things like that. They stay very busy in those days before the storm. And kudos to marketing and Mike Perry. I saw him in here somewhere. They did a really great video they put out on social media that just captures what all Public Works does before a storm. It's a lot of work that goes into it to make sure that, you know, we handle those impacts a little bit better. In addition, we staged high-water vehicles. And those, you know, strategically located in those high-water areas, police officers were assigned to flood-vulnerable areas. We put variable message boards, again, in those streets and those areas that tend to see that higher water. And very early and often, communications and marketing was pushing that information out to our residents to ensure that we had an informed city on what was happening, the impacts they could expect, and those actions they could take to make sure that they were prepared. Six emergency sandbag distribution locations were opened. Kudos to the stormwater team again. 31,000 sandbags in two days. It's a very impressive operation. We did do a partial EOC, that's Emergency Operations Center, activation with the executive policy group. Those are daily virtual briefings and strategy meetings, so it's 24-7 communication and coordination through the Microsoft Teams platform. In addition, we did have a few different city department subcenters activated to include fire and police. For impacts, you'll see we put some photos on all of these slides because, you know, pictures speak a little louder than words so that you can see what we had. So Hurricane Debbie passed about 100 miles west of St. Pete. If you look at a map, it's incredibly similar to Hurricane Adelia when it passed by. But as we know, no two storms are the same. So while there was a similar track, for Debbie, really it was rain was our big story, how much rain got dumped on us. And I won't steal thunder away from Claude. He's going to talk about some of that rain and the surge. But we did see over 10 inches of rain in just over a day. We had nearly three and a half feet of storm surge that came through, mainly with a high tide early Monday morning. Fresh water flooding was a new one for us with the amount of rain that we saw. So we saw places that typically weren't inundated with water being inundated with water and issues with cars stalling out through intersections and things like that. It was a wind event. So it was a tropical storm event when it came by us. So we saw sustained winds of 39 miles per hour with gusts as high as 60 miles per hour. And a combination of all that water and the sustained winds, we did see lots of trees go down. So I believe it was about 125 trees that the forestry crews were working to pick up. So our response, fire, again, we had high water vehicles that were strategically stationed, and our police officers were in those areas throughout the entire time. So our fire and our police crews were really our eyes and our ears in those neighborhoods, not just our low-lying neighborhoods that, you know, we know have issues, but throughout the city because we saw flash flooding that we haven't typically seen before. So it was really nice from an EOC standpoint to constantly get those reports in on what it looks like in the city, what roads are closed, where, where are cars stalling out, where are their traffic lights out, things like that. So our fire and police were out there throughout the duration early on. Parks and Rec Forestry teams were out there, again, from the very beginning, trying to clear those trees in the right-of-way as they happened, coordinating with Duke Energy for any of those lines that are down within those trees. All right, with recovery operations, really the goal here is to get things back to normal as quickly as possible. So as soon as those floodwaters receded and the wind stopped blowing, street sweeping started getting out there to clear that debris from the storms. I live in Riviera Bay, and I'll say once the water went down on the streets Tuesday morning, Claude, street sweeper came right by my house. It was great. So, you know, but crews are always out there, always working. Crews are still out there working to get those last trees cleared up. We're still picking up, or we started picking up debris from residents, so I included the debris flyer here that's being handed out. It's virtual. It's being sent social media. Street teams have it to make sure all the residents know how they can get their debris picked up. So it can go in the bin, it can be taken to a brush site, or for storm debris, they can call for the free special pickup. And then street teams and damage assessment teams. We talk about fire and police being the eyes and the ears of the storm during the event. After the event, that transitions a lot to these street teams and these damage assessment teams. Those are teams that are pushing out throughout the city to kind of capture the story. What kind of damage did we see? How many houses were damaged? What kind of needs are out there? How can we connect our residents to resources? So I want to talk just for a second about the damage assessment. So this is a screen grab that I pulled. Pinellas County, when we do a damage assessment, all that information gets pushed to a GIS page with Pinellas County. So this is just a public-facing page that shows where some of those spots are that we were putting in. So Hurricane Debbie brought minimal flood damage to habitable structures. Flooding was mostly due to wakes caused by traffic on the flooded streets. The winds did bring down trees. And we had two reports so far of trees going into structures. All mobile homes were assessed and came back with no damage. So you'll see some numbers listed here. Two minor damage, 40 affected. To define those for you, minor is flood damage to the habitable area of the home, up to 12 inches of water. And affected means there's flood to non-habitable areas, such as garages, and that's up to 6 inches. So overall, we didn't have any reports of any major flood damage. And again, the caveat there is it's always ongoing. We're still getting calls or reports from citizens as they find things. And then finally, for recovery, American Red Cross did open a shelter over at Allendale Methodist Church. They stayed open until yesterday afternoon. They decided they didn't have anybody come seeking shelter or resources. So they decided to close that operation and move to the more northern counties that could use those resources more. And then crisis cleanups are for any resident that got or had damage, whether it's from trees or flood water, and they need help and resources. They can call this crisis cleanup, and that connects them to non-government organizations that can help them out. And as always, 211 Tampa Bay Cares is a resource that can connect residents to those resources that they might need. And then finally, a special thank you to all of our city crews who worked around the clock to keep our city safe and get us back running. So this is a screen grab from social media, the special thank yous from our residents to show our city team some love. So we thought that was really important to share as well. So with that, I will turn it over to Public Works Administrator Claude Tinkersley. Thank you, Council. Thank you, Amber, for setting that up and giving the good news that this storm in many ways was not as bad as it could have been. But in some ways, it was more than we expected. So I'm going to start first with describing what we saw in terms of tides and surges. We saw three high tides during this event, and all of them were roughly around 3 to 3 1⁄2 feet. You'll see the second high tide there barely touched around the 3.4 feet above sea level. That's where what NOAA would recognize as minor flooding. However, we know that here in St. Pete, we have certain areas and neighborhoods and streets that are pretty low. And so you've seen this before. It's to show how this storm compared to other recent storms we've had in terms of storm surge. And as you can see, we had quite a few streets, particularly in Shore Acres, but also down in Sunrise Drive, as well as some in Riviera Bay and Kingston Street South. These areas were inundated with some storm surge. And then when it's combined with the rainwater, it made things difficult for them. So we are grateful that more homes were not impacted than they actually were. One thing I want to point out on this, if you notice, I have on there the average high tide for 2024 being 1.13 feet. That's a value that I calculated based off of the information we received from NOAA. NOAA actually lists the normal high tide for St. Pete as 6 inches or a half a foot. This year, we have seen regularly, day after day, high tides that are significantly higher than what you would expect. And that is impacting the city all year long. So we did have a significant amount of rain. There's a lot of rain gauges throughout the city. And rain doesn't always come to every neighborhood the same way. So I put up here information showing roughly how the rain was distributed across the city. We have three rain gauges at our wastewater treatment plants that recorded values anywhere from just under 6 to almost 12 inches of rain during the event. We also have some private rain gauges that are available on the Internet that I used to show how it was distributed in different parts of the city. It's been reported in the media by Bay News 9 that we saw 11.4 inches. News Channel 8 reports that we saw 10.34 inches. We recognized that this rain occurred roughly over 30 hours. So it was not quite 24 hours, but just over 24 hours at 30 hours. So how does that compare? Well, we often talk about design storms when we talk about our stormwater system. And this Hurricane Debbie is roughly equivalent to what we would call a 50-year, 24-hour event, recognizing it didn't take place in 24 hours, it was 30 hours, so slightly more. But nevertheless, it's the same amount of rain as we might expect to receive about once every 50 years using historical data. And we know that that data is changing in current days. Also, looking back at rainfall data that we have from Albert Whitted, we have an incredible database of rainfall data from Albert Whitted going back to the early 1900s. There was only one day in the last 110 years where we saw more rain than we did during Hurricane Debbie. And that was August 2, 1915. The other times that it came close to this were tropical storms or hurricanes that occurred either in 1933, 1974, or 2001. And then if you look at this same data and you look at a 48-hour period, since the rain did come, it's straddled on Sunday and Monday. If you look at a 48-hour period, the most recent time we had 10 inches of rain in a 48-hour period was 27 years ago in 1997. I point these things out to show this was not a standard storm. If you look at this chart here, it shows the rainfall and the tide surge for some of the storms we've had recently, Hermine, Ada, Ian, Idalia, and Debbie. And you'll see that the rainfall that we received during Debbie far exceeded the other storms, whereas the storm surge was right about in the middle. One of the things that I'll talk about in a few minutes is that we have designed our wastewater systems to meet a storm that was similar to Hermine. We had some occurring in Hermine in 2016. Afterwards, we implemented an expansion of our wastewater system. We based that off of the storm of Hermine. And you can see that this storm exceeded what we achieved or had during Hermine. It was talked earlier about our sandbags. I just want to point this out. Our teams, when we hand out sandbags, we have tablets that the teams will use to document the name and address and the number of bags handed out to anybody who comes up. And you'll see roughly where most of the handbags were handed out in St. Pete. But we have quite a few people that come to St. Pete outside of our city and picked up handbags. So let's talk about the impact to our stormwater system. For the period of August 4th through 6th, we had roughly 66 cyclic fix reports for flooding that came in. We have recently installed some replacement backflow preventers in Riviera Bay and Shore Acres that keep saltwater from backing up into the streets. Since May, we've replaced 26 of the 56 in Shore Acres, and we've replaced four of the seven in Riviera Bay. We believe these backflow preventers did their job. They kept the saltwater out of the street next to the backflow preventers. Unfortunately, we got a lot of rain, and when you have a backflow preventer that's closed keeping the bay out, it is also not allowing the rainwater to drain out. So we had a lot of rainwater that backed up behind the backflow preventers. We also have some stormwater pumps that we use. We have two permanent stormwater pumps in Riviera Bay that are there all the time, very, very large pumps. Those performed very well. We put in a portable pump on Appian Way in Snell Isle and six portable pumps in Shore Acres. All of these portable pumps performed as appropriately and were operationally performing throughout the entire event. So let's talk about the impacts to our wastewater system. Again, I want to give some background here. So in 2016, Hurricane Hermine came through and resulted in significant sanitary sewer overflows, over 100 million gallons. Because of that, we entered into a consent order. We started on a very aggressive expansion of the capacity of our system as also a program to try to eliminate the amount of inflow and infiltration into the system. So we expanded the peak hydraulic flow rate to the three plants to the numbers you see there, 32 million gallon per day flow rate for northeast, 40 for northwest, and 70 for southwest. So that's the flow that would come into the treatment plants. We also established a level of service for our collection system. And if you recall, we came back to council sometime in 2018, and we debated what is the level of service we would want our collection system to be able to handle. What kind of rain event can we afford our collection system to handle? And we looked at events, a 3-inch, a 5-inch, a 7-inch, and a 9-inch event. And with each of these events, we looked at the price tag for being able to handle those events blew up extremely between events. And so because of the discussion of the cost to do these things, we settled on a 7-inch level of service, a 7-inch event level of service for our collection system. And what that means is that for a 7-inch rainfall event, we are going to be working on our collection system to avoid any manhole overflows and respond to that 7-inch event. Now remember, we got almost a 10-and-a-half-inch event. Since 2016, we spent over $400 million to expand the capacity of our sewer system to meet those level of service standards. Hurricane Debbie produced rains and peak sewer flows that exceeded those level of service standards. As you can see in the first graph, the first chart there, our level of service for the Northeast plant was 32 million gallons per day. At one point, we saw 39 million gallons per day as a flow rate coming to that plant. Northwest, we have a level of service of 40. We saw 45 coming through. And southwest, a level of service of 70. We saw 79 coming through. And our collection system, again, the level of service for that was established as 7 inches. We saw almost 10-and-a-half inches. So I do want to give you some general takeaways from this event. Even though we had this extraordinary storm that stressed our wastewater system, and this was really the first real stress test we've had of the expanded system since those upgrades were completed. Even with that, the investments that we put into place appeared to have paid off very well. Those investments reduced the potential impacts of Hurricane Debbie on our wastewater system and most likely prevented larger sanitary sewer overflows. I do want to highlight and give a shout-out to our utility staff. They performed exceptionally well during this event. And were able to – thank you. So one of the things our wastewater staff were doing, they realized that this was an event that exceeded the capacity of our system. But they still kept the system going and minimized any impacts from this event. And so they really pulled a rabbit out of the hat, performed a miracle, and kudos really to them. They're my heroes. So we did have about 429,000 gallons of untreated sewage that did spill into our neighborhoods that came from what we call – they're called sanitary sewer overflows. They came from manholes that were overflowing. You'll see in this drawing here roughly where those were located in those blue areas in the central part of the city. This is what a sanitary sewer overflow will look like. We have several photos here of those manholes when they were overflowing. If you look at the second photograph, you'll see a metal pipe going down into the manhole. That metal pipe is a big vacuum that's connected to a truck, and we are pulling sewage out of that manhole to reduce the amount that's being discharged into the street. And then the third and fourth photos show you what a sanitary sewer overflow in a manhole looks like when it's ongoing and then what it looks like when it's done. One of the ways we estimate the volume that's coming out of a sanitary manhole is we have this industry-wide data that our teams will go out and they'll look at a manhole, and then they have this information, and they'll compare what they see in the street with what's prepared here in front of you. This allows us to estimate roughly how much flow is coming out of a manhole. And this is how we estimate what those discharges are. I think it's really an interesting graphic. You can see how, you know, five gallons per minute looks like the manhole is just barely weeping, just barely crying, just a little bit of a stain over there. But you get up to 275 gallons per minute, and it's just pouring out of that manhole. So those were the sanitary sewer overflows that did occur during this storm from our manhole system. This system, of course, designed to handle a 7-inch storm, and we got a 10-1⁄2-inch storm. So let's talk about our treatment system. We did have a momentary brief spill on site at two of our plants for a total of almost a quarter of a million gallons. These spills lasted for approximately 15 minutes, and they occurred because of the inrush of water coming into the plant. But these spills were captured on site. The spills were fully contained, and all but 3,000 of the 230,000 were redirected to the beginning of the treatment plant and retreated within the facility. Therefore, none of this water, none of these spills entered community spaces, nor did they reach surface water bodies. I also want to highlight one of the things that I think is what we avoided. I believe it's reasonable to assume that we may have avoided, with the improvements that we've made over the last eight years, we may have avoided about 8.4 million gallons of a potential spill. Had we not done the improvements to the plants, I believe this may have been what we would have seen at those plants. And the reason why is this, we saw flows through the plants that were higher than the peak design flows. And so I estimated what that higher differential was, and it estimated to come out to be about 8.42 million gallons, that our team was able to get through that plant, even though the plant wasn't designed to take it, they did it anyway. That meant that these plants were operating at times above their peak hydraulic capacity. So, for instance, the Northeast plant operated for about six hours above their peak hydraulic capacity. The Northwest plant, almost 27 hours, and the Southwest plant, 17 hours. So I wanted to give you this information. It's a lot of good news, but also to recognize that we did have some sanitary sewer overflows, and we are treating those. We've reported them to DEP, we've reported them to the public, and we are recovering from them. So thank you very much. We have council members that would like to speak. Council member Gabbard. Thank you, Madam Chair. And so I just want to, first of all, kind of start off with where the mayor started us off, with an echo of thanks to the entire team. As council members, during an event like this, we, I'm sure my colleagues would share in my thoughts, we feel very helpless sometimes, right? Because as council members, you're not out there doing the work that our team is doing, and you're not directing them the way that the mayor is. And so knowing that we have all of you, the very capable hands, the very capable residents of my own district, who care so much, who have put so much into not only helping our city be able to do the improvements that you talked about, but also be able to prepare and respond in real time, is such a relief. And I know, because as council members, most of the time during these storms, we're constantly hearing from our residents, especially, I'm sure myself, Council Member Montaneri, you share in this. We are in constant communication with our residents. And all we can do is deliver that message back to you. And during this particular event, my contacts were Claude and Chief Gilliam from PD. And the two of you, you were never annoyed by my updates, never, like, I mean, Chief Gilliam had police officers out there. You know, Riviera Bay is a little unique in the fact that we can't really shut it down with just, like, two openings, like Shore Acres. People can kind of come and go, and that can be very anxiety-filled for our residents when they're watching people drive through this wake. Chief Gilliam was on it, and he had people out there trying to slow people down, trying to stop people. So I cannot say enough thanks. It helps me kind of relieve my anxieties when these events are going on. But, I mean, we can see the work that we have done that has, to your point, stopped what could have been a major catastrophe. It could have been a catastrophe for our residents inside of their homes. It could have also been a major spill. And so the work that has been done has worked, right? But, as one of only three council members who was here in 2018, when we made the decision to go to a 7, I very clearly remember, which you've reminded us, that 9 was the only other option we were even discussing at that point. And from what you're sharing, 9 wouldn't have even changed it. It would have maybe reduced a little bit, but we still probably would have had this issue. Is that correct? Yes, I do believe that's true. So you and I spoke at length on Tuesday, and we kind of batted around, you know, what do we do? Obviously, I mean, a future investment in continuing to add to our capacity is well worth a conversation. But can you talk a little bit, kind of in theory, about what we discussed around infill and infiltration that you believe potentially could have happened during this event? And for those who aren't sure what that is, it's when we have breaks in our sewer lines, where the stormwater and the rainwater actually goes into the wastewater system. And so can you talk a little bit about what we discussed the other day? Sure, thank you. And I apologize if this gets a little too technical. So within our city, we have thousands of miles of sewer pipes that are buried underground. Half of those belong to us, the city. Half of them belong to the public as a group. Roughly the other half belongs to individual property owners. We call those pipes private laterals. These are the pipes that run from your house to take the sewage from your plumbing and runs through a private yard, through your yard, out to the street where it connects to our system. And these are privately owned. These private laterals are very shallow. They're not buried very deep. You'll often find them with maybe six inches of soil above them, maybe 12 inches. They're very, very shallow. Whereas our public pipes, our public lines, are much deeper. They're at the very shallowest. They're at least three feet deep. They're often ten feet deep. What that means is that our public pipes are often inundated or often surrounded by groundwater on a regular basis because they're deep enough to be below the groundwater table and stay there on a regular basis. Inflow and infiltration occurs when you might have a crack in that pipe and that groundwater will flow into the pipe, putting more water into the system. So over the past eight years, we've spent millions and millions of dollars going through our pipes. We literally have TV. We put a TV camera down every single inch of our 1,000 miles of pipes to determine its condition. And based off of its condition, we've been spending money to either put a lining inside the pipe or, in some cases, actually dig the pipe up and replace it with another. So we've done a lot of improvements to our system, and we've seen the results of that in our normal daily flows that we have seen go down because of the reduction in that I&I. This event was different than what normally occurs in that we got so much water that the rain completely saturated the soils. So one inch of rainfall will actually saturate six inches of soil. And so we got enough rainfall to saturate five feet of soil, which means that anywhere that you might have a water table three feet below you, four feet below you, five feet below you, that water table is now at the ground surface. What that did is that it inundated every single pipe in our system, including the private laterals, many of which are rarely, if ever, inundated. And what we saw was when this occurred, we saw our flows go from about 30 million gallons a day to 150 million gallons a day. So what that leads me to suspect, I cannot prove it, but what that leads me to suspect is that we have work to do on our private laterals, that our private laterals, when they are inundated, and they're not inundated all the time, but when they're inundated with groundwater, we believe that they are contributing heavily to our system. Well, thank you for explaining that to everyone, and I know you all have private conversations as well, but we live in the sunshine, and we can't speak to each other outside of this dais. And so I wanted to make sure that you were all aware of the information that he shared with me on Tuesday, because, of course, immediately I said, well, what's going on with our private lateral pilot program, right? So, Council Member Hanowitz, this would be the appropriate time for me to ask you. So we have an outstanding item on our PS&I referral list that I had referred that we took up in October-ish, I believe, around the private laterals, self-funding, all of that. I have spoken with self, and I have spoken with Claude, and they would be prepared to come together and bring us an updated report as to – they've done a lot since then with this program. So I would just respectfully request at a time when you are able to, with the agenda scheduling, if we could bring this back sooner rather than later, because I think we've seen from the information you're sharing anecdotally that we need to move forward on that project. We need to make sure that we're doing everything we can to help residents be able to kind of invest in their part of this situation. So I just wanted to ask you that while we're here on this dais. Yeah, and that's not a problem. Well, it's not the first item that has been pushed to PSI as we handled something today that was an emergency, and now there's another one. So we have a couple of things that are backed up because of what we handled today, but as soon as I can get it on the schedule, I will. And we had a conversation about that also. Perfect. So thank you. And then just also want to thank our State Senator DeSigli, Representative Cross, both of them very, very much engaged throughout the entire storm, and I've had some conversations specifically with Representative Cross. So residents who are upset about people driving through the neighborhoods creating that wake, that very stressful situation. I mean, I live in Barclay Estates. It's never seen water in its streets. We had water in our streets during this event, and people were driving through, and my husband was just like residents standing on the front porch freaking out that water was going to come up. So I know, I understand, and so I pledge that I'm going to work with Representative Cross because there's some stuff that needs to be done at the state level that we can then start to be able to make some real headway around how we enforce and how we work on making sure that we keep the neighborhoods safe when they are inundated with floodwaters. So there will be more to come on that going to Lair, but I just wanted to let everyone know about that as well. So thank you all again. Thank you for all your hard work. Thank you for keeping us safe. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Council Member Montaneri. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mayor, thank you for leading, and it's good to see you after a storm. And, Amber, thank you for the briefing. And, Claude, thank you for everything you've done as Council Member Gabbard spoke. I, too, was calling you multiple times a day and also Chief Gilliam and the Mayor's Chief of Staff. We were on the phone a lot. Let me just give a little perspective from a lot of residents who really get scared during these storms. Claude shared with me an e-mail that came through C-Click Fix about a Shore Acres resident that was panicked about what was going on. And residents of all around St. Petersburg, but especially in the flood-prone areas like Shore Acres and River Air Bay, people get very, very upset. And I'm glad that we're leading in a strong way to prepare for the storms, deal with them while they're happening, and then doing the post-storm recovery. And briefings like this give our residents confidence that our city's on top of these issues. So, in Shore Acres, you've talked about the backflow preventers and the pumps, the six pumps that were deployed. Can you give us a little detail? Because I received a lot of questions from people around Shore Acres that wanted pumps in certain areas. Can you talk a little bit of why we place the pumps where we do? Sure. So, we have a stormwater system in Shore Acres, and we know where everything is located, and we know how it operates. Some of the stormwater is channeled down a street to another street. Some of the stormwater goes into a catch basin into a pipe. Some of the pipes are connected. Some are not. It's a very complex system. Part of the challenge of a neighborhood like Shore Acres is that it's very flat. The entire neighborhood is very flat, and we all know that water runs downhill. But when you don't have a downhill to run, water just wants to kind of stay, and it's trying to figure out where to go. So, having such a flat area, it's difficult to move that water, and the water can move in many different directions depending on what the water next to it is doing. So, our engineers, and we've got some crack engineers, crack, you know, crack, I don't want to say crack pot. I don't want to say crack pot. We have some really, really good engineers that, working with our stormwater staff, they've gone through and they've looked at how our stormwater system is connected and figured out where would be the most optimum place to place these pumps to have the biggest impact. Not just to impact a single home next to the pump, but where can we put a pump where it impacts the greatest number of homes, the greatest number of streets. And so, we first started putting these pumps out into the system back in January. That was our first event. We put them out again in April. This is our third event of putting it out. And in that process, we've learned that where we, some of the places we put them the first time, many of them were very effective, some not so effective. And so, based off of that experience, we decided to move them in one or two and see how that works. We did that again in this storm event. And so, it's that iterative process of understanding how the system works from an engineering view, but also running the pumps and seeing what's effective. It gives us an idea of where we can place them. And I wish we could place pumps everywhere in every neighborhood. We don't have that many pumps, unfortunately. And frankly, as I just mentioned, sometimes a pump's really not going to be that effective. Okay. I appreciate that answer. The other thing, and Councilmember Gabbard referred to this, another big issue we had in Shore Acres and around the city through flooded areas was people driving too fast, creating a wake and flooding homes. Back in 2021, I put an item forward. I found an ordinance from the city of New Orleans that the city of New Orleans put in to slow people down through flooded streets. And we do have a preemption problem with that. I did speak with Brett Pettigrew earlier this week. And I had him send me that memo that was built, that was put together for a PS&I committee meeting. And I want to go back and review this and see if there's any other issues that we can do to address that concern. And, uh, because we did talk about it one time, uh, but I, I, I want to go back and I'm glad that you, you, you mentioned it, uh, council member Gabbard. I, uh, during the storm, uh, I went out and spoke to the police officers at both 22nd Avenue and 40th Avenue. Uh, and, uh, also 62nd Avenue and, and, you know, they were, they were doing their best to try to make sure that people, if they didn't have a reason to go into shore acres, didn't go, but we do live in a free country and people do live there. And, but I put people in like categories when it comes to their driving abilities, you got some people that just don't care and just drive fast. You got other people that care and they don't realize that even if they're driving pretty slow, they're still creating a wake and causing a problem. Uh, and then you have people that are driving, just barely creeping along and not, not doing anything. But, uh, chief Gilliam and his team that were out there and they deployed officers, uh, around, uh, uh, I, I, I know shore acres to try to slow traffic down, but, uh, that's, that's a major problem, uh, in, in the, uh, in these flooded areas. And then the last thing, uh, that I wanted to commend the city on is communications, uh, communications are key. And there was a time in the city where we have these storms and city council members were kept in the dark. There wasn't a whole lot of communication with city council members. Well, if you're a city council member and we're, uh, going through a flood event, you're going to pick up the phone and you're going to call staff and staff's not going to have to take the time to, to, uh, deal with a city council member. And that's why good communications is just essential because that way city council members don't have to reach out because we know it's being handled, uh, in, in most cases. Uh, and, uh, we can, we can push that communication out to the residents, uh, in, in our city council districts. So on, on, on all levels, the, the updates that were, were sent out and then the social media and, and then some interviews that were done. And, um, I asked Michael Perry for his autograph earlier today because I thought his, uh, his, his, uh, little video that he, that he had, he did, did a good job of explaining, uh, a, some, something that a lot of people don't understand. So thank, thank you all for, uh, what you, what you did with this, this storm. Thank you. Thank you so much for that. We appreciate the report, the presentation. More importantly, we appreciate everything that, um, you all do for us. And I just wanted to point something out to you all. When we started getting ready to do this report, did you not notice how many people came from the back? They were prepared. They're, they're like that all the time when it comes down to addressing the needs and the issues of the residents in the city of St. Petersburg. And I want to concur with my colleagues in regards to the communication, um, that we get, because we do want to be your first point of contact at, at all possible. And if we're not getting correspondence from the city, I know my phone was ringing off of Next Door and Ring, if you're members of that. So you get that information. But the more information you have, the better equipped you are to deal with our natural disasters. And I spoke to Mr. Tankersley over the, the course of it, and I had to thank him, because his job is just so unpredictable. Amber's job is just so unpredictable, because no one knows the outcome of storms and how we're going to address that as a city. And I think that they've done a phenomenal job. We gave Amber an applause, but I think we need to give the entire team. So I want to thank you for that. It took a little longer than we wanted to, but we were not going to digress from the fact of thanking you for all that, you know, you've done for our city. And thank you so much. I appreciate it. Thank you, Madam Chair. So now we're going to go ahead and move on to our awards and presentations. And joining us for D1 is our Sister City Student Ambassadors presentation, our Government Affairs Director, David Thompson, and our Arts, Culture, and Tourism Director, Celeste Davis. Good afternoon, Councilmembers. David Thompson, Director of Government Affairs with Celeste Davis, Director of Arts, Culture, and Tourism. We are thrilled to present to you this year's Student Ambassadors for our Sister City Exchange Program. As part of Mayor Welch's commitment to our Sister City Program and under his pillar of education and youth opportunities, we're excited to mark the return of the Sister City Exchange Program for the first time since the COVID-19 pandemic. To become a Student Ambassadors, these students go through a rigorous application and interview process and once selected, complete comprehensive cultural competency and training and language skills training. The city, through our contracted vendors, pays for the full cost of the experience, and as part of that commitment, the students are required to come to you, City Council, to update and share their experiences in Takamatsu. And before Madison, Ava, and Leland come up, I want to take a moment to thank all of you for your support of the work we do in the International Affairs space and the Sister City Program specifically. I know that several of you joined two weeks ago to listen to the exchange students from Takamatsu share their perspective and their lives. And many of you participated in the events last year when Mayor Onishi and the delegation came from Takamatsu, Japan. So I'm going to turn it over to our students. Ava, who's going to be up first? Go, Barons! Do I use this? Okay. Hi, my name is Ava Carvales. Um, I'm going into 12th grade at St. Petersburg Catholic. Go, Barons! And, yeah, so today I'm going to be presenting about Megijima Island, which is like a mountain off the coast of Takamatsu. So first, here's a view from the island. This is actually on the island. It's very beautiful, typically on a typical sunny day. You would just see the ocean, but it was cloudy while we were there, but it was still so beautiful. So the history of Megijima Island, it's located in the Sido Inland Sea near Takamatsu, Japan. This island is associated with the famous Japanese folktale Mamotaro, also known as Peach Boy, where it was said to be the island of ogres that Peach Boy defeated. It's a fun little Japanese folktale. Here's a picture of me and my exchange student, Kureha. Um, in the back, it's just a little representation of what the ogres would look like. Um, so the island is famous for its cave, the big, huge cave that takes you through the whole Peach Boy story. It's pretty cool. On the left, here's a picture of Peach Boy defeating the ogres. And then on the right are some handcrafted stones that each have individually crafted faces. So I thought that was pretty cool. Um, its significance today, today Megijima is known for the Megijima Cave, which is linked to the Mamotaro legend. It's also known for its scenic beauty, scenic beauty, and its beautiful beaches and hiking trails. Last, on the left, I believe it's a shrine. I'm not 100% sure, but it's a shrine. I think it's a shrine. Um, it's really pretty. I didn't get to go inside, but it has a lot of significance to the island. And then on the right is just a handcrafted dragon. If you look closely, you can see the dragon's face and eyes. It's made out of pine sticks, you name it. And then, um, so that's all I have. Lastly, I wanted to thank the city of St. Petersburg so much and thank Spiff's, Stephen, and Joellen. This was an amazing experience that I will hold on to forever. I really plan to go back to Takamatsu and explore more of Japan. So thank you. Hello, I'm Leland Coburn. I'm going to talk about the temples and the shrines that I visited on my trip. Um, temples are, uh, from Buddhism and shrines are for, uh, Japanese Shinto. So this is the first one that we went to. Uh, we all went to it together, uh, guided by the city. It is called Yashima-ji because it is a temple located on the mountain of Yashima. Um, so here you can see some photos from that. Um, uh, on the bottom row, the, on the bottom right of the smaller photos, you can see a very interesting shop we went into with a very nice couple. And they showed us, um, some artworks of the legend of the Battle of Yashima, um, which occurred there. Uh, this is the next one that we went to, Umpenji. This is also a temple, uh, which means that it is Buddhist. Um, on, it is located up high on a mountain, um, actually on the border between Kagawa and a neighboring prefecture. Um, its name means Cloud Boundary, uh, Cloud, Cloud Boundary Temple. Um, so yeah, it's a big journey to get up there. Um, on the left most, you can see a little box in front of the statue of Guatama Buddha. And those boxes are located all throughout temples and shrines and are used to cast offerings to the various deities and, uh, folks, um, worshipped at the locations. This is the next one that we went to, uh, Zenzuji. Um, so on, it is the birthplace of a very famous monk named Kukai, which means, um, air and ocean. Um, on the left most, you can see a popular structure in Japanese temples, a five, a five-storied building. It doesn't actually have stories inside, you know, nothing really goes in, but that's the five classical elements from Buddhism. Um, on the right most, you can see a statue of Kukai. Uh, this is, uh, the first shrine that I went to, so that is, we're talking about Shinto now. Um, it has two names. Originally, it was called Kompidasan, and now it is called, uh, Kotohiragu, but people still call it Kompidasan. Um, so it also, it, there is worshipped Omononusi no Kami, who is a god that protects sailors and various seagoing folk. Um, so it's very high on a mountain, most of these are. Um, and it also is home to a large museum to, uh, sake production, Japanese rice wine, and, um, a large naval museum. This is the last one that I went to just before going on, uh, that, going to the airport. Uh, Tamura, uh, Tamu, sorry. Tamura Jinja. Um, on the left most, you can actually see a statue of Momotaro, uh, the peach boy that Ava talked about in the middle, you can see a dragon that people write wishes down on fake gold coins and cast it to it, hoping for it, hoping for good luck and for the wishes to be fulfilled. So on the trip, I learned a lot, um, about not, not just about Japanese aside, not just about Japanese culture, but also about what makes American culture unique. Things that I took for granted, like, even the way that showers function, I've now learned are just a uniqueness of us. And it was also really interesting to see the similarities, uh, for example, between Christianity and the local, uh, Japanese traditions like Buddhism and, uh, Shinto. And it's definitely opened my eyes to the more rural parts of Japan. I think otherwise I probably would have, if I were to just go to Japan on a vacation, I'd probably go to the more urban areas, but, um, I think if I were to go back now, I probably would return to Takamatsu or maybe explore the rest of Shikoku, which is the island that it's located on. Um, also my Japanese has, uh, improved significantly being able to talk to native speakers for so long. So, um, here you can see a photo of all of us together. Um, the, uh, woman on the furthest left is, the woman on the furthest left is the chaperone that they sent over, Jiho, and then you can see the other ambassadors interspersed with us. Um, I want to thank the council for allowing, and just the city and Spiff's for allowing this amazing opportunity. And it's definitely something I'm going to be looking back to for the rest of my life. So thank you. I'm Madison Schmitz, and I would like to share some of our experiences with our host families over in Japan. So, starting off with Ava and the Suga family, um, at the beginning of her time in Japan, her host sister, Kureha, Ava said, um, needed to use a translator a lot of the time to communicate with each other. But then at the very end, right before Ava was going to leave, uh, she said that she and Kureha could speak an entire conversation without the use of a translator. So, not only did Ava gain a lot of information about Japanese culture and, um, Megijima Island, right? Um, but it's, uh, help on both sides because Kureha became so much more confident with her English. Moving on to Leland and the Ichihashi family. As Leland said before, he himself learned a lot about, um, the Japanese language. He became, again, more confident with speaking the language, being immersed with his family. And something else he said, he not only learned so much about, again, Japanese culture, but something interesting about his family is they are actually from New Zealand. So, he was able to also learn about New Zealand culture. Finally, moving on to myself and the Sano family. While the Sano family wasn't sending anyone over to America, they were gracious enough to take me in. And after everything said and done, I really feel like I have another family over in Japan. I really grew so, so close with them. We have already agreed to send handwritten letters to each other, become pen pals. Um, and thanks to them, I, I truly, really want to go back, learn more, um, about Japan. Not just Takamatsu, but of course, I want to go back to Takamatsu. Um, yeah. And finally, a huge, huge thank you to the city and to SPFs. Um, thanks to the city, this entire program was possible for us to go on. And thanks to SPFs, all the information gained went smooth sailing. And this entire program, I would say, is nothing less of a blessing. So, thank you. Thank you. And before Mayor Welch comes to present our students with a key to the city lapel pin and challenge coin, just want to point out the parents of all the students in the audience here who not only did everything they needed to get their students to Japan, but also hosted a Japanese students for about 10 days here in St. Petersburg and made them feel very at home. Thank you, David. Could we have the parents please stand up so folks can see who y'all are? Madam Chair and Counselor, this is such a wonderful program and we're excited to get it back up and running post-COVID. Ava, Madison, and Leland did a great job. I did hear go baron several times, Mr. Vice Chairman. Madison, which high school? I didn't catch yours. Vikings. Kings, okay, so a few people will be happy about that. And as you know, Madam Chair, I don't know if you noticed, but Leland is wearing his Spartans black and gold. But all fantastic ambassadors for our city. Y'all did a fantastic job. It was an honor to learn from y'all. We had dinner with the Japanese ambassadors a few weeks ago. And I want to give you, in recognition of the great job you've done, a mayoral challenge coin and a key to the city lapel pin on behalf of St. Pete. So thank you all so much. Madam Chair, did you want to jump in this one quick? You know I will. Okay. This is a first for me now. All right. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Got it. Awesome. Thank you so much for that. We do appreciate all the relationships that we're not only building here, but across the world and other nations. And so thank you so much for reinstating that program. So now it gives me an honor to introduce our Vice Chair, Copley Gerdes, and our ADA Diversity Coordinator, Lyndale Bright, to present Item D2, Words for Good Award, who will be presenting or being presented an award from Hope to Present Award by Debbie Yones and James King. And they're from the Voices of Hope Organization. Welcome. Good afternoon, City Council, Madam Chair. It's my pleasure to be here this afternoon with the Program Coordinator, Program Director of Voices of Hope for Aphasia. We're located right here in St. Petersburg, a local nonprofit doing great work. And Debbie is actually going to speak for just a brief moment about aphasia and the work that we're doing. Thank you very much for having us. Voices of Hope for Aphasia, located right here in St. Pete and serving the Tampa Bay area, is an organization providing services, support, and advocacy for people who, due to a stroke or other neurological condition, lose their ability to communicate. It's a language disorder. Some of you may know of it because a relative maybe had a stroke, a grandmother or someone had a stroke, and then had difficulty communicating. And you can imagine that not being able to express yourself limits you a lot from being active in your community. And this year, this is our second year that we are presenting an award, and it was a unanimous decision to present the award to the committee to advocate for persons with impairments and City Council and the City of St. Petersburg for the incredible work that they do to ensure that our city is accessible to everybody, including highlighting communication disorders and making them a priority as equal to other disorders and disabilities like physical impairments. So we are here today to present the committee to advocate for persons with impairments with the Merle Regal Words for Good Award, our second annual award, and it is my honor to present it to the CAPI committee. And I'm going to hand it to Lindell. As you know, council and the public, with CAPI, I'm just a staff liaison, and the good thing about it is Paula Arundash, she is our chair for CAPI. And I can tell you right now, it's an honor just between myself and Anita Dreyer to work with these CAPI. You've got 12 citizens that are very dedicated, represent different types of disabilities in the city. And they are drivers, drivers, drivers, and drivers. You know, they ask me to look and do stuff and research a lot of stuff. But working with Debbie and Aphasia, I did not know about Aphasia about four or five years ago until she told me what it was, and you'd be surprised how many people are impacted, okay? We need to know about it. So, but I want to take all the things, but Paula, you on behalf of CAPI, and also Cindy is one of our CAPI members too, so. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you all so much. I have to say, I'm incredibly proud of this. I've been part of CAPI for nearly over 30 years. I hate to even, I was very young. But this is the very first time CAPI's ever been recognized from our efforts on behalf of the community. Not that we do it to be recognized, but boy, when we do it, get a nice big award like this, it really makes us incredibly proud. And knowing that we make an impact to the community is really such a joy, because that's really what we're all here to do, right? To make the best accessibility for all of our citizens and our visitors, to make our city very proud when people come and visit. So, thank you very much. Council has been an amazing support to us. Councilman Rick Gurdas, you've been a huge advocate. And without our city staff, I want to say, Lendell and Anita and our legal advisors, we keep us on the straight and narrow and keep us really highly, highly effective in everything we do. So, thank you all so much for your support. And Debbie, here you are. Thank you so much for recognizing us, and we're very proud of this. Please, thank you. Thank you, everyone. Go, Barons. Yes, yeah. Chair, colleagues, mayor, over the last few meetings, it seems I've been lucky enough to be up here as a part of CAPI, and I'm truly humbled again today. As the grandson of two grandfathers that battled aphasia for periods of time, this one hits close to home, this organization. I was able to go to their annual event, and the room was ready and willing to support an amazing cause, including a couple of big leaguers from the Rays, which was pretty cool to see. They were like a foot taller than everybody else in the room, but this organization really does amazing things when you're talking about, you know, people that have trouble to communicate, and frankly, sometimes it can be an invisible disability. And so to recognize the work that Voices of Hope for Aphasia, what they're doing in our community, and those they represent is an amazing thing. And let me tell you, I know I say it all the time, so I apologize for repeating, but this organization, CAPI, the committee that we have, it's an absolutely amazing thing that our city put together a long time ago, longstanding. And the work that they do, frankly, is absolutely incredible and humbling to watch, to be a part of it. Mayor, thank you for the appointment. I will gladly serve for as long as you will have me, and the staff, the members of CAPI, just a big thank you from me, and again, from somebody that has had family members dealing with aphasia, Voices of Hope, thank you for everything that you do, and you certainly have my support for as long as I'm in this town, and they're going to have to get rid of me, because I'm not going anywhere. So thank you very much, Madam Chair, Mayor, members of CAPI, Voices of Aphasia, thank you so much. This is a great honor. Thank you, Madam. Thank you. And now we'll move on to Item D3, our Black Business Month proclamation by Mayor Walsh. Thank you, Madam Chair. August is Black Business Month, and cities across the country are celebrating, and we are, too, in a big way in the city of St. Petersburg all month. Just Tuesday, our Office of Supplier Diversity hosted a construction trade show at the Coliseum. It was packed. They had some great food trucks as well, but I won't go into that. But there's much more, and our staff will share more after I read the proclamation. I'd like to invite our Supplier Diversity Manager, Curry Hendricks-Bell, and all of our guests who are here today to join me at the podium as I read the proclamation. Other guests for Black Business Month? Y'all come on up. No androids are allowed up here, just letting you know that. And it reads, whereas the month of August is observed as National Black Business Month, recognizing the successes, milestones, and historical progress of Black businesses and entrepreneurs. Throughout history, despite facing systemic racism, Black businesses have continued to grow and thrive nationwide. And whereas businesses owned by Black women have increased by a 12% annual growth rate over the last year. Additionally, Black women-owned businesses account for 21% of all women-owned businesses in the United States. And whereas the Office of Supplier Diversity was created to promote fair and equal business opportunities through the intentional implementation of diversity programs. These programs ensure equity in contracts and procurement for all members of our community who want to do business with the city of St. Petersburg. And whereas the Minority and Women-Owned Business Enterprise Program aims to promote business and economic development for minority-owned and women-owned business enterprises in the St. Pete area. And whereas, as we celebrate Black Business Month, invite minority and women-owned businesses to register for our minority and women-owned business enterprise programs to take part in our inclusive procurement and contract opportunities, networking and collaboration opportunities, and business development support, including mentorship programs, training sessions, and resources to help business owners thrive. Now, therefore, I, Kenneth T. Welch, Mayor of the City of St. Petersburg, Florida, do hereby recognize August 2024 as Black Business Month in St. Petersburg. And I urge all businesses to visit our Office of Supplier Diversity website, sign up for our newsletter, explore our various programs, and connect with our small minority and women-owned businesses. Well done on this. And would you like to say a few words? Sure. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Council. So, the Office of Supplier Diversity is definitely happy to accept the proclamation recognized in August as Black Business Month. Black Business Month offers us a dedicated time to celebrate and support the contributions of Black entrepreneurs in the business community all over the nation, as well as to show the impact and contributions of Black-owned businesses to the economy locally and nationally. The Office of Supplier Diversity is the Office of Supplier Diversity is our business community's resource to doing business with the City of St. Pete. And besides certifying businesses through our SBE and MWBE programs, we provide training, resources, access to opportunities, and are overall advocates for the intentional equity and contracts at and within the City of St. Petersburg. Additionally, we recognize the importance of collective collaboration in the development and support of Black businesses and all businesses in our community by working together with government agencies, private sector partners, community organizations, and individual citizens. We can create a robust support network that fosters growth, innovation, and sustainability, which is why organizations like the Pinellas County Urban League, the Tampa Bay Black Business Investment Corporation, and the Black Business Investment Fund, and so many others are staples to help our businesses thrive. Collaboration amplifies our efforts and ensures that the benefits of our initiatives are far-reaching and impactful, which is why, throughout the Black Business Month, we have planned and will also be participating in a series of events to honor, uplift, and support our small and minority-owned businesses. All of these events are aimed to showcase the talents and innovations within our business community, as well as providing vital resources and support to amplify voices and build capacity. So the first opportunity which Mayor kind of went into was Bill St. Pete, which was this past Tuesday, and we are still, our office is still receiving so much good feedback from that event. We had our chief equity officer, Mr. Carl Lavender, lead a discussion panel within that event with minority-owned and women-owned businesses, all in the construction sector. And from the small to the largest of firms that listened to that panel, all of them gave us very good feedback, saying that, you know, it was very insightful, and they left with something, you know, impactful and different perspectives that they can use within their very own businesses. So we appreciated that. Panelists included Robin Donaldson, owner of Renew Construction Services and STEM Exposure, which is an initiative that focuses on increasing exposure to and participation in STEM fields with African-American girls. Denise Young, she's the business development manager with Turner Construction and a strong advocate for small, women, and minority-owned businesses. Karen Burton is an architect and owner of Space Lab St. Pete, a co-working space here in downtown St. Pete. Bakari Kennedy of Construction Dynamics, he's a general contractor and certified energy manager. Corey Monroe of IROC Construction, who's also a general contractor here in St. Petersburg. And then Leah Graham, vice president of Horace Construction and chair of Horace Academy, which mentors minority and underserved women-owned and local businesses. Like I said before, all of them gave powerful statements, and it was definitely a great event, so I definitely want to commend my team for a job well done on that. A few follow-up events we do have going on the rest of this month. So on Friday, August 16th from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. at the Center of Health Equity, we're going to have an event called Empower Your Enterprise, where it's a symposium-style event for small, minority-owned businesses to gain capacity-building information about capital finances. We're going to have speakers there from Raymond James Financial, the Tampa Bay Black Business Investment Corporation, the Black Business Investment Fund, and several other banks and credit unions as well. We're also going to have some participation in that event with the Pinellas County Urban League, so we're excited about that. Also, the Greenhouse is going to have an event on August 23rd, the Neighborhood Commercial Business Expo. From 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., and we're excited about participating in that with them as well. It's going to be a market-style event featuring businesses that have participated in the CRA Micro Fund, and they're inviting the public out to explore, you know, different crafts and products from our local businesses. So, for more information on those events, please visit stp.org forward slash OSD. Thank you so much. All right. So, thank you for that. So, now we're going to go ahead and move on to, we're going to switch just a little. Madam Chair, could I just for one second interrupt? Yes, you can. And I apologize, but I just want to thank Corey and Stephanie and the entire procurement team, and thank the council members. I know several of you were able to join at the Build St. Pete on Tuesday. It was a fantastic event. And I think, as you can see, Corey is pretty exercised about what she's doing, and I am just so grateful for Stephanie and Corey and their leadership and the procurement team and the Office of Supplier Diversity. And I just wanted to mention that, and thank you for allowing me to interrupt for a second, Madam Chair. Well, thank you, and I'm glad you did because it was an awesome event, and we just wanted to make sure that we celebrate those that are making our city great. So, again, so thank you, Mayor, for allowing me to switch item D5, and it is a Distinguished Citizen Award by Councilmember Driscoll. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. If I could have the Mallory family join me at the podium today. You know, I'm really excited to present a Distinguished Citizen Award to everyone today. And we have the Mallory family with us, and, you know, most people know Trevor Mallory. He has done some really wonderful things in the community and is very well-known. But as they say, behind every strong man is a strong woman. In this case, five. And so, everyone knows Trevor, but today, this award is actually about Malena Mallory. And so, I would like her to join me right here. Hello. Yes, I'm shorter. So, I am excited to tell you that Malena Mallory is about to begin her senior year at Boca Siega High School. She has been a varsity volleyball player and a track athlete since her freshman year. She qualified for the FHSAA State Championship for shot put the past two years, and she placed in fourth place both times. Now, last year, Malena won a $5,000 scholarship at Bogey from the Wax family for breaking the school's shot put record. Now, you might be thinking, that's Hall of Fame material right there, but wait, there's more. This summer, Malena competed in both the AAU Club Championships and the AAU Junior Olympics. And in the AAU Club Championship for shot put, she won the gold medal. I didn't realize we were acting it out. And then, going into the AAU Junior Olympics that just happened, what, last week? She did it again. She won the gold medal for the AAU Junior Olympics for the shot put. Malena is currently ranked number three in the state for shot put, and we're so excited to see what her senior season is going to bring. Now, when she's not rocking her athletic skills and collecting gold medals and giving her dad a hard time, Malena works as a lifeguard, and she's headed there, I think, right after this. And she also enjoys doing hair, going to the beach, and making TikToks. When she graduates, she plans to study biology, and she would like to become a pediatrician. So, Malena Mallory, remember this name, y'all, and please join me in recognizing Malena Mallory with our Distinguished Citizen Award. All right. So, as we let them take their final picture, we're going to go ahead and get ready for D4, because we're a little behind schedule. All right. Thank you. So, now we're going to do D4, our Community Development Block Grant Program, 50th Anniversary Proclamation. Thank you, Mayor Welch, for allowing us to switch that for a little bit. We're ready. Ready, Madam Chair? All right. Just give them a couple seconds to clear up. This is even better. Madam Chair, housing opportunities for all, as you know, is one of our pillars for progress. I'd like to recognize and thank our housing team, led by Administrator Amy Foster, for their impactful work and innovative strategies. Housing is a national challenge and a local challenge here in St. Petersburg. We focus on innovation and partnership and utilizing every tool available to us. And one of those tools in our toolbox is the Community Development Block Grant, or CDBG, program. The program celebrates its 50th anniversary on August 17th, and I'd like to present the following proclamation to recognize this important milestone. And I want to ask Administrator Foster and your team to join me at the podium as I read the proclamation. How are y'all doing? And it reads, Whereas, the Community Development Block Grant program has existed since 1974 to provide state and local governments with the resources to develop viable urban communities. And whereas, the CDBG program provides annual funding and flexibility to local communities such as the city of St. Petersburg to provide decent, safe, and affordable housing, a suitable living environment, and economic opportunities to low- and moderate-income people. And whereas, for 25 years, our community has received a total of $104,776,930 in CDBG funds, and has funded a variety of projects that have directly benefited our citizens and neighborhoods. And whereas, we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the CDBG program in recognition of its tremendous contributions to the viability of the housing stock, infrastructure, public services, and the economic and well-being of our community. Now, therefore, I, Kenneth T. Welch, Mayor of the City of St. Petersburg, Florida, do hereby recognize the significance of the 50th anniversary of the CDBG program in St. Petersburg and urge residents to celebrate this milestone anniversary and its tremendous contributions to the well-being of our community. And thank you all for supporting us. I know some of you are lucky enough to serve on the CDBG committee. I'm not sure if you feel lucky as you try to figure out all the moving puzzle pieces of how to allocate those funds. But it's definitely made a huge difference in our community. And I know I, for one, was surprised to see what that totals up year after year. We have had significant federal cuts over the years, but it still, every little bit makes a big difference. So we have a number of different housing programs represented here today. I think we have Bright Communities. We also have our, what we call the single-family team. But they're working to make sure that those who need assistance in our community have safe housing to live in. And I believe I see Catholic Charities behind me as well. So thank you for all of your support, Council, and this program. Vice Chair Gerdes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I enjoy being on CDBG. I think I heard Council Member Floyd say the same thing. I just wanted to thank the Mayor. Amy, thank you so much for all the work that you do. Just the passion you have for it really shines through, especially in meetings like that, helping guide us on those types of decisions. It just really, it means a lot to me. And thank you so much for your guidance over the last couple years. Quickly, I just wanted to point out, and it's not because of CDBG, but they're here. I think a representative from Park is here. Yeah. Just real quickly, Chair and I were able to go to the groundbreaking for their new child services building. And because of CDBG doing programmatic services at Park, they are able to use money to do capital projects like that. And if you had ever been to the child service, the old child services building, compared to what the new one looks like, oh, my goodness. That's the importance of CDBG, being able to bring those dollars to services and let those dollars help there, and then they can help fund capital projects like this new child services building. It's just the most recent example that I was able to be at, plus it's in District 1, and so selfishly. But I just, again, Mayor, Amy, the whole team, Josh, thank you so much. Just excited to celebrate this $104 million over 25 years. That's a big number. That's a big number. Thank you, Madam Chair. Council Member Floyd. Thank you. Yeah, I'll just reiterate, you know, I think being on CDBG often means you have to come here, I think, once a year to hash things out. And it's early on a Friday, which is not a council member's favorite time after a late Thursday. But I want to – but after doing it twice now, I realized it's all right, actually, and it's really important, and it's something, you know, we do together with community members in deciding how to expend really important funds in our community. And I've enjoyed learning more about it, and I really just put myself in the queue to say thank you to the staff, who we lean on tremendously when they make their recommendations. And I really learned a lot this past year. I think the first year was just kind of figuring out what's going on, but this past year, I feel like I really learned a lot about how services get doled out in our community. And I look forward to being able to continue in that – participate in that process in the future. So thank you again. Thanks. Thank you. And seeing no further requests to speak, we're going to go ahead and keep it moving. We're going to now move to open forum. Clerk, can you please read the rules for us? If you wish to address city council on subjects other than public hearing or quasi-judicial items listed on the agenda, please sign up with the clerk. Only the individuals wishing to speak may sign the open forum sheet. Only city residents, owners of property, business owners in the city, or their employees may speak. All issues discussed under open forum must be limited to issues related to the City of St. Petersburg government. If you are speaking to an item on the agenda, you may only speak once during the open forum or when the item comes up on the agenda. In order to provide an opportunity for all citizens to address council, each individual will be given three minutes to speak, and after which the microphone will be muted. If you wish to address any council through the Zoom meeting, you must use the Raise Hand Feature button in the Zoom app or enter star 9 on your phone at the time the agenda item is addressed. When it is your turn to speak, you will be unmuted and asked to state your name and address. At the conclusion of your comments, or when you have reached the three-minute time limit, you will be muted. All raised hands will be lowered after each agenda item. Regardless of the method of participation used, normal rules apply, including the three-minute time limit on comments. The requirement that any presentation materials must be submitted in advance of the meeting and the rules of decorum. If live public comments is disrupted by the violation of the rules of decorum, the chair is authorized to accept public comments by alternate means, including by email only. And, Madam Chair, we do have some speakers. Okay, thank you. And I just want to inform all of our constituents that the first open forum has a 30-minute limit. So, upon the 30 minutes, we'll have to cut open forum and move through our agenda. First two names, please. The first two speakers is Charlene Harrison and Alvinette McLeave. Please go to either podium, state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. Good afternoon. Hello, my name is Charlene Harrison. My address is 301 22nd Avenue South. I am the director of operations at the St. Petersburg Arts Alliance, and I'm here speaking on behalf of individual artists and small arts organizations like the Al Downing, Tampa Bay Bass Jazz Association, which I am a board director. I am specifically here to advocate for the city's consideration in allocating 1% of its budget to fund individual arts and small arts organizations. Funding the arts is crucial because it provides financial support that allows artists to focus on their creative work within the constraints of commercial demands and financial stress. These funds, they empower the artists to experiment, take risks, develop their craft, which enriches the cultural landscape. Additionally, supporting artists through the funds would foster diversity, innovation in the arts, ensuring that a wide range of voices and perspectives can be represented and appreciated in our society. These operational dollars allow artists to explore their creativity, produce their work that might not fit commercial restraints. Through capacity building, we can support the artists. We nurture innovation, diversity, and cultural expression, which enriches our communities. Art is not just a form of expression, but it's a powerful tool for promoting emotional well-being. It fosters creativity, critical thinking, and emotional expression. Art is powerful. It means the processing of feelings, reducing stress, building resilience. Whether through creating or experiencing art, people of all ages can find a sense of connection and self-discovery that contributes to overall mental and emotional wellness. As a director, grants manager, and board member of a small organization, I have seen firsthand how vital it is to support individual artists and small arts organizations. It is incredibly rewarding to see how even a modest fund can profoundly impact artists, enabling them to take risks, develop their craft, and share their unique perspectives with the world. So, thank you so much for your time. Good afternoon. I'm Alvinette Downing McLeave, and I live at 6735 31st Way South, Apartment C, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33712. I'm the president of the Al Downing Tampa Bay Jazz Association, committed to ensuring that the only original American art form created by African Americans, jazz, is to be kept alive and taught to our students. I'm also the founder and CEO of Creative Intelligence Educational Mentors, which provides a holistic approach to tutoring for students kindergarten through college. Arts matter. Why? Because science has proven over and over and over again, whether it is creativity on canvas or on the black and white keys of a piano, artistry increases the intellectual capacity and functioning of students. As an educator, I've seen it. I've seen my students go from failing to excelling as a result in their activities and exposure to the creative arts. The Al Downing Tampa Bay Jazz Association has a working volunteer board that recognizes this truth. The administrators and teachers take time out of their normal days to become the master, to open their doors to our master classes of jazz. They know how important the impact is and what it means to students. Why must we support 1% of your budget allotted from the city? Well, you have witnessed the difference that it has in other cities, the difference it's made. Providing just 1% of your budget will keep organizations like the Al Downing Tampa Bay Jazz Association able to add to the success of our students and the enjoyment of our community. The money could provide our students with the educational necessities, music, theater, painting, sculpture. Provide them with exactly what they need on an educational journey to be successful, simply by putting 1% to establish and support art organizations and artists. This is what I want you to take with the back. The next time you look in the mirror, remember your 8, 12, or 16-year-old self. Think back on your educational path. What were the things that made fun and successful learning for you? Your time in marching band? Your time singing in choir? The photography class where you captured that perfect moment? Or the art class that you sculptured that cherished bowl your mother or you still have? You are those successful examples that were able to make a difference in Pinellas County because of the arts. That is what I want you to remember. Please consider dedicating 1% of your budget to the essentials that made you successful. The arts. Thank you. Thank you. Madam Chair, the next two speakers is Ricky Seed and Teresa Sullivan. Please go to either podium. State your name and address for the record. We'll have three minutes to address Council. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Ricky Singh, and my address is 515 22nd Street South. I am a studio artist at Warehouse Artistic. I moved to St. Pete from New Jersey last year because of what I saw here, a very vibrant artistic community. And because of that, I got an opportunity at Warehouse Artistic to get subsidized studio space where I can create art and all other stuff. However, since June, our arts organizations have been in crisis, and Warehouse Artistic has experienced this hardship too. Warehouse Artistic is more than just a place. It's an ecosystem that nurtures creativity, fosters collaboration, and enriches our community. The funding Warehouse Artistic receives is returned manifold through subsidies, free events, and educational programs across St. Pete. As a working artist in St. Pete, I have seen this firsthand. I am also committed to giving back by teaching kids at Jordan Park this next couple of months how to create resin artwork, inspiring a new generation of artists and helping keep them off the streets. To ensure the arts community's continued success, we need Citi's Department of Arts and Culture to directly oversee funding for the arts. We don't need any extra bureaucracy. We trust Citi to manage these funds transparently and efficiently, ensuring that resources go directly to arts organizations and sustain our webnet arts scene. This approach will maximize the impact of each dollar, fostering even more creativity and engagement within our community here. Support the supporters. Support arts, nonprofits in a systematic way. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Teresa Sullivan. I live at 2411 Sunrise Drive Southeast in St. Pete. I'm a mosaic artist. I teach mosaic classes. I'm a founding board member of the Warehouse Arts District Association, and I give monthly to arts nonprofits. I put my money where my mouth is. I believe local nonprofit organizations are the foundations of the artistic scene here in St. Petersburg. But to accomplish their missions, they ask to be consistent funding from the state, from the county, and, yes, from the city. So let's take a look at an ROI perspective. I believe that value and image of St. Pete will increase with the city's investment in the arts organizations. And as far as quality of life, it's an intangible measure, but it is why people move here, and it is, more importantly, why people stay here. And I believe that it will also be raised. So what should be done? First, create a grant program to help the nonprofit organizations be more effective in their outreach, advocacy, and accessibility. Let the nonprofits do what they do best, build community. Task the City Department of Arts, Culture, and Tourism, led by Celeste Davis, to use their existing processes, resources, and expertise to administer the resulting grant program. Finally, let the City of the Arts create an ample fund, say a 1% of the budget, and show everyone that the City of the Arts puts its money where its mouth is. Thank you. The next two speakers. The next two speakers is Ryan Griffin and Pamela Joyce-Rowe. Good afternoon. I'm Ryan Griffin. I live at 322 Bel Air Drive, Northeast. I'm here today to speak in support of the proposed policy to dedicate funds from the city budget on an annual basis to the arts. I appreciate the opportunity to be able to speak with you. I'm here today, and proudly here today, as the chair of the St. Pete Arts Alliance. I'm also born and raised in St. Pete, past chair of the Chamber of Commerce, past president, immediate past president of the St. Pete Bar Association, with Ms. Janine here. I'm on the board of EDC. I've been the past chair of Gross Martyr Strategy. I'm a lawyer and partner at the Johnson Pope Law Firm here in St. Pete. I'm the owner of a lot of restaurants, Trophy Fish, Mandarin Hyde, El Cap, Perry's Porch. In every one of those capacities, the arts has been inextricably intertwined in my life and in my work. The arts has been an unbelievable economic driver for our community, as evidenced by the Gross Martyr Strategy, which, if you're not familiar, was a multi-year, comprehensive, equitable economic development strategy that was partnered by the city, the Chamber of Commerce, and local businesses. That plan spotlighted the importance of the arts in our community's economic success. Further, as it relates to tourism, Visit St. Pete Clearwater has always identified arts to be the major distinguisher for St. Pete, among other coastal and beach communities, to draw tourism here, which has been a huge economic driver for us. Moreover, the EDC uses the arts to market to and to attract incredible companies like ARK Invest to relocate their headquarters here to St. Pete, and with that relocation, create high-paying jobs for our community. Lastly, and most importantly, the arts is part of our community's fabric and identity and attracts people to live and work here. And with all of that, because of the rich arts culture, I think we have thrived over the last two decades, especially. With the recent changes at the state level in terms of funding for the arts and given the current economic conditions, this is a dire and critical time for the arts. This is a time to be a leader and to show other communities how to support the arts and truly be an arts city. If approved, St. Pete will be a beacon, and it will create enormous ripple effect, and this money will stimulate our arts community, but it will also send a message to arts communities beyond St. Pete, throughout our country and throughout the world, that what kind of support we have and leadership we have and what the arts truly means to us. And I think with that, artists and art supporters will flock to our city. To end, as the chair of the St. Pete Arts Alliance, our organization is willing and experienced and situated to work diligently to help the city get the most impact of this on a DEI level for the community. Thank you. You can go ahead and begin. My name is Pamela Joy Trow, and I live at 223 Elmwood Circle, 7033777, but I work throughout St. Pete. And I'm an artist with a background as a professional designer, illustrator, and creative director. And my experience has given me the insight to understand the power of a message, whether subtle or bold. In my art, I use messages that aim to inform, educate, and bring smiles to people's faces. In 2022, I received a $10,000 grant from Creative Pinellas, the National Endowment for the Arts, and Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners. With this support and collaboration with Dr. Jeremiah Tipton, I created a coloring book titled There's a Crystal Clear Pond, The Unseen World of Water Pollution, which tells the story of a goldfish saving a community pond from pollution. The kit includes the coloring book with a science game in the back utilizing scanning electron microscopy photos of the decomposing pond litter in the story. Also, a science game answer card with QR codes to environmental websites, a pack of coloring pencils, and a sticker proclaiming the colorist as a member of the Glenda Goldfish Clean Water Club. And last year, I conducted nine workshops and nine Pinellas County libraries providing free kits to children, parents, and adults. At the end of each workshop, I asked the children what they would do if they saw a styrofoam cup in the ocean. Apart from that one child who said, I'll go get my mom to pick it up, their responses showed they understood my message. I left kits and scripts with each library to continue spreading the message, and I also sell the kits locally to support my livelihood. City counselors, without local arts funding, projects like mine would not be possible. Defunding the arts directly impacts artists' livelihoods. Please continue to support arts funding so community-minded artists like myself can contribute to our community's health, education, and happiness, and make a living at the same time. Thank you, and I hope you enjoy the coloring books. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. The next two speakers is Susan Betzer and Roger Curlin. Please state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. Hello, I'm Dr. Susan Betzer, 1830 Crescent Lake Drive North, St. Petersburg 33704. I'm a retired family doctor and geriatrician and a 53-year resident of St. Petersburg. I'm a longtime board member of our Florida Orchestra and of ACE, which is Arts for a Complete Education, a group dedicated to education and in the arts in our public schools, and it's under the umbrella of the St. Petersburg Arts Alliance. I'm here in support of the proposal that the city plan to budget no less than 1% of the annual budget to support the arts in St. Petersburg. You've already heard many compelling reasons why this is a great idea. I'd like to pull out and emphasize just one, the impact of arts on education in our community. With the growth and increasing prominence of the visual and performing arts throughout St. Petersburg, we've seen a concurrent growth of measurable student achievement in our public schools, measurable student achievement. It is no accident that arts infusing our community, along with high-quality arts opportunities in our schools, supported by an engaged community of volunteers has helped us achieve the first-ever A grade for Pinellas County schools, just this year, just announced last week. And for the first time, there is no D or F-rated school in Pinellas County. This is no accident. The arts organizations and individuals that the 1% for the arts would support are central to educational outreach programs throughout our community and would include organizations which lost funding last year, which raised in size from individual artists to our wonderful Florida Orchestra. These are the programs that change lives for the better throughout our community from early childhood to old age. So, in closing, please follow a prescription from this retired family doctor. Include 1% for the arts in the budget. The results will make us all smarter. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you, Counsel Roger Curlin. I am the executive, oh, sorry, 4535 6th Avenue North. I'm the executive director of the Edge Business District Association. I also serve on the board of the St. Petersburg Opera Company, and I also participate for many years now with Creative Clay on their marketing and development committee. I'm here on behalf of the Edge Business District Association today. We represent over 130 businesses here in the city and have 115 members of our association. We likewise are supporting the effort to earmark 1% of the budget for the arts. It's important for our vibe, our economy, our health, and our happiness. I would also encourage the city to collaborate on the creation of a national promotion campaign that focuses on St. Pete as a must-visit art destination, and as I like to say, see art, feel art, buy art. I also like to remind us that we need to support and amplify both our nonprofit and our for-profit art organizations and entities here in town. And last but not least, I applaud the city's efforts to address housing affordability, and I would encourage building more inventory of micro-efficiencies in studio apartments in the 400-square-foot and below range because that can help meet the demand of affordability amongst our art, hospitality, workforce, elder, and single-living community. Thank you. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. Next, it's Robert Kapuska and Cheyenne DeBoris. Rob left. Rob left. Okay. Cheyenne DeBoris. Thank you. And Paulita. Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of the Council. My name is Cheyenne DeBoris. I am the Donor Services Manager for American Stage, 163 3rd Street North, St. Petersburg, 33701. American Stage has been a staple of the arts community in St. Pete for 47 years. I'm here today to express our support for the proposed policy that would commit a minimum of 1% of 1% of the city budget to support the arts each year. This policy could not have been proposed at a better time, as it would help offset the significant loss that arts nonprofits and for-profits like American Stage incurred after Governor DeSantis unexpectedly vetoed $32 million in anticipated funding. American Stage lost $150,000 of anticipated support. This loss greatly impacts our arts community, affecting hundreds of jobs and creating barriers to providing services to St. Pete and Tampa Bay residents. Arts positively impact our economy, creating significant revenue for the city, as well as distinguishing St. Pete's repute as an arts destination. According to the Arts and Economic Prosperity Study 6, conducted by Americans for the Arts and the St. Petersburg Arts Alliance, direct economic activity, or total expenditures, by arts organizations and audiences, totaled over $132 million within St. Pete in fiscal year 22, one year. By committing a minimum of 1% of the budget to support the arts, the city of St. Petersburg would be making an investment with a substantial return. A quick and related update from American Stage. We recently launched a campaign to save park. For 38 years, American Stage has produced an outdoor production in our city's parks. Attending the park show is a beloved annual tradition for so many in St. Petersburg, but it requires substantial funding, just like all of the non-profit arts organizations across our city. To date, American Stage has raised over $100,000 towards our $500,000 goal, and we will keep the council informed of our progress. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Polita Glenn. I live at 6010 Bahama Shores Drive, proud resident of District 5, and I want to thank you for this opportunity to speak today to address the proposed policy to dedicate 1% minimum of the budget for arts every year. This initiative could not have come at a more important time since the arts are growing and the state of Florida funding has been cut. I'm a writer and a filmmaker. I'm also a business owner, and I have a small non-profit film company, and I've worked for many years as an arts educator. I'm currently working on a documentary film about erased histories in St. Petersburg and Tampa Bay, and this project would never have been possible without the essential funding from grants from St. Petersburg Arts Alliance, Creative Pinellas, and Florida Humanities. I can testify that public funding for the arts is a lifeline for artists. I started coming to St. Petersburg in 2014 when my son started at USF St. Pete, and even 10 years ago, I was struck by the richness of the arts and culture in our community. When we decided to move here from Miami in 2021, the arts community was an essential factor in our decision. Whether it's this quality of life element that attracts new residents like ourselves or cultural attractions that draw tourists, I think we can all agree that the arts are a major driver in our economy. Economic studies, as have been quoted here, show how the sector has generated millions of dollars in economic activity, supported over 2,000 jobs, provided $85 million in personal income to residents, and generated $26 million in taxes. We also recognize that tourism is also a major driver, and according to the study for the St. Pete Clearwater study, within the $1.8 billion tourism industry, 90 percent or 98 percent of arts visitors come to St. Pete for the arts and for culture, with most coming to visit museums and other activities. So there's clearly clear evidence about the benefit of the arts to St. Petersburg economy and growth. But we also know that growth can be double-edged, and that living in Miami, we watched how the arts revitalized districts like South Beach and Wynwood, but also how that growth priced out artists. So this opportunity gives a chance to support artists, to allow them to continue to stay in the city, to create in the city, and to contribute. So I hope that you will certainly consider the benefit. Thank you. We have time for one or two cards. Two cards? Okay, next to the speakers, please. It's Hany, Hany Becker, and Ignacio, Ignacio Barron-Villa. Please state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address council. Good afternoon. My name is Hany Becker, and I live at 1014 56th Avenue South. Honorable members of the city council, I initially came here today to express my continued support for the proposal for the 1% budget allocation for the arts. However, since I've already communicated that in previous letters to you, and my friends present here and colleagues have done a great job in covering that, I want to take this opportunity to thank each and every one of you for your dedication and hard work on the historic gas plant development project. This project, which had adopted Mayor Welch's five pillars of progress, will have a profound impact on generations to come. Your commitment to addressing the complexities involved in a project of this scale, raising flags, identifying risks, and ultimately approving a plan that aligns with our community's vision for the future is truly commendable. Whether you voted for it or against it, your thorough consideration and the collective effort you put into this decision are deeply appreciated. It's often said that public servants don't hear enough appreciation, so today I want to ensure that you do. And now, we look to the future. I want to emphasize the importance of vision in building a strong foundation for St. Petersburg. The pillars you've endorsed are crucial to our progress, but we must also consider what our city and our region would look like without the arts. The arts are not just an added layer of culture. They are an essential pillar in themselves, supporting the very identity and vibrancy of our community. I'm shaking, you can tell from my voice. Without the arts, we risk building a future that is less vibrant, less inclusive, and ultimately less reflected of the diverse, creative spirit that defines St. Petersburg. As you have done with the gas plant project, I urge you to consider how the arts contribute to the strong, resilient, and innovative city we all envision. Thank you once again for your leadership and for your continued commitment to making St. Petersburg a place where creativity and progress go hand in hand. Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of the Council, Ignacio Barron-Biela, 244 2nd Avenue North in St. Petersburg. First of all, thank you for the opportunity for letting me speak today, and good to see you, and thank you for all you do for our city. Much appreciated. I'm a St. Petersburg resident, and I'm the president and CEO of the Florida Orchestra. I'm here to express the Florida Orchestra's support to the proposed policy to dedicate a minimum of 1% of the annual budget to support the arts in the city of St. Petersburg. St. Petersburg is a vibrant community and an arts destination, shaped as much by our culture and institutions as our award-winning beaches and sport teams. Deeply rooted in this community for nearly 57 years, the Florida Orchestra is proud to be a beacon of excellence and a cultural powerhouse as the largest professional orchestra in the state. This is your orchestra, and we are a non-profit that serves more than 150,000 people each season through outstanding concerts and education and community programs. We reach nearly 60,000 of those through free or low-cost programs, including free educational youth concerts and the family-friendly Pops in the Park community concert, each fall in Benoit Park, as you might know. At the Mahaffey Theater, we perform a wide variety of concerts with diverse programming that create unforgettable moments, from Beethoven to Sting to the music of Jimmy Buffett. All under the artistic leadership of internationally acclaimed music director Michael Francis, such extraordinary music has the power to bring us together and have positive impact on every person. I believe the arts and music can transform lives. They transform mine. That's why I'm here today. And as part of our mission, the Florida Orchestra is a catalyst for beauty, healing, excellence, and economic vibrancy. I am very aware of the documents that have been previously shared with City Council, the Comprehensive Arts Strategy and the Economic Impact Study, AEP-6, of the amazing impact that the arts provide to this community, and the orchestra is one of them. The Florida Orchestra and the arts are essential to St. Petersburg, and St. Petersburg is essential to the Florida Orchestra and the arts. We help each other to thrive and grow, and we are grateful for the support to the orchestra and all the arts. We could not do this without your support and you, our city. This is why, on behalf of the Florida Orchestra, I ask for your support, voice, and vision to allocate 1% of the city's annual budget to provide adequate funding for the arts. Thank you very much. Thanks so much. Thank you. So now we will close open forum, and we're going to conduct our two new business items before we take a 10-minute recess. The first item is G1, and that is my new business item that I am respectfully requesting, a referral to the Public Service and Infrastructure Committee or other relevant committee for a discussion on the city's electric and hybrid fleet vehicles and the plan for achieving emissions and diesel-free mobility. And with that... Move approval. Second. Having a motion and a second, can you please open the machine for voting for G1? Council members, please cast your votes. Seeing that all present council members have voted, can you please tell in and announce the votes? Madam Chair, a motion to approve agenda item G1 passes unanimously, with Council Member Mohammed being absent. Thank you. Now we'll move to item G2. Council Member Driscoll. Thank you. For this new business item, I am respectfully requesting a referral to the Committee of the Whole to discuss the Salt Creek property that is currently on the Wikiwaji project list. I move approval. Now that we have a motion that's been properly seconded, can you please open the machine for voting? Council members, please cast your votes. Now that our present council members have voted, can you please tell in and announce the votes? Madam Chair, a motion to approve agenda item G2 passes unanimously, with Council Member Mohammed being absent. Thank you. We're going to break for a 10-minute recess. Thank you, Chair. We will now take up our public hearings, beginning with J-1. Clerk, can you please read the title? Harness number 590-H, an ordinance amending section 21-125 of the City Code relating to Wikiwaji monies. Temporary place in an available investment with little risk of principal reduction and providing for an effective date. And Madam Chair, we do not have any cards on this one. Thank you. Joining us is our Interim Chief Financial Officer, Ms. Erica Lanyans. Good evening. Hi. As mentioned, this ordinance proposes that leftover funding in the Wikiwaji projects fund is retained in that fund to shield money from potential market risk if we have some temporary projects to be pending to be financed through Wikiwaji funding. Move approval. Second. Clerk, we have a motion. It's been properly seconded. Clerk, can you please open the machine for voting? Council Members, please cast your votes. Now that all present Council Members have voted, can you please count and announce the vote? Madam Chair, a motion to approve for agenda item J-1 passes unanimously with Council Member Mohammed being absent. Thank you. Now we will move to item J-2, A, and B, which are quasi-judicial. Clerk, can you please swear on all speakers, including city staff? Madam Chair, I have to recuse myself for this item. Thank you. Anyone speaking on this item J-2, please stand and warn in. Staff, we're affirmed that the evidence you're about to give is approved. Can you please read the ordinance titles, please? Ordinance number 760-L, an ordinance amending the future land use map of the comprehensive plan for the city of St. Petersburg, Florida, by changing the future land use map designation for a 0.58-acre site consisting of four parcels, generally located at 920 20th Avenue South from Plan Redevelopment Residential PR-R to Plan Redevelopment Mixed-Use PR-MU, providing for repeal of conflicting ordinances and provisions thereof, and providing for an effective date. Would you like me to read the other one, Madam Chair? Yes, please. Ordinance number 792-Z, an ordinance amending the official zoning map of the city of St. Petersburg, Florida, by changing the zoning of a 0.58-acre site consisting of four parcels, generally located at 920 20th Avenue South from Neighborhood Traditional-1 and T-1 to Corridor Residential Traditional-1, CRT-1, providing for repeal of conflicting ordinances and provisions thereof, and providing for an effective date. Thank you. So now we're going to move to our presentations. Each party will have 10 minutes for their initial presentation, and we will begin with the city staff presentation. Joining us is Planner Andrew Juritz. Did I say that correctly? Andrew Juritz, yeah. Close enough. Thank you, thank you. Thank you. Well, welcome, Andrew. Thank you. Ready to go? Okay. Good afternoon, Council Members. As introduced, Andrew Juritz, Planner for the Record, presenting amendments to the future land use map and official zoning map for a 0.58-acre site, generally located at 920 20th Avenue South, initiated by Namaste Homes. Per the applicant's notice of intent, the site will be redeveloped to accommodate multifamily townhomes. This is an aerial of the subject property, which is located at 920 20th Avenue South, just west of Dr. MLK Jr. Street South. The site has been owned and operated by SH St. Pete MLK LLC since 2020 and previously consisted of two single-family residences on the northwestern and southeastern parcels, which were demolished in 2018 and 2020, respectively. Currently, all parcels are vacant. The site itself is within the Cromwell Heights Neighborhood Association, which extends western to 16th Street South. The Barlett Park Neighborhood Association is roughly 300 feet east to the site across Dr. MLK Jr. Street South. To the north are predominantly single-family homes with a triplex and convenience store along Dr. MLK Jr. Street South. East of the site is a mix of commercial and residential, and then further south of the site across 21st Avenue South is a medical office building. This is the future land use map showing the subject site designated planned redevelopment residential, PRR for short, which is proposed for amendment to planned redevelopment mixed-use, PRMU, in keeping with the PRMU designations to the east and the south. Additionally, the request will require an amendment to the county-wide plan map going from residential medium to multimodal corridor. This is the current zoning map showing the site-zoned neighborhood traditional one, NT1, which is proposed for amendment to corridor residential traditional one, or CRT1, to be consistent with the CRT1 to the east and allowing for the potential redevelopment of multifamily housing. So the change in development potential from neighborhood traditional one to corridor residential traditional one will impact the form, density, and intensity of allowable development. Firstly, a change to CRT1 would allow for redevelopment of multifamily use, whereas this use is not permitted under the current NT1 zoning. The allowable base density would also increase from 15 dwelling units an acre, one primary and one accessory per lot, to a base density of 24 dwelling units per acre. For the 0.58 acre site, this would result in an increase from four single-family and four accessory units to 14 multifamily units. CRT1 also allows for utilization of either the workforce housing density bonus at an additional eight units per acre or the missing middle housing density bonus at an additional six dwelling units per acre. For the 0.58 acre site, the workforce housing density bonus would result in an additional five units, and missing middle would result in an additional three units. As mentioned in the staff report, the owner of the subject parcels also owns the three eastern adjacent parcels fronting Dr. MLK Jr. Street South. These parcels are also under consistent zoning to the proposed changes to CRT1 zoning and existing future land use or the existing future land use of these three adjacent parcels is consistent with the proposed request to PRMU. Per the applicant's notice of intent, it is anticipated that these parcels will be redeveloped with the amendment subject area, increasing the total redevelopment area to 1.16 acres. At a base density allowance of 24 dwelling units per acre, the total 1.16 acre site could have 28 units. With the workforce housing density bonus providing an additional eight units, the site could have 37 units. Or with the missing middle housing density bonus providing an additional six units per acre, the site could have 35 units. Also noted in the staff report, the proposed amendments are consistent with numerous policies of the comprehensive plan, For example, the proposal has the potential to contribute to the provision of safe and sanitary affordable housing. It provides for an orderly land use transition from Dr. MLK Jr. Street South to the east and neighboring single-family residences to the west. And it is generally compatible with the character and zoning makeup of the surrounding area. Also provided for in the staff report, the level of service impact analysis concludes that the proposed future land use map amendment and concurrent rezoning will not have a significant impact on the city's adopted LOS standards for public services and facilities, including potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, traffic, mass transit, recreation, and stormwater management. The proposed amendments also further the goals of the city's housing opportunities for all plan in the Advantage Pinellas Housing Compact that aim to address housing affordability by increasing the availability of workforce housing throughout the community. And with all that said, staff recommends a finding of consistency with the comprehensive plan and recommends that city council approve the future land use change from PRMU to PRMU and zoning change to CRT1. Thank you. Now does the applicant have a presentation? Thank you. So now we will take public comment, and I don't need to ask if we have cards. Do we have cards? Chair, for this item, we do not have any cards. Really? Okay. Well, we have no cards. We have no cards for that. Staff, any closing remarks or rebuttal? None. Thank you. Okay. Does the applicant have any closing remarks or rebuttal? No, thank you. Just normal stay home specializes in affordable and workforce housing, and we will give you the opportunity to increase the available housing supply in this area. All right. Thank you so much. So now we will go into our executive session, and Council Member Driscoll. Thank you. Thank you for the presentation, and thank you to Namaste Homes for bringing this forward, seeing the development that you've already done just north of that on MLK Street South. All I can say is let's have some more. I mean, you've done an excellent job with that, and you're really connecting people with homeownership who may not otherwise have that opportunity. So thank you for all that you're doing. I'm looking forward to seeing more of this in our community. I do have a question for the city attorney's office. We have two items here. Can they be taken up together, or should we do two separate votes? You may take them together, Council Member. All right. Thank you. Then in that case, I'll move approval of items J2A and J2B. Second. Thank you. Seeing no further requests to speak, can you please open the machine for voting? Council Members, can you please cast your votes? Now that all present Council Members have voted, can you please tally and announce the votes? Madam Chair, motion to approve Agenda Item J2A and B passes unanimously, with Council Member Mohammed being absent and Council Member Gabbert being recused. Thank you so much. Thank you. So now we're going to go ahead and move to Item J3A and B, which is also quasi-judicial. Oh, thank you, Madam Chair. Just quickly, just want to put it on the record that I did have three people reach out to my personal cell phone, Kevin Scott, Carrie Davis, and James May. Those conversations, which I told them I was not allowed to comment, had been forwarded to my city email, so they are public record, and they'll be forwarded to all city council members. Thank you, Madam Chair. Clerk, can you please swear on all speakers, including city staff? Thank you. On this item, please confirm that the evidence you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I do. Thank you. Can you please read the ordinance titles? Ordinance number 761-L, an ordinance amending the future land use element of the comprehensive plan for the City of St. Petersburg, Florida, by changing the future land use map designation for Block 70 and a portion of Block 69 of the Pasadena on the Gulf, Section B subdivision, from I, institutional, to RM, residential medium, providing for repeal of conflicting ordinances and provisions thereof, and providing for an effective date. The next ordinance is Ordinance 794-Z, an ordinance amending the official zoning map of the City of St. Petersburg, Florida, by changing the official zoning map designation for Block 70 and a portion of Block 69 of the Pasadena-on-the-Gulf, Section B subdivision, from NT-3, Neighborhood Traditional, to NSM-1, Neighborhood Suburban Multifamily, providing for repeal of conflicting ordinances and provisions thereof, and providing for an effective date. And, Madam Chair, we do have several cards. Okay, thank you, Claire. So now we're going to move to our presentation. And each party will have 10 minutes for their initial presentation. We will begin with the City staff presentation. And joining us is our Urban Design and Historic Preservation Manager, Mr. Derrick Kilbourne, and Planner, Brandon Evans. Good evening. Thank you, Chair. I will be presenting this item tonight as the Manager for Urban Planning and Historic Preservation. As you've just noted, also with me tonight is Braden Evans, who is a planner from our division who worked significantly on this case. And also we have Tom Whelan to help answer any transportation or traffic questions that might come up. This particular application is for an official zoning and future land use map amendment covering 5.09 acres at a site generally located at 6942 First Avenue South, which was initiated by the Pasadena Community Church and is represented by an agent here this evening. As stated by the applicant, the purpose of the amendment is to allow for the development of multifamily units following the sale of the two parcels that are identified on the screen. The reason that we're here today is because there was an initial map amendment application made to the Community Planning and Preservation Commission. On May 14th of this year, the commission conducted a public hearing. After hearing the initial presentations and conducting public comments, the commission voted 0 to 7 against the requested map amendment. Following that public hearing on May 14th, on May 23rd, the city received an appeal of that commission decision. So per city code, this application is coming to you today for consideration as part of the appeal. But per the instructions of city code, it also is to be considered as the map amendment request. So you will be receiving more specific instruction, I believe, from the city attorneys as we kind of move through this process and what your role is in it. But in order to overturn the appeal and approve what is being requested, would require a supermajority vote of the city council, which is for seven members, a minimum of five votes. And like I said, you'll receive additional instruction. Okay, so what we want to do is kind of cover just the application itself and what is being requested, starting with the aerial image of the subject property. You can see that it consists essentially of two city blocks opposite and opposite sides of 70th Street South, located just south of First Avenue South and just west of Pasadena Avenue South. And they are highlighted on the aerial photo here with some notations about surrounding properties. Generally, you can see to the north of the subject parcels, you have commercial mixed use on those properties. And then important to this discussion and the individuals who are here to speak this evening, as you move west of those parcels, you'll see that it is predominantly single-family residential. And then to the south is the existing institutional use, the Pasadena Community Church. What they are requesting first is a future land use map amendment. The parcels are currently I, institutional, which represents the church use. But in order to discharge these parcels for either single-family or multifamily development, they'll no longer be used and controlled by the church. And so the institutional use on the future land use map is typically changed. And to support the request from the applicant for multifamily, in this instance, they are requesting the residential medium RM category. On the zoning map, you can see that the existing zoning is NT3, which is a single-family zoning category. The NT3 category was amended in 2022 to also allow accessory dwelling units. And so in this instance, you have single-family with accessory dwelling unit. The proposed zoning category is NSM, neighborhood, suburban, multifamily. And then as we highlighted on the aerial photo, you can see that the commercial uses north of First Avenue South are there because of the CCT-1, CRT-1, and CCS-1 zoning categories, which are all mixed-use categories, allowing commercial and multifamily. These pictures here just give you some context photos of the two blocks if you're not familiar with the area. This particular picture is looking at the northeast block. And as we kind of move through here, you'll see from that same position, this is looking at the northwest block. And as we just kind of move around the four corners here, these photos were included in the original presentation to the commission. In the package of materials that you received for this meeting, there were additional photos added. And those additional photos were included to show additional context around the two blocks based on just some of the public comments and feedback that had been presented to the commission and received since that time. We try to give you additional photo information to understand what is being asked for. Okay, this table is showing you a comparison between the NT-3 zoning, which is existing, and the proposed NSM-1 zoning category. And this is pretty self-explanatory. You can see the side-by-side comparisons. We did want to note there have been a number of public comments coming in leading up to this public hearing. There was a public comment that came in in the last, I believe, couple days that indicated that multifamily would be permitted up to 60 feet in overall height. And we just wanted to clarify that the 60-foot allowance is only when a project includes workforce housing units. If it does not include workforce housing units, the maximum allowed height per the zoning category is 48 feet. If it was rezoned to NSM-1, under the existing NT-3, it is 36 feet. In looking at the comprehensive plan and making findings or determinations of consistency, the staff report includes many different goals, objectives, and policies. These are three that we highlighted for the commission in our initial presentation. We look at surrounding development, the character of the surrounding development, the densities, the floor area ratios. We also look at road classifications and traffic distribution patterns. And you can see, for example, with transportation, this map is showing the relationship of the two subject blocks, which are highlighted in yellow, to some of the roadway networks to the east and to the north. So some of what was discussed at the commission hearing, you can see the distribution of future major streets, which is highlighted in the blue color, Pasadena Avenue South, Central Avenue, and First Avenue South. The future major street for First Avenue South ends at Pasadena Avenue. It does not carry west in front of the two subject parcels. In our initial review and evaluation of this, seeing the dedicated bicycle lane, knowing the walkable distance to the intersections at Central Avenue and Pasadena Avenue, and the two Sunrunner Station locations just east of Pasadena Avenue, contributed to staff's recommendation, a finding of consistency and recommendation to approve. This is kind of steps out a little bit. It shows you a broader application of the site and the surrounding zoning. And it also shows you the relationship of this site to the Central Avenue revitalization plan boundary, which is now recognized on the maps as an activity center area, which you see highlighted there. For each of these applications, we also conduct a level of service analysis. The details of the level of service analysis are included in the commission staff report. And then finally, you have obviously a lot of public comments that were contributed during the commission hearing, also that were received between that commission hearing and this hearing tonight. Many of those comments are recorded in the meeting minutes that were included in your city council packet. They're also recorded in the comments that were included and the ones that you've received directly to your office. For those reasons, as I mentioned, going through that analysis, the city staff did make a finding of consistency. We made a recommendation to approve. The commission voted 0 to 7 to deny. And so the discussion tonight would require a supermajority vote of the city council to overturn that commission recommendation and decision. That's it for our initial presentation. Like I said, we do have staff here to help answer your questions. Thank you. Okay, thank you. So now we will have the applicant's presentation. Madam Chair. Can I ask, is this different in some way? Is this different than what's in here? Yes. The binder that you received was an evidence binder that has the reports in the application, and this is a PowerPoint. Oh, you already have it. That's what I was asking. If this was anything different than what I was talking about. The staff must have provided it, sorry, or the clerk must have provided it after we emailed it. Sorry, I wasn't sure if you had a copy. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm sorry. Okay, that's all right. Thank you for the clarification. It is not different. Go ahead. You can start your 10 minutes. Very good. Thank you, Madam Chair, council members, Katie Cole with the law firm of Hillward Henderson, 600 Cleveland Street, Suite 800. Clearwater representing Onyx and East, the agent and agent for the owner, Pasadena Community Church, who is the applicants related to this FLUM 75. I have the unenviable task this evening of asking you to approve a MAP amendment, which we know you've received significant correspondence from neighbors opposed, and which without much analytical discussion, the CPPC recommended unanimously to deny. But alas, we are here, because based on all of the analysis of both your staff, your professional team, the professional team engaged by the applicant, this request is consistent with your comprehensive plan. It is consistent with the surrounding area, and yes, the neighborhood. This amendment should be approved. I'd like to introduce Rachel Markwitz, a PE with Onyx and East, whose resume is also in the handouts that you receive. She's an expert in development plans and infill projects. Also with us today is Steve Henry, our traffic expert, Steve Sposoto, our planning experts, Tim Clemens, the architect, all who have contributed to the application and the reports before you today and previously entered into the record. That'll hand it over to Rachel. Perfect. Good evening, council members and neighbors from Old Pasadena. My name's Rachel Markwitz, and while I am the director of land development in Onyx and East, I'm also a St. Pete resident of eight years, and as anybody who's lived in this city for some time, I love this city. I love its diversity, I love the presence of the arts here, and I love everything this city has to offer that every other city in this state does not. I'm also a licensed professional engineer and have worked on projects for most of the large national home builders. I want to point out that Onyx and East is not a large national home builder. We're not a developer just churning out as many homes as we can every year. We care about the quality of the homes we build. We care about the locations and the neighborhoods we choose to put our projects in. City staff has done a great job presenting the technical reasons on why this application should be approved, so I'd like to use the remainder of my time to show you our vision for this site and why we think it complements the adjacent neighborhood. Comp plan policy LU 3.6 states that planning decisions shall weigh heavily on the established character of the predominantly developed areas. So what is the character of the developed areas around this property? You can see on this aerial the project location outlined in yellow. While the property is technically within the boundaries of the Old Pasadena Neighborhood Association, the reality is that the neighborhood is to the west and south of this property. The project's not proposed in the center of the neighborhood with single-family homes surrounding it. The aerial shows outlined in red the extent of the church property that buffers the development from the majority of the neighborhood. This includes on the west side the location of the new preschool. Here you have the Pinellas Trail and the city-owned property housing the underground wastewater pump station. After the trail, you have office and commercial uses as shown on the screen. Continuing west and directly across from the property, you see mostly single-story medical office uses. Although these are relatively low-density uses now, the zoning allows for three- to four-story mixed-use developments or multifamily structures. Approval of this application does not change the fact that Old Pasadena is a residential neighborhood with commercial properties and the church at its outer edges. The photos you're looking at now are directly adjacent to the north. This is what's directly adjacent to the south. As I mentioned before, this is the remaining church property. When you look at a zoning map, this area can be misleading because it's technically given a residential zoning designation of NT3, but that has not been the use for the period of time that the church has been here. Facing east, you see the city's wastewater pump station, which is currently being used for construction staging in this photo. Again, this is technically zoned NT3, but that's not the actual use. It's also important to note this is the only parcel separating the subject property from the Pinellas Trail and the future major street that is Pasadena Avenue. And here's the property facing west. This is the only portion of our project that faces an existing single family home in the old Pasadena neighborhood. Not only do we have the 71st Street South right-of-way separating us from the existing single family home, but I want to show you the rendering of what our neighbors will see when they look into our project. Look at the similarity in these two views. We have the side of an existing single family home facing the side of a proposed single family home. The sides of both buildings are required to be 15 feet from the property line. There's little difference between these two images. Although not required, we engage a traffic engineer to conduct a preliminary traffic analysis assessing the impact of the project on the surrounding road network as we know that neighbors were concerned about this. In summary, all of the roadways in the vicinity of the project have more than enough capacity to accommodate the trips generated by the development. Here's our proposed site plan for the project. The western block, which is closer to the neighborhood, is comprised of single family lots. These are skinny lots with a narrower width than you typically see in the city. The eastern block, which is further from the neighborhood, shows attached townhomes with four units per building. We've made an intentional decision to construct two-story townhomes rather than our typical three stories, and we've located them as far from the existing neighbors as possible. You can see by looking at the aerial below our site plan that the proposed townhomes are relatively in the same location as the existing church buildings. The city has acknowledged the importance of missing middle housing in solving the St. Pete housing crisis. Missing middle housing means a range of housing types, and that's exactly what we're proposing here, as you saw in the previous slide. NSM-1, the requested zoning category in this application, is one of a few zoning designations that correlate with missing middle housing. The housing crisis in St. Pete will not be solved with only affordable housing projects. The city needs an increased supply of housing for all ranges of income, and missing middle is an important component of that. A study by Opticos and AARP cited an ideal location for missing middle housing on edges of neighborhoods and along commercial corridors. That's exactly the intersection of uses we have at this location. The reality is that there has just been less redevelopment pressure on the west side of the city. But there's a proven track record of projects like this making sense next to neighborhoods throughout St. Pete. Here are examples of just a few. You see this in historic Uptown. You see it in the Crescent Lake neighborhood, and in the top right, you see a photo of a block of skinny lots. You see it in historic Kenwood and in Jungle Terrace, Shore Acres, and Coquina Key. Lastly, in the historical Northeast, one of St. Pete's most desirable neighborhoods. At the commission hearing in May, a neighbor stated that Old Pasadena demands high standards of development just like the Old Northeast does. But the images shown on the screen, these projects didn't ruin the character of the Old Northeast neighborhood. Instead, they've contributed to the revitalization of the area and added housing options needed by the extraordinary number of people who want to live there. Why would Old Pasadena be the only neighborhood in the city whose character is ruined by the addition of medium density residential housing options? A lack of housing supply results in high prices. On the left, you can see here a new construction home in Pasadena that sold for over $1.3 million. On the right, you can see a resale home that's around the average resale price for this neighborhood at almost $900,000. Our average proposed sales price for this project is around $750,000. While this obviously isn't an affordable project, it does provide the opportunity to live and own a new, well-built, high-quality home on the edge of the Pasadena neighborhood without spending over a million dollars. Here you see the frontage along 1st Avenue South, now and with the proposed rendering of our project. You can see the similarity in scale, location, and height. This is by design. City Council just approved Vision 2050 that wants increased residential housing close to transit, close to activity centers, in walkable, bikeable areas, and outside of coastal high-hazard zones. This is the Council's opportunity to approve a rezone that meets all of those goals. Historically, the existing buildings and land uses on this property have always been unique compared to the single-family homes within Pasadena. So I hope you agree that smaller lots and townhomes do have a place on the edge of this beautiful neighborhood. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Hold your applause, please. Thank you so much. So is that the conclusion? Certainly. We certainly would appreciate your consideration of this application based on the evidence in the staff report, the application, and the experts. We do have the experts who contributed to this report who are here today to answer your questions more specifically. We know that there were concerns about stormwater expressed, clearly, and traffic. Based on the concurrency analysis of both your staff and the experts, those are not concerns with this decision. As you all are well aware, any stormwater issues would be resolved at the site plan process and are obligated to do so then. So with that, we would respectfully request your approval of both the comprehensive plan map amendment as well as the rezoning. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next, we'll have the opponent's presentation. Ten minutes. Good evening. My name is Shannery Barnes. I live at 318 72nd Street South, just a couple blocks from this property. My family has been a part of this church and preschool for almost five decades. I'm a parent of three Pasadena preschool graduates, and we have attended countless services and activities at the church. I care about this church. I care about this preschool, and I care about the angels. They are truly angels who are the preschool staff. However, as an old Pasadena resident, I must oppose this rezoning application. We residents understand the desire for the church to sell their property. Although sad, we would understand if the church sold the property under the existing NT3 zoning and conforming single-family homes were built. After reviewing the numbers, we know that this is a feasible option and encourage the church to entertain it. We are strictly opposing the rezoning, not the sale, which allows a significant change in landscape and character of old Pasadena. A petition against this rezoning application at this moment contains 641 signatures, a significant amount gained in only two months. I've observed that the outspoken supporters of this rezoning application do not live in the old Pasadena neighborhood, and most of them do not reside in the city of St. Petersburg. This includes members of the church's building oversight committee. Please consider the residential addresses of the people weighing in on this matter. In reference to the staff report regarding the relevant criteria for the application, consistency and compatibility, the requested designation is not compatible or consistent with the established surrounding land use and zoning patterns. If I can remind you of what you just saw on the map, you're continuously shown the land that is north and east of this property. Conveniently, you have not been shown the land that is west and south of this property, which is an NT3 neighborhood. The word compatible as defined in the city's comprehensive plan is not having significant adverse impact with limited variation from adjacent uses in net density in type and use of structures and with limited variation in visual impact on adjacent land uses. This rezoning would certainly have a significant adverse impact, significant variation in net density in type of structures and great variation in visual impact. In paragraph five, staff states that the RM land use and NSM1 zoning are considered appropriate at this location. A main goal, 3.2, of the future land use element is to direct and manage the type, distribution, density, and intensity of development and redevelopment to protect and enhance the fabric and character of neighborhoods and to attain the highest level of economic well-being possible for the city and its citizens. It is wrong to state that denser or multifamily housing would protect or enhance the fabric or character of Old Pasadena. The fabric and character of the neighborhood is low density, large lots, and single-family homes. Increasing density in this neighborhood would not add value. Attaining the highest level of economic well-being possible for the citizens of Old Pasadena would be to protect their property values, likely their biggest financial investment. I'd like to point out in the staff report, the staff identified comprehensive plan consistency. They referred to LU 3.4. Staff statement that the site is adjacent, quote, adjacent to Pasadena Avenue South is incorrect. They have contradicted that statement in paragraph 3, page 4, under consistency and compatibility. It is not adjacent. It is buffered by the lift station property, All Seasons, and Circle Park. The next statement regarding the land immediately south of the subject site, stating that it will remain institutional and under ownership of Pasadena Community Church is pure speculation, assuming that they won't rezone and sell that land to another developer in a few years. Another staff identified comprehensive plan consistency was policy LU 3.11, which states more dense residential uses may be located along major streets with high-frequency transit or in close proximity to activity centers. The definition of close proximity is not specified or quantified and is left open for interpretation. This property does not abut any future major streets. Residents have suggested that the church sell the property as NT3, which could command a similar price point and satisfy the density concerns of the neighborhood. This rezoning decision should not be based on the financial status of the church. However, it should be noted that there is no hardship that deems this rezoning necessary. Rezoning is not necessary to sell for the amount the church needs or what the property is worth. This can be illustrated in the recent sale of 7211 5th Avenue South, which is a vacant lot, 0.18 acres. It sold for $436,000 in April, off-market, and the owner plans to build on it. There is significant value on these lots. Criteria number six, regards the amount and availability of vacant land or land suitable for redevelopment for similar uses in the city. This is an estimate, but I believe NT3 zoning takes up approximately 1,100 acres of land in St. Pete. There are almost 40,000 acres of land in St. Pete, leaving about 38,000 other acres to choose from. This property is five acres out of almost 40,000. Surely there is land that doesn't need to be rezoned for your project. Onyx and East apparently did not have to rezone their existing projects in St. Pete and were able to find appropriate land to develop on 1st Avenue North and on 15th Street North, which I believe are CRT and NSM2, respectively. So, why rezone on this property? It is evidently possible to find appropriate land for your projects. The future land use element of the comprehensive plan, objective LU3, states that the future land use map 2 shall specify the desired development for pattern, the desired development pattern for St. Petersburg through a land use category system that provides for the location, type, density, and intensity of development and redevelopment. The development pattern is already identified. Regarding the issue of housing quantity in the comprehensive plan, staff answered this as an opportunity for the subject site to obtain residential density and intensity bonuses for the development of either missing middle housing or affordable workforce housing units. Such incentives support the applicant's interest and ability to develop the site as proposed. This is not a planned affordable development. This is a contradiction between what the applicant Pasadena Community Church states is the plan and what the city is expecting based on this answer. If this opportunity is the case, then the applicant and potential owner are not being forthcoming about the actual development plans. They have tried to assure residents and stakeholders that development density would be minimal. Just an excerpt from the Vision 2020 Special Area Plan I'd like to read. In the past decade, the city's Neighborhood Partnership Program has worked with the neighborhood associations to develop neighborhood plans that guide the restoration and revitalization of these neighborhoods. During this same period, the new urbanist movement has gained ground. Today, these traditional neighborhoods have been reclaimed and are the highly desirable sought-after neighborhoods within the city. The rules, regulations, and development standards need to reflect the existing character so that these neighborhoods continue to be preserved and enhanced through preservation, rehabilitation, and compatible infill construction. I have a minute left, so I just want to address a couple things that the applicant stated in their opening. Ms. Cole stated that the CPPC made their decision without much analytical discussion, which I want to firmly disagree with because they did have much analytical discussion. They are highly qualified, highly educated people, and they did analyze it. Ms. Markowitz, if your company cares so much, why do 90% of your projects require rezoning? In the photograph that she showed, Ms. Hill's house was supposedly the only house that would face your future project, which is false. There is another house behind Ms. Hill's house. I'd like to also state that Old Pasadena does not need revitalization, as you mentioned, happened in Old Northeast. And a price point of $750,000 is not what we have been told. An average of $850,000 is what was in the information provided previously. Thank you. Thank you. We are in a quasi-judicial proceeding, and we did not allow the applause. Thank you so much, sir. I do appreciate that. Thank you. So now we will have public comment. Clerk, I know we have cards on this particular item, so everybody sit back and hold tight because we're going to have a lot of cards on public comment on this. Please, the first two cards. Madam Chair, the first two cards is Pamela Claire Smith and Donna Miller. Please go to either podium, state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. Hi, my name is Paula Claire Smith and my address is 2881 Chancery. I'm actually the Senior Vice President for Collier's, which is a commercial real estate company. I've done a significant amount of business in St. Petersburg over the years, over the past 25 years, beginning with, actually with All Children's Hospital and then land assemblages as well as selling various office buildings and throughout the city of St. Petersburg. I had the privilege of being chosen by the Pasadena Community Church to represent them in their search for just the right buyer for their property and to recommend the process that they would take. And it was, the changes that they're requesting are actually going to promote the character integrity of the family neighborhood better than leaving the property as is. It's being used right now with a multi-story building on it for preschool, which they intend to move interior, moving traffic interior also, but getting, eliminating that and also eliminating the maintenance that is going on right there. So they're actually looking at this as they began their process. They went through a collective effort to outline the advantages of selling the unused soccer fields and upgrading the preschool and facility all to enhance the current church campus. That was what they wanted to do. They wanted to continue to contribute the ministry of the preschool. So much thought and discussion was involved. Multiple offers were considered. Developers interviewed. Surveys done. With a sensitivity toward the neighbors to the west, and yes, there are two homes. There's 250 feet, which is the only common area, shall we say, butted by a street by 75th or 71st. And so there are two houses from the old Pasadena. But everything else, as you looked at your screen, you could see were CRT, CCS, which are very high density and allow for retail that the church actually has in their contract without disclosing things that are confidential, deed restrictions, so that there would not be undesirable establishments, no matter what the zoning was, no matter if it was rezoned at any point. So when you're looking at this, the church listened to neighbors, they listened to their church members, to preschool parents, and then also acted as city council did last week, concerned about performance, the history of completeness with Onyx and East, a response to residents, families, they're looking for families to go there, and hopefully with the 90K moving into St. Pete that was mentioned last week, being able to grab those as contributing members and maybe new preschool kids to go in there. So it's not, thank you. Thank you. Name and address. Okay, Madam Chair, members of St. Pete Council, thank you for having me. My name is Donna Miller with Caldwell Banker. I am the number one agent for Caldwell Banker in St. Pete Central. And the reason why I'm here today is I want to talk about diversity in the neighborhood. Excuse me, can I have your address, please? Oh, I'm sorry. 5401 Pallyway, St. Petersburg. So I wanted to talk about diversity in the neighborhood and the much needed. There hasn't been anything redeveloped, anything hasn't grown in that section of Pasadena in the past four years. It's been stagnant. We don't see growth. We have 89% of the population. We have white, we have 248 people being Latino or black in that neighborhood. and a lot of it has to do is because the median age is 69.2. So the problem with that neighborhood is that the median houses are like four to 500,000 or some are even less. The people go in, they don't move and we don't have new people moving in the neighborhood to create diversity. We don't have young families moving there because either the houses are way too big for them, they're way too large too large for them or, you know, they're older houses that the older population stays in for years and years and years. As a matter of fact, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, only 3.7 moved in that area from out of state. So with the problem that we have in housing now and our interest rates being at an all-time high, somebody buying a house for $750,000 or $800,000 is like a year and a half ago somebody buying a house for half of that. It's so different. The prices have doubled. The prices have tripled. So we understand about single family in that neighborhood, but nobody with a rising cost of insurance, nobody with a rising cost of building rates is going to spend over $2 million to have businesses across the street, to have the St. Pete Trail across from them, and to not have a quiet neighborhood. It's a very busy intersection there. You have the pump there. None of that is going to get changed. This is the same as single family housing, but it's more like city housing. So if you look at it, it's affordable housing for people who either want to get off the beaches because the flood insurance is astronomical or people who want to start and live downtown, but they can't afford to spend a million or a million and a half on something, but they can get on the bus and ride downtown. We have to make change. This neighborhood hasn't seen a significant change in the past four years, and with the way that things are going, I know that change is hard, but also sometimes change is good, and change can make a difference. So I think we need to realize that change can teach us to adapt and help us develop self-resilience, but only if we understand with our own capacity for growth and learning. When change makes us better, it's because we've learned how to turn... Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. We appreciate it. The next two speakers is Warren Willingham and Madison Rice. Madison Rice is four. And the next person will be Scott Russell. Hey, Warren Willingham, 3245 Jackson Street North, 33704. I'm very much in favor of the upzoning. I'm just jealous it's not in my neighborhood. We had a church torn down in our neighborhood, and all we got was a handful of McMansions because that's all that was allowed. They sure saved the character of the neighborhood, though, thankfully. This isn't out of place. It's feet away from Central, touches the Pinellas Trail, is a stone's throw from a sunrunner stop and a two-minute bike ride to a grocery store without even crossing a major road. It is begging to be dense. I'm happy to see even a slight increase in our anemic housing supply. We need as much as we can get. Overly restrictive zoning policy such as this is holding us back from having exactly that, enough units. I have had far too many friends leave St. Pete to cheaper cities due to our lack of affordability. I'm just sad that there isn't enough affordable housing in this. I wish it was affordable. I'll take market rate if I can get it. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, sir. Name and address. Yes, good evening. My name is Scott Russell. I've been a member of Pasadena Community Church for 25 years. Can I get your address? Yes. 227 70th Street South. I also serve on their building oversight committee. You've heard from your city staff and the developer why this rezoning is appropriate given the land use plan. In addition to others with heartfelt concerns about it. I thought it might benefit your decision making to know why our church is selling these two parcels of land. Our church has different needs today than we did 99 years ago when we opened. We do not have the luxury to hold on to acres of land that were once central to our Sunday morning services. Our aging buildings need maintenance and renovation. We say we welcome all but in fact our older buildings are not accessible to all. We are counting on the property sale to pay for those improvements, cut our operating expenses, and to create space where people continue to enjoy serving. We must trim church spending to preserve our vital ministries that serve our community. Even with a smaller congregation than decades ago, the community relies on our church more than ever. Every month we feed 200 families through our food pantry and prepare and deliver meals for others in our community. Several hundred children in our community attend our preschool, morning, and after school programs. Our gym is almost constantly busy with basketball and pickleball while our food ministry packs weekend food bags for hundreds of children at two local schools. We teach ESOL classes to help immigrants obtain citizenship. When hurricanes approach, Beach Community EMS departments use our gym as their command center. We are a polling place for elections and we host addiction and mental health groups in the evenings. And every month we supply hundreds of bags of food to St. Pete police to hand out to our homeless population. Our campus is in service far beyond Sunday mornings. Years ago, we had a visionary pastor, Dr. J. Wallace Hamilton, serve at our church and who led our exponential growth during that time. He gave a sermon on January 1st, 1961 titled Keep Moving. During it, he spoke of the need for change. That sermon could be preached in churches across the country today. He said, we were made to go in only one direction, no provision for retreat. Our eyes, hands, and feet all face forward. Dr. Hamilton went on to say, quote, he is saying in the very construction of our bodies, get up, go on, move forward. Which is exactly what we as a congregation are trying to do. We ask you to allow this rezoning to proceed. We believe that a smaller campus footprint will allow us to make an even larger footprint within our community going into our next century of service. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next, who's speaking to me, please? Richard, Christian, and Holly Edwards. Please go to either podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. My name's Richard Chastain. I live at 7030 Mango Avenue South, about two blocks from the subject property. My comments are concerning compliance with the goals, objectives, policies, and guidelines of the comprehensive plan, specifically addressing LU 5.3 from the comprehensive plan. And regarding the concurrency management system, the level of service impact analysis does not reflect the approved developments of the Raytheon site, the St. Pete College Gibbs site, the Bear Creek site, the 6090 project on Central, or the development that's planned at the intersection, or close to the intersection of Tyrone and 9th Avenue behind the Wawa. So, considering these developments that are all in the works, I think will definitely change the capacity of the existing infrastructure and facilities. And it should be noted that Commissioner Magnelo suggested that we look at the development of St. Pete on a whole on a macro level and evaluate the effects of these projects you know, within overall. And on another point, the reduction of green space that goes along with all these projects I think is significant. And this will also be reducing green space within our neighborhoods. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Ma'am, name and address. Good evening. I'm Holly Edwards, 7023 Mango Avenue South. I am the proud owner of a 100-year-old home in this neighborhood and I can tell you the homes that you saw up on the screen are going to look nothing like mine. And I'm here to encourage you to please implement the words in your own comprehensive plan. And that is to address the concerns of the community related to growth management and the preservation of the city's characters and vote no to this land-use zoning change to this historic neighborhood. Over 600 people have signed a petition asking for that same thing. The city's criteria in LU 3.6, which was cited by one of your CPPC members as a reason for his vote to deny this change, states that land-use planning decisions shall weigh heavily on the established character of the predominantly developed areas where changes of use or intensity of development are contemplated. I hope each of you took the time to go drive through our unique area and see for yourself what kind of impact we're talking about here. In addition, in Part E of the standards of review, the city states that the decision shall be guided by the following factors. Whether the proposed change is consistent with the established land-use patterns of the areas in reasonable proximity and whether the proposed changes would alter the population density pattern and thereby adversely affect residential dwelling units or public schools. The bottom line is that this land has been zoned in T3 for a reason. The church property is within the boundaries of a beautiful, quiet, historic neighborhood consisting of brick streets with granite curbs, large single-family homes with large trees and yards, and historic architecture. Many of the homes in this neighborhood, which this development will be right in the middle of, or at least adjacent to it, are historical and listed in the city's master file for the historic homes. There are no tall condominium buildings. The proposed development would be the tallest building for miles. There are no small, densely packed homes that are 10 feet apart with tiny setbacks. This will double the plotted occupancy for those particular lots. The neighborhood is not on a major road as stated in the city's plan, and it's not a destination. It's not likely to be low-income or workforce housing. It sounds to me like it will be very expensive housing. And as a member of your CPPC committee stated, there are other properties in the city with the proper zoning that are more appropriate for this type of development. This will set a precedence. The term shall weigh heavily is important here because what this is proposing will add almost 400 people to this neighborhood. That would freak anybody out. Thank you. Oh. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. Kristen Brett and Carol Bining. Please go to either podium. State your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. Brett first. Kristen. Okay. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Councilmembers. Thank you so much for this opportunity. My name is Kristen Brett. I reside at 438 Villagrand Avenue South. You know, decisions are made from the head and the heart, and there's lots of data. There's lots of good information for the head. I'm going to be speaking from the heart today. My husband, David, who is here in the audience, was born and raised in St. Pete. His grandparents moved here in the 30s, and all seven of their grown children moved here and raised their families. Their children, including my husband, David, raised their own children here, and now those children are raising their families here. We have pretty deep roots. David has also worked in commercial real estate his entire career, including what was one of the first redevelopment projects of downtown, the old McNulty Fire Station and Wilson Mattress Factory, for those of you that remember, into offices that then brought Progress Energy, now Duke Energy, back downtown. I worked with the city for 10 years on the team that developed the new St. Pete Pier before retiring in February of this year. We support progress and development, thoughtful development. About four years ago, we fell in love with the old Pasadena. It has an esoteric quality that isn't easy to describe. But as the chair of the Community Preservation and Planning Commission noted in the last meeting, the neighborhood has a sense of community that is apparent and incredible. During that meeting, other commissioners made these comments. This neighborhood is a treasure. This proposed development would have an impact on the character of the neighborhood. All of the support letters for this project were from church members and none of them live in the neighborhood. They referenced city policy LU 3.6 that states the established character of a neighborhood should weigh heavily on land use decisions. And of course, they voted no unanimously on the proposed zoning. Last fall, the city organized a neighborhood summit meeting that featured Peter Kageyama who wrote a book that describes the love affair between people and their places. He talks about a sense of place, which is exactly what we have in old Pasadena. There's a sense of community beyond the brick streets and the hundred-year-old oaks. Neighbors not only know each other, we are there for each other. We help each other clean yards after a big storm. We watch each other's homes during trips away and bring a dish when someone's home from the hospital. There is a neighborhood vibe that will not be the same if this rezoning is approved. Hi, my name is Carol Binding. I live at 545 Villa Grande Avenue South. And I have many concerns about this, but my main one is traffic. Our streets are brick, and for any of you guys who have driven over the brick streets, they're not smooth. They're very bumpy. They're noisy. And they were never designed to have an extra 400 people driving over them. Our neighborhood is bounded on three sides by two-lane streets. They're not, Pasadena Avenue is not near the, I mean, it is near, but it's not near where this development is going to be. So, if nothing else, the traffic would be a great detriment to the neighborhood, which you've already heard is a great neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. Next two speakers, Howard Knapp, Janet Knapp, please approach either podium. State your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address City Council. Good evening. My name is Howard Knapp. I live at 7111 2nd Avenue South in Old Pasadena, adjacent to Pasadena Community Church's property that they are selling. I am a lifelong resident of St. Pete. I purchased my home 23 years ago due to its NT3 zoning and the historic nature of the Old Pasadena neighborhood, which was built in 1923 as Pasadena Estates by developer Jack Taylor. Old Pasadena's defining quality is that it is a quieter neighborhood known for its wide brick streets and oversized lots. It boasts over 40 historic 1920s homes with unique characteristics. The residents of our neighborhood specifically chose living here for these features. Our neighborhood is one of only five NT3 zoned areas left in the city. If rezoning is approved for these three parcels, it will set a precedent and open the floodgates to future requests for rezoning of any parcel within our neighborhood and the other NT3 neighborhoods in our city. A change in rezoning requires proof by the appellant that this development will not significantly impact traffic, density, and property values in our neighborhood. Common sense tells us that adding 80 to 160 dwelling units will nearly double the volume of traffic and density in the neighborhood, which consists of approximately 280 homes. The fact is, the appellants have not proven with any empirical data that traffic and density will not be adversely affected. It is said the three most important factors in buying a home are location, location, location. St. Petersburg's home property values are greatly determined by this factor. A home is one of, if not the most, significant expenses and financial investments of any citizen, especially in today's market. When a resident purchases a home in this city, they are making an investment in the city and its future. The city's future land use within the comprehensive plan maps the city's vision and is a commitment by the city leaders to steer our city into the future. Its purpose is to keep the course and prevent just these rezoning situations from happening and derailing that vision and promise. We trust in you, our elected representatives, to uphold the city's future land use as written in the comprehensive plan. I strongly urge the council to vote no on this appeal for rezoning. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you for opening this up to comments. We appreciate it. My name is Janet Knapp. I live at 7111 2nd Avenue South in St. Petersburg, Florida. What I'd like to address is that some information you've gotten from Pasadena Community Church. The church, first let me say the neighborhood supports the church. We have, they have always been part of our community. Many of our members attend the church. Many of our residents grew up in that church. Parents got married in that church. They've indicated that they need to sell this to this developer, Onyx and East, for the financial health of their church. And I understand you may feel swayed by this. However, there are several factors that are not commonly known. For one, the church has stated on their website that they had overwhelming support on the vote to sell these properties. That, I understand from many reliable sources, is not correct. The vote was just barely over half of the membership. And currently, the membership is divided as to how to proceed further working on the financial health of the church. Onyx and East are not the only developers interested in the parcel. I also have information from two local developers that they are interested in the parcels. They only build single-family homes in the style in keeping with the neighborhoods. It would not require rezoning. They're NT3 developer homes. Additionally, a small study by our association shows that the church could sell the parcels for approximately $8 million if they were sold as individual lots. In the current market value, again, without having to change the zoning, I gave a handout to you that shows the sources of this, which is the latest sales in our neighborhood, both by individuals and by developers. The church does not need $9 million to keep operating. I think Mr. Russell basically alluded to that, too. What it needs is funds to remodel some of its older buildings and to lower its upkeep and utility expenses. The church has looked at selling property as a solution to this, but I do not believe they have fully explored their other financial options that may be equally or more beneficial. The city of St. Petersburg offers several grants and loan opportunities and partners with organizations such as theirs to offer further assistance to the community. The city also has programs to assist the church with grants and assistance from state programs. Additionally, our neighborhood is willing to help the church. Many people have come forward saying they will help write grants, help them find the funds, but in closing, I believe that the church has other options. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. Next two speakers, John Tyler, Gary Butler. Please approach either podiums. State your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address city council. I am John Tyler. I live at 3701 13th Avenue North in St. Pete. I grew up in this church. I went through preschool there. I went through confirmation there. My sister was married in this church. We had my late grandmother's memorial service in this church. So I'm very familiar with that. You know, more than 40 years ago I was in that preschool, so it makes me feel pretty old. But, you know, I'm here to speak in support of the 60 families that will be able to live there if we redevelop. This is a neighborhood where they can, once there's 60 homes there, they'll be able to walk over to the new preschool and take their kids there. They want to walk over to the, there's an elementary school just two blocks away. You cross over Central Avenue there, two blocks away and there's an elementary school so they can have a period of their lives where from going to church to going to preschool to going to elementary school, it's all within walking distance. Not to mention the doctor's offices, the veterinarian hospital, all within walking distance. There's, if the residents are Jewish, there's a synagogue right across the road. I remember growing up that we would do our youth group at the church would collaborate with the youth group at the synagogue and I have some fond memories of that experience. So I think, you know, we need to bring some more young families there that can take advantage of the, you know, all the different amenities that are in this area that are within easy walking, biking distance of everything that that neighborhood has to offer. Like I said, I'm very familiar. I spent plenty of time growing up there, walking, riding my bicycle around there, everything like that. Like I'm very familiar with the area and I think welcoming those 60 families into our great city is going to be a net positive. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, sir. Yes, my name is Gary Butler. I, my residential address is 11095 Village Green Avenue in Seminole. I am a member of Pasadena Community Church. I have been a member since 2001. Raised as a single, raised my daughter with the help of Pasadena Community Church and I've been active since. Is that okay? I was. Yeah, on a public hearing like this, it's only an open forum where it's impermissible. Okay. Just wanted to make sure before you got you all into it. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I was a co-chair of the Long Range Planning Committee that was charged with investigating and figuring out the best path forward. and we spent a year, more than a year, looking at all the various options, determining what our facilities needed, what we needed to do financially moving forward, what resources were available. So the third party hearsay that we haven't looked at all the options just flat isn't true. We have looked at all the options and what we have determined is that we have facilities, every single one of our buildings needs substantial capital improvements to make us more inclusive, to make us more sustainable, and to make us fit the current demands of our generations as far as what they're looking for in a worship facility. We need this level of funding in order to accomplish that. If we're not allowed to realize our proper and best use of the property that we're trying to sell, then we're not going to be, we're going to be very limited in what changes we can make to the property in order to become more inclusive and more sustainable and more welcoming to other generations. I would like to point out that there has been a lot of speculation made by some folks that perhaps there are other people out there who would be willing to pay for this property with the current zoning. This property was marketed for six, nine months for a substantial amount of time, aggressively so. Not a single offer was made to buy this property at anywhere near this price using it at this current zoning. So if you want to go by speculation, you look at speculation and see what reality shows and reality shows that speculation did not come true. I think it's important to realize that the property as in its current, or the future use is zoned industrial. This current petition actually makes it, I'm sorry, not industrial, institutional. It's future use is institutional. The rezoning makes it more residential, makes it more consistent with the existing plan. So the rezoning petition here before us today makes it more consistent with what's long-term, makes it more consistent with what's there, serves our purposes and will better serve the community by filling in what we've talked about in both this hearing and the previous hearings, that important missing middle housing. We're adding a small amount there without, the evidence is clear, without any burden on the infrastructure, without building multiple five-story towers or anything that would be unattractive like that. So we ask for you to approve. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next two speakers, please. Next two speakers, Joseph Berglio and Kevin Carroll. Please approach either podiums, state your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address City Council. Good afternoon. I'm Kevin Scott Carroll. I live at 301 71st Street South, right across the street from the church. And I basically just had a question and I would like to actually implore the City Council to defer to their experts at the CPPC. They voted 7-0 unanimously to deny the request for the zoning change and I can't see why the Council would not accept that and move on. I mean, certainly the applicant, regardless of the attorney for the applicant's snide remark to talk about the staff at the CPPC, they are professionals. They are highly educated. They made the decision unanimously to not approve the zoning request and so I would implore the Council to side with them. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Joe Borgia. I live at 7100 Sunset Way. I lived on Villa Grand for 23 years in the neighborhood, so to say. I am also on the building oversight committee for the church and been a member for 30 plus years. As you heard, we have multiple offers. One offer that came in wanted to build 245 units. We didn't even consider that. That would not work for that neighborhood. Okay? We understood that. We were thinking of the church and the neighborhood at the same time. Onyx and East came in, single family homes on the empty field, which is right adjacent to the neighborhood, that's what we wanted. That's what we got. Where the school is, you're talking about putting nice townhomes where this dilapidated building is that needs so much work it's not even funny. You saw all the commercial property next to it. You got the church on one side. You got the offices. You got the car repair on the corner. You got everything there. That's sort of, you can say it's in the neighborhood, but it's really not in the neighborhood. It's just off of Pasadena Avenue. And as you heard, you know, the current zoning, if this doesn't pass, I don't know if we're going to find a builder that's going to come in with all single family housing on both lots because they're not going to make their money. It's not going to meet what we need to do. So we felt pretty good by saying, you know what, Onyx and East, putting a little more density there was good with us. You're going to be right across from the street from us. 245 units, boy, we could have got a lot more families into the church, you know, for the preschool, for the aftercare. That could have been a lot more money for us. And if it doesn't get approved, who's going to come buy that? You know, it's institutional property. You may lose, you know, you don't get tax dollars off it now. You may not get tax dollars off it if somebody comes in with an institutional property for it. So that's really all I have to say. I mean, I think what's going there fits the area, fits the neighborhood. You got single family right next to their single families. To me, it's a win-win for both sides. Thank you. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. Next two speakers, Madam Chair, Lonnie, Laney Daniels, John Taylor, please approach either podium. State your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address city council. Laney Daniels, John Taylor. Hey, I'm John Taylor. I'm at 7300 2nd Avenue South. So I had a nice prepared speech here and I'm just going to go completely off script here. You know, I've heard a lot, but it all boils down to really one thing. And that is, you know, I heard some comments as though anybody who's against this is somehow anti-change. Maybe there was even some, like a semi-racial kind of tone there. Didn't appreciate that. I moved here from Scottsdale, Arizona. I own homes in multiple states. I own more than one home here in Florida. I chose Pasadena because it was unique. And, you know, somebody made the comment of, oh, we did it here. We did it here. We did it here. We improved these. Well, you know what? I could have bought any, any neighborhood in all of St. Pete. Not the whole neighborhood, but I could have bought a home when I moved here six years ago. I chose this neighborhood because there was nothing else like it. So also, I'm the executive vice president, chief financial officer of a large real estate developer. I'm all about buying property and developing. We're headquartered here in St. Pete. Somebody mentioned the, revitalizing the, the old McNulty garage building. That's where our headquarters is. So, so it's like totally for progress, totally for moving forward. At the same time, there are certain gems that you want to, you want to, you know, make sure that you don't mess up. Okay. And from that standpoint, I think that, that the church, you guys, there's been plenty of people. This gentleman here, you mentioned your address. And it's the gymnasium that I visited the church. I don't really know where you live, but when I meet my address, it's where I live, so everybody can know. You know, I think that, that I've, I've attended your church. You probably can recognize me. A lot of people, I just got a recognizable face. Okay. And, and, and, you know, it's a great church, but I've got to say, where, where does anybody have the spirit of, of complying with, with what the Bible says? Right? There, are we told to listen to our rulers? Aren't we told to give unto, you know, Caesar what's Caesar's? Of course we are. And, and we've got rules. This council has rules. This community developed a master plan and, and just follow the rules. Nobody's, nobody's, nobody's asking you not to sell it. I would support you. Nobody ever once knocked on my door. Not anybody from the church. Not anybody from the high price attorneys. Hill, Ward, Henderson. I know you guys. None of, nobody ever said, hey, let's, let's build a relationship with these neighbors. I mean, I love this church. I think you guys are cool. I play pickleball down there. I mean, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's good. So my, my encouragement is why don't you develop a relationship with the neighbors and let us help you build something that's great. Daniels? Yes. Daniels? Okay, go ahead. Name and address, please. Sure. My name is Lonnie Daniels. I live at 7127 2nd Avenue South. I currently live in one of the oldest houses built in Old Pasadena that sits within a short 300 feet from the land in question. My house was built in 1925 and the home was once the rectory for the old or for the Pasadena Community Church. I purchased the home in 2005 because I appreciated what the neighborhood had to offer. It has character, it has charm, quiet living, and so much more. And I do not want to lose the integrity of my neighborhood. I believe the city can accomplish its comprehensive plan without changing the existing zoning requirements. The land in question is approximately five acres of land that can still be developed under the current zoning and still create meaningful density that will retain the character and charm of the existing neighborhood. I'm a capitalist at heart and I believe the owners of the property have every right to develop the land they own, but these proposed changes to the zoning will heavily alter the density and adversely affect the existing residential area. The old Pasadena property is not the property to exponentially increase density in such a small defined area. I ask the council to be transparent with your actions and your vote today. If this proposal does unfortunately pass, I ask for reasonable contingencies to the development. I would request the developer create significant noise barriers, possibly doubling or tripling the setback requirements, create a calming wall for quieter living, and only allow for single-family housing. I believe these are all warranted compensation for what the residents are giving up, not to mention the increased congestion, the loss of spacious parcels of land, and the loss of more green space. Sometimes in life, there is no need to maximize everything you can sell to the highest bidder for no reason to maximize everything for the quickest solution. It's not how many houses or townhomes you can squeeze on a parcel of land. It's about making the right choices to satisfy the needs of a city while maintaining the integrity and character of that same city. I strongly oppose the request to change the zoning and the future land use amendments. Keep the integrity of the neighborhood and maintain a proper density for the area. Thank you, all city councils. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. Next two speakers, Shelly Olsen, Robert Dickinson, please approach either podium. Please state your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address city council. Good evening. My name is Shelly Olsen. I'm at 6929 Bougainville Avenue South in St. Pete. The CPPC board unanimously voted against this application. They are entrusted to make these important recommendations and highly qualified to do so. The board holds at least five master's degrees in areas, including environmental planning, natural resource management, government, architecture, engineering, industrial management, land use, and real estate development. It consists of at least one PhD, several architects and contractors, and a published St. Pete historian. The CPPC's disapproval of this application was clear and unanimous, and I fully trust their collective expertise in this case. I also have a comment with respect to criteria number one. LU 3.8 from the comprehensive plan states that the city shall protect existing and future residential uses from incompatible uses, noise, traffic, and other intrusions that detract from the long-term desirability of an area through appropriate land development regulations. CPP staff's reference to the Circle Park, lift station, and Pinellas Trail highlights that there already is a buffer between the streets and the subject property and the existing homes and the neighborhood. A buffer of neighborhood suburban multifamily between the trail and the existing homes or between Circle Park and the existing homes is not necessary, and allowing more dense development on the property would in fact fail to protect existing residential uses from noise, traffic, and other intrusions that detract from the long-term desirability of this area. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, sir. Name and address. My name is Robert Dickinson. I'm a resident at 7126 2nd Avenue South. I live in a 100-year-old house that has been in my family, my wife's family, for 98 years. I am here to remind you that some very qualified people on the CPPC committee voted 7 to nothing to deny this request. I'd also like to remind you that you have a land use plan and a zoning plan in place. In order to change it, you need to receive significant assurances, I believe, and significant evidence that the change is not going to adversely affect the fabric and character of the existing neighborhood. I'd also like to remind you that you have a wonderful neighborhood here. And you don't need to fix something that's not broken. Now, I'm sympathetic to the church. Everyone wants to see the church be successful. But having the church be successful should not come at the expense of one of the best neighborhoods you have in this city. I guarantee you that if you put 80 to 160 units on these two parcels or three parcels, however you want to count them, you are going to adversely infect the traffic, the density, and the property values of all the other parcels in this neighborhood, you will also adversely affect the fabric and character of this neighborhood and the interrelationships amongst the various people who live there now, who are already citizens of this wonderful city, who have elected you to represent them and who have relied upon the people on the CPPC to make and guide your decisions. So, please, vote against this change. There are other ways for the church to be successful. I am sure that a solution to maintain the church's existence can be found without having to sacrifice the entire integrity, character, and goodwill of this neighborhood. Please vote against this change. Thank you. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. Next two speakers, Rocky, excuse me, Rocky Tingler, Lori Stocknew. Please approach either podium. Please state your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address city council. Hi, I'm Rocky Tingler, 6921 Mango Avenue South. I just wanted to point out a few things. You've been hearing a lot from my neighbors that we really love the neighborhood, you know, the character, the quietness, the historic preservation value that is there. So, I won't hit on those points anymore. I would like to point out within one and a half miles of this proposed zoning change is the SPC Wellness Center, the St. Pete College Wellness Center that was recently approved for a zoning change and the Raytheon property. So, there is some major zoning changes going on within that area which were probably appropriate places to do that. But the old Pasadena neighborhood is not. The large lots and the historic value that we have there is worth saving. So, I really hope that you guys do not approve this zoning change. And I would like to point out one more thing. I think the developers have tried to downplay the location in our neighborhood. We're in an island between Central Avenue, Pasadena Avenue, and Park Street. The church is completely part of our neighborhood. I walk through there all the time. We have to ride our bikes and walk through there to get to the Pinellas Trail which they're selling as a bonus to their potential residents. So, you know, it would hinder our access possibly and it's just going to, bottom line, it will change the character of our neighborhood. Old Pasadena is worth saving. It's unique in St. Pete. And so, yeah, I appreciate your time. Thanks. Thank you so much. Yes, ma'am. Name and address. My name is Lori Stognew. I live at 427 Villa Grand Avenue South. So I'm just around the corner from where this is proposed. Ms. Cole mentioned that she thought that the property that is proposed is consistent to the current neighborhood. My block currently has four homes on the entire block. My neighbor across the street has four homes on her entire block. If you were to use the same formula to what we have right now on our block to what is being proposed, it would be comparing that we would add only 13 more homes to what they're wanting to add in 40 townhomes and 20 single-family homes. That is a significant number. When we walk our dogs down the street and we look down this wide brick road and say, it's safe, I can walk, I can ride, I can roller skate, I can do what I want in this neighborhood without worrying about traffic, waiting in line at a stop sign 16 deep. It does make our neighborhood unique and that's why I drove around this neighborhood like some kind of stalker for years to try and find a home that was for sale and the minute I did, I bought it because it was so desirable. I've lived in St. Petersburg for my entire, well, I don't want to tell you all of them, but I've lived here. I started out in Seminole, I went to St. Pete Catholic, I went to St. Jude's and St. Pete is my home and this neighborhood is a desired neighborhood but we're also a family so I ask that you consider that and vote no. Thank you. Next two speakers is Don Pellegrino and Paul Grifford. Mr. Grifford does not want to speak but he's for it. The next person would be Jessica Ackley. Can you repeat the last, not joining you? Don Pellegrino. It was after Don. It was Paul Grifford. I'm drifting gears here. I will show my voice to bear with me. Don Pellegrino for the record 4669-319 Grove Boulevard, St. Pete Beach, 32706 but I'm a proud resident of Old Pasadena. I oppose this development based on the following criteria 1, 3, 4, 6, and 7. We all have a village there. It's low intensity. Not just for the old Pasadena neighborhood but the whole surrounding area is predominantly with a few exceptions single family homes. And with all due respect to the church, I do not believe that an owner, that a reason to put an incompatible development is not based on what an owner requires financially. And I say that with all respect, due respect to them, but I don't think that's a way to make zoning decisions. I was a member of the Hillsborough County Planning Commission back in the late 80s when the new drug plans were installed. And I was shared during the first year of the inflammation. We had in our plan an urban service tour, agreement with Hillsborough County and the unappropriated and the city of Tampa that we would build out our level of services as we grew. Well, it was a very appropriate piece. It's all diluted over the years by the development sphere and you can see the sprawl across the street. I urge you, your planning board rejected this unanimously and their citizens you all appointed. I think you should take their lead and deny this application. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Name and address. Hi, my name is Jessica Ackley. I live at 7116 First Avenue South. I'm one of the houses that is 300 feet from this entire thing. I had zero intentions of speaking today. But on behalf of young people that were said that don't live in the neighborhood, I live there and I have a child. So, what I'd like to say is that I can't wrap my head around the math for this. At $750,000, quick Google search tells me you need $172,000 a year income to purchase something like that when the average income in this city is $50,000 which is also another quick Google search. That's the only reason why I came up here. I don't know anybody in my lead group that is making more than $50,000 to $60,000 so to propose that we're going to get families and all these things into this area, it's not really adding up to me. Aside from that, I live on First Avenue South like I said and it's not the road there, the traffic that goes through there, I can't back out of my driveway. That road is being used as a bypass for people to go to work in downtown St. Pete from Largo Area Park Street and they bypass Central's Lights and they come flying down that street and now they have a school zone through there and there's many mornings where that's not even held to standard where people are flying, I don't know if they're going 15 or 45 down that road. It's just, the math isn't mathing for me, I just wanted to put my face on it as a young person because we were told that we didn't live in the neighborhood and didn't have families and I have a small house, bought it at a fraction of the price that is being said today and I just don't see how we're going to get families in there at that number. So, thank you. Thank you. Next two speakers. The next speaker is Mercedes Walker Dickinson. She does not want to speak and she's against it. Cliff Cook is the next speaker and Jay Carter. Please go to either podium, state your name and address for the record. You'll have three minutes to address counsel. Hi, my name's Cliff Cook. My address is 4101 83rd Street North, St. Petersburg, Florida. Thank you for listening to me tonight and thank you for everything you guys do. I'm just going to give you guys, I have a, I'm going to read something to you guys. So, basically a reminder of the zoning classifications according to the LDR. The NSM districts allow medium intensity suburban style garden apartments reflecting the small and large apartment complexes constructed in the 1970s and 1980s. These uses can generally be found near 4th Street, North, Gandy Boulevard, excuse me, Pinellas Point Drive and other areas throughout the city. The purpose of the NSM district regulations is to maintain the existing multifamily densities in the districts. The purpose of the NT district regulations is to protect the traditional single family character of these neighborhoods while permitting rehabilitation, improvement, and redevelopment in a manner that is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood. The standards for each of the NT districts are intended to reflect and reinforce their unique character. Code 16.20.010.3.1 refers to preservation of single-family character. NT districts are primarily single-family in character while some NT districts allow accessory units or limited neighborhood scale mixed uses. The character and context along the street should reinforce the pattern of a traditional single-family neighborhood, generally duplex and multifamily buildings are prohibited. So I am the basketball coach at Pasadena Community Church. I know a lot of the families that go there. I'm coach eight to 11-year-olds. The pandemic did not help Pasadena Community Church at all. We're on the rebound. I know that for sure. It sounds like they're in financial situations, but I know there's a lot of people that want to help. And going off of what has already been voted seven to zero, I ask that you guys vote no and keep our neighborhood the way it is. Thank you. Yes, sir. Name and address. Hi, my name is Jason Carter, 360 Villagrand Avenue South. I live on the zone map right at the point of where the church property ends at the south point. I can say as far as traffic goes, there are times when you can, I can stand on my front lawn and hear cars roaring up the street, cobblestone, whatever, and it might not be a traffic issue, but there's a lot of traffic experts here, but living there, I experience this. It's people basically trying to flip their cars, trying to get past Pasadena and First and all the other chokeholds that we're dealing with now. I ride my bike with my children to school every day. There's times on First, just like Jessica said, that are like shooting the gauntlet to get to school. I mean, people have said this and they're absolutely right. First Avenue South is not First Avenue Southwest or whatever it is. Everything east of Pasadena is a completely different version of that. We are privileged to have a well-preserved triangle like people have been pointing out and it would get worse for sure. I'm not sure if the traffic experts have taken into consideration what it's like to actually pull out on these roads now that we have on-street parking. Right there where the school is, that intersection, I mean, you're just kind of drifting out there hoping someone's going to stop in time for you to pull out. That's no exaggeration. I wanted to state that regarding the traffic issue. I have some other things that I'm supposed to get to which is, well, let me just get past that because I think a lot of people have covered a lot of this stuff at this point. We built a house and moved in four years ago. We spent a lot of years designing and building the house. I have two elementary kids. I have an Indian wife who immigrated here with her family and it's very difficult to listen to anybody say that we live in a rich white neighborhood if that's the way it sounds. I mean, I think that's ridiculous. I mean, I know plenty of kids in the neighborhood. There are kids moving in next door to me. I think there's two three-year-old twins moving in next. There's a guy that flipped the house next to me and he's got a buyer for it but it's not our neighborhood is not old and stale or whatever and I'll point out that Goville Banker did not lend us any help in finance in our house. We did it the hard way and went through whoever else hired our own architect. We didn't go through a building firm or anything like that and we did all of that because of the neighborhood. Everybody's already said this. This is a gem of a neighborhood. It's either Allendale or Ray. The next three speakers do not want to speak but their names is Constant Hardy and she's against. Sherry Kelly does not want to speak and she's against and Courtney Hampton does not want to speak and she's against. And the next ones are Kathy Krause is not speaking and she is against. The next two speakers are Christy Howland and Chloe Hill. Please approach either podium. State your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address city council. Did I go? Who is Kathy? We'll get the handouts together. Christy. Christy. Christy, I'm sorry. Thank you. My name is Christy Howland. I live at 753 21st Avenue North. Firstly, I understand the church wants to raise money due to the declining number of parishioners as their submission overwhelmingly reflects. And I am not opposing the church selling the land and the developer buildings and the developer building single family homes in keeping with the NT3 zoning and neighborhood. In fact, I have seen calculations showing the church could likely get a similar price for selling the land as NT3 as they are from Onyx and East. I am opposing the land being rezoned for a one-time monetary benefit of the church and an out-of-state developer at the ongoing expense of the neighborhood and the people of the city. The proposed rezoning is not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood character. Secondly, Mr. Kilbourne said at the May CPPC hearing that any concept plan shown to you today could change tomorrow. The only binding decision is the MAP amendment itself. Therefore, it's important to consider the worst-case scenario of a new 173 dwelling unit development with a maximum height of 60 feet and not Onyx and East's current iteration of their development plan. Apparently, developers changing plans is very common and we've already seen changes in the number of dwelling units by Onyx and East as pointed out by Commissioner Wanamaker at the CPCC hearing. Thirdly, I'd like to talk about the neighborhood and why the CPPC who are experts in their field considered the law and the St. Petersburg Constance of Plan 2020 to unanimously vote no to the rezoning. The plan states protect and reinforce the unique character of each neighborhood, develop rules and regulations which allow infill and redevelopment that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood context. Commissioner Wanamaker was right when she said once I crossed Pasadena Avenue it went from 40 miles per hour to 30 miles per hour with brick all over large canopy not unlike any of the other historically designated neighborhoods in the city. The neighborhood of Old Pasadena is lined with beautiful trees, brick streets and made up of 214 family homes of all different shapes and styles. Many of the homes are over 100 years old. The character of the neighborhood should be preserved as part of St. Petersburg Heritage as per the new as per the St. Petersburg Comprehensive Plan 2020 and Policy LU 3.6 which calls for land use decisions to weigh heavily on the established character of the neighborhood. Across First Avenue South there are some doctors and lawyers offices which are appointment only and several of the businesses aren't even open on Friday. The structures are mostly single story and low density often with parking lots. The triplex in question is reasonably small single story house divided into three. The rest of the neighborhood except the church is NT3 single family homes. Thank you. Thank you. My name and address. I did. I passed it up. Okay, perfect. My name is Chloe Hill. I live at 7100 First Avenue South in that apparent ugly house that was up earlier. I am 36 for the record. I have two children, two dogs, two cats because I feel like that needs to be said. The city report and rezoning requests state that this large residential development could act as a buffer to the doctor's offices and small mom-and-pop shops on Central Ave. On my block, the same size as the soccer field, there are only seven homes which includes Jessica who is also pretty young as well. The development could be 173 dwelling units in two blocks versus the 214 in the whole neighborhood. That's considering worst case which could be an 80% increase in dwelling units in two blocks for the whole of the old Pasadena neighborhood. Personally, I think we would need a buffer from the proposed development. First Avenue South is not a major future road nor does the school or a soccer field but a future major road. The city obviously is not planning on First Avenue South becoming a major future road anytime soon as a couple of years ago the vehicle lane east was removed so the bike lane could be installed. First Avenue South went between Park Avenue and Pasadena Avenue and Pasadena Avenue is quite different to the continuation from Pasadena East. The portion of First Avenue in question is only two lane. One lane east one lane west. The portion has no bus lane or turn lane and only has parking on one side of the street. The other the portion from Pasadena East has two lanes going east and additional bus and turn lane and parking on both sides of the road. I noticed that the planning department used numbers of dwelling units in the applicant's application for traffic modelling i.e. 86 multifamily units instead of the maximum 173. Additionally the modelling did not take into account the population explosion in the past few years of St. Petersburg, Treasure Island, South Pasadena and the many large scale projects that have been approved. Outdated traffic statistics from 2022 were used without considering the population and traffic growth. the modelling shows Park Street between Central Ave and Pasadena has 6,354 daily trips with only in excess of 348 daily trips. I would imagine the St. Pete College development, Bear Creek Commons and Raytheon site among others would significantly reduce this excess if not to zero. I feel like the images we are shown do not show how the development fits into the neighbourhood. The images generally show only the immediate land around the development or show several neighbourhood districts all in one. I provided a couple of maps found online looking at the zoning from a neighbourhood perspective. I've also clarified where the St. Rona stations were in relation to the church property. The property is three blocks from the water. The flood model map shows the property is already within the two of the flood models. Thank you so much. Next two speakers please. Diana Gaputis, Keith Gaputis, please approach either podium, state your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address City Council. My name is Dana Gaputis. I live at 242 71st Avenue. Honorable members of City Council, I stand before you to express my strong opposition to the proposed rezoning of the land currently occupied by the preschool and the soccer field. It fails to meet our community standards. The proposed development is out of character with Old Pasadena's neighborhood. Currently there's not a single three-story residential building in the area which sets precedent this proposal blatantly ignores. Also please right now pull out Onyx and Niece PowerPoint and look at their picture of the site plan curated to the location in the neighborhood. Look at that single-family home. It's the width of a car. It's superimposed over one car. A whole house. The current NT3 zoning is discussed as allowing 72 units. That's not 72 units meaning 72 houses with NT3. It's only 40 houses. You can have 32 accessory dwelling units. So let's think when we're comparing how different NT3 and NSM1 are as 40 houses versus a lot with NSM1. The city report also shows that two and a half individuals will live in each unit no matter if the structure is NT3 or NSM1. However, we know that more than two and a half individuals would be appropriated for NSM1. NT3 structures can only be two stories. NSM1 can be three. NT3, the second story can't be more than 75% of the first story. That goes out the door with NSM1. NT3 has greater boundary setbacks. NSM1, make it closer to the road. NT3 has a maximum building height of 36 feet. NSM1, 48 or, let's get work for us in there with a new proposal we'll change plans the zoning's already in place goes 60 feet high. The variation in structural requirements between the zoning results and significant increase in livable square footage with NT3 versus NSM1. The Old Pasadena District has one of the highest millage rates in the city akin to those in some areas of Old Northeast, Snell Isle, and our esteemed waterfront homes. We have demands and high standards for redevelopment. This proposal's lack of affordable middle income housing options further illustrates its unsuitability for our community. It should focus on single family homes on larger lots and preserve the neighborhood's integrity. In the CPPC meeting, Commissioner Jeffrey says, we have put in place zoning that allows this kind of development, but it's not being built there in other places yet because they have to assemble lots. It's easier to say, hey, we've got this piece of land over here. It's got a lot of square footage. Let's just rezone. The Vision 2020 plan has appropriate zoning in place for townhome development. We are not precluding development of the church site, but it should stay NT3 single-family houses on respectable lots, not car-width single-family houses. I urge you to vote no on FLUM75 until a plan that truly fits the character and regulations of Old Pasadena is submitted. We need developments that enhance our community, all of St. Pete, respect our laws, and are developed transparently and with genuine community benefit in mind. Thank you. My name is Keith Caputis, and I live at 242-71st Ave. I'm going to cut this short because many of the concerns that have been raised by various members tonight, I share as well. one topic that has not come up yet is the environmental impact of this proposed rezoning. Driving through the Old Pasadena neighborhood, there are already issues at times with water drainage. I'm concerned that this development, adding so many units, just really packed in like sardines, unlike anything around it, I don't expect the drainage issues to get any better. I'm concerned that it does not adequately address the required impervious surface ratio of 0.65. There's no, I mean, at least I don't see any provisions to manage runoff, and I think that any plan that would require, you know, such a large-scale rezoning should manage water impact effectively. I don't see that here, and I think this rezoning would just exacerbate an already existing issue, and I guess just to highlight what everyone's been saying, obviously there's been a lot of opposition tonight. This plan, rezoning, would change the fabric of the neighborhood. It's a shame that the church, the congregation is reduced in size right now, and it sounds like having some issues with funds, but this establishes a precedent. I mean, what happens when the church needs more money and wants to sell the rest of their land, or are they going to seek more and more rezoning? If they need to sell something, fine, but I would just, you know, encourage the church to follow existing zoning rather than trying to squeeze every last bit of profit out of this in the name of greed. Please vote no on this rezoning proposal, and let's keep it as NT3. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. Next two speakers, Mr. Vice Chair, Stephanie Sassin, Whitney Harding. Please approach either podium. State your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address city council. Go ahead, ma'am. Hi, my name is Stephanie Sassin. I live at 670 63rd Street South. I am a Pasadena preschool parent and a nearby resident and local native. I come before you today in strong opposition of the proposed rezoning to express my deep concerns about the environmental and infrastructural implications. This proposed development will not only increase our population density significantly, but also strain our existing wastewater management systems, specifically the pump station at the intersection of First Avenue South and Pasadena Avenue. Currently, our wastewater infrastructure, particularly at the noted intersections, is calibrated for a much smaller populace. The proposed increase in residencies will undoubtedly overload our existing pumps leading to potential system failures in environmental hazards as we just saw with sewage issues from Tropical Storm Debbie, and that was just a tropical storm. Before any decision on rezoning is approved, it is critical that a comprehensive assessment of our wastewater infrastructure's capacity be conducted to ensure it can handle the proposed development without risking public health or safety. The current studies that have been done do not include any of the already approved development nearby that has been built and realized. Therefore, any data that was collected has a misleading deficit. The rezoning should not be approved until the study is complete. Additionally, this development threatens to reduce our neighborhood's tree canopy significantly. We know trees are not vital only for their aesthetic value, but for their role in air purification, providing shade, and maintaining local biodiversity. The presence of local wildlife that depends on this canopy and existing open spaces cannot be overlooked. A thorough wildlife mitigation study must be conducted to understand and mitigate the impact of habitat loss on the local fauna. Given these substantial concerns, it is imperative that we do not rush into rezoning without proper studies and preparations. The potential environmental and infrastructural impacts demand careful consideration and thorough planning. We must ensure our community's health, safety, and environmental integrity are not compromised for the sake of development. Therefore, I urge you to vote no on the rezoning. And I have a couple more comments based on just a little bit of what I heard earlier. If there was an argument to attract that families at 850,000, that is very unrealistic for affordability, and it definitely would not promote any further diversity in the neighborhood as the goal is intended. Additionally, adding high density also threatens the safety of the preschool, especially since the church has no real blueprint in place for it, and the neighborhood has no sidewalks because it hasn't been needed. Lastly, I understand the pull of a major activity area, but there are other options, and you must maintain part of St. Pete's actual charm that draws people here, lest you render the area unrecognizable. Say no to the rezoning, please. Thank you. Go ahead. Hi, my name's Whitney Hardy. I live at 335 65th Street North in St. Petersburg, Florida. I became a proud homeowner in the adjacent NT3 neighborhood of Lake Pasadena Estates, and I have been a parent at Pasadena School for over a decade. In fact, my youngest that just graduated from there is here today. I love the preschool, and I actually had a whole prepared speech, so I'm going to talk a little bit about why I handed you these maps today. I think that this whole area needs to be considered, not just the four abutting properties. I moved here from Broward County and married a local and chose this neighborhood that I live in in this side of town. He wanted the old northeast, and I was like, I want to be close to the beach. I want to ride my bike with my family, with my kids. We ride our bikes through Lake Pasadena, old Pasadena, Park Street Historic District. We can play in the roads. Ms. Cole and city staff have used the word proximity in support of their argument for which there is no definition of measurement. I find that kind of interesting. They have alleged that public transport, which measures 0.4 miles to the east of Pasadena Avenue, is in close proximity, that the activity center on the central corridor to the northeast of Pasadena Avenue and central is 0.5 from the parcel is close proximity, as shown on the future land use map that I provided. I've provided you with the coastal high hazard map from the comprehensive plan, which illustrates the coastal high hazard area, which is 12 homes, or 0.2 miles west of this parcel in even closer proximity. I have provided the zoning giz map, clearly indicating what Commissioner Michaels was stating, a sea of NT3 homes, residential, surround these parcels, clearly buffered by what the city put in place in their plan, a CRT1 zoning. We don't need more buffers. We have the buffer in place. You gave it to us. CCS1 in red to the north of the single parcel allows a max building height of 36 feet. CRT1 to the north allows a max building height of 36 feet. They are not within this activity center where now you have that growth. I chose to focus on the 60 feet height because we're working off of a conceptual plan, not actual plans from the person who owns the property, a developer that's interested in changing our land. You recently rezoned a property on Central for this type of build. Three years ago, 2020, it has sat vacant. It is a danger. It is a hazard. It has no fence around it. It has a huge berm on it that people could live in. This is the place for this type of development to go, not in our neighborhoods where you're bleeding into the areas where we live and enjoy our lives with our family. Pasadena could pursue other opportunities for sale that would continue the single family as we've heard from audience today. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. Next two speakers, Mr. Vice Chair, Ken Jobson, Amy Pasadente. Please approach either podium, state your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address City Council. Ken Jobson, 335 65th Street North. As my wife just alluded, we've been members of the church school for a decade. I'm not going to read a speech. I'm going to highlight what's going on tonight. We all swore to tell the truth. We've had church members come up here multiple times and lie their addresses that there was no other offers. I can tell you when it first came up that it was for sale with a previous pastor, I walked over, I work in finance, I said, I have an offer for this property. He said, not at this time. The restrictions they put on that property is that whoever buys it can't open a school there of any denomination, of any age group. It can't be an elementary, middle, nothing. So you build all these family homes out there, they're preventing what these families need, places for their kids to go to school. The church is mismanaged. They've chose to spend $300,000 on an organ and not reassure their building to be safe for their congregate. So when they cry poor, it's because they've done it to themselves. And now they're seeking us, the community, to disrupt ourselves to overcome their mistakes. They had a school of 45 years operating flawlessly who they fired their head person of 23 years just recently, which is going to cost them their accreditation because the person taking over doesn't have the education and care of the accreditation for the school that they claim they're going to reopen. They're reopening at daycare. But again, why would a church be truthful when they consistently stand up here and lie over and over and over again? And Onyx and East, why do they need to rezone single-family homes if they're building single-family homes? Why are those two lots in this? It's a deceitful manner because when they get re-zoned, they'll flip it. If they're going to build single-family homes, they don't need to rezone the single-family homes. I don't understand why it's part of this application if that's what they're going to build. It's a deceitful tactic that they're using for profit. Thank you. Amy Posadente, day 2860 63rd Street North. Members of City Council, I stand before you as a preschool parent and a long-time member of the Pasadena Community Church. I have attended this church since I was a baby and have been a member since being confirmed as a teenager. The church's land and the buildings upon it have always played a key part of my life. I am also an active volunteer on the neighborhood level. Today, I strongly oppose the proposed rezoning from 7-20 homes on church grounds, grounds that have not only nurtured generations but also embody the historical essence of old Pasadena. This change threatens to disrupt the delicate balance of the neighborhood's infrastructure and its distinctive sense of place, eloquently defended by Commissioner Michaels and unanimously upheld by the CPC against FLOM 75. Their decision reflects the St. Pete Comp Plan 2020 which mandates that the distinct character of each neighborhood be not just recognized but actively protected and enhanced. Moreover, CPPC Chair Wanamaker has urged residents to consider additional protections for their properties recognizing the historical significance of homes in old Pasadena some nearing 100 years old as you have heard. Like the neighborhood, the church has a rich history and is nearing its centennial. Commissioner Michaels pointed out that the PPC Sanctuary was designed by famous architect William B. Harvard. The neighborhood grew and developed around the church and its buildings. Given these robust foundations and the shared commitment of CPPC members to preserve the fabric of this community, I implore you to stand firmly against the rezoning. Our collective future should honor our past, not capitulate to high-density developments that undermine the values and the history we so cherish. Thank you for safeguarding the legacy and the character of old Pasadena. Thank you. Next two speakers, please. Next two speakers, Madam Chair, Karen Birkenratt and Arthur Birkenratt. Please approach either podium, state your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address city council. My name is Karen Birkenratt and I reside at 200 Park Street South. And I'm here for the advocate for the trees. There are 70 grand oak trees on this piece of parcel in old Pasadena. Now, I think that, you know, we're all well aware with St. Pete Urban Forestry, you know, how important trees are, you know, to the beauty and, you know, to the safety and to our environment. St. Petersburg tree canopy analysis in District 1, which we are, we only have 18%. We're the lowest. So on this grand plan, which I didn't see one of the trees being preserved, I don't know how any of them will be preserved. We measure them. You have to have, in order to be a grand tree, you have to be, their circumference has to be 30 inches. Several of them that we measured were like 98 inches surround. So, you know, in order to keep, you know, the environment and providing shade and also, you know, promoting social and economic environment health and also with the drainage in our area, you know, with the root system, I really think that should be really, you know, considered. And also the habitat for our animals. I mean, if you walk in the area and if you do walk in the neighborhood, I mean, many times I see, you know, I don't know the name of the woodpeckers there, but, you know, whether they're a nuisance or not, but I, you know, you see them filled in the trees and it really, it really would be a shame to remove. It takes 20 to 50 years, you know, for a tree to grow into that height or maybe even longer. But I know there was a, I guess after World War II in St. Pete, they had an area where they made it, it was on purpose, purposeful, that they planted trees for shade. So I think with removing, you know, these beautiful grand oaks, I think it would be just a crime, it would be a shame that we would ruin the environment. I pray often because I live on Park Street and in the center we have oak trees and I just, you know, because of the traffic, I'm just, it's a matter of time, I just think, oh my God, you know, there's another oak that will be leaving. I mean, you know, the Smithsonian in Washington, they're trying to figure out with University of Pennsylvania in Harvard how to go ahead and to grow live oaks in the Northeast. I mean, because it's our cultural heritage. They, you know, they've researched this. This is something that's very important and we have it. We have it here in our own backyard. No one. Mr. Gregory. Well, I'm the author of Bernkrant. I live at 200 Park Street South. In addition, I may not be able to speak too well, but I wanted to show everyone we try to locate where the trees were. You know, I don't know whether you can see it, but I mean, you can see how many trees on the outskirts of the, this is the soccer property, on the outskirts of the street, there are approximately eight to ten live oaks that the city planted. Those are all city trees. and on both sides, on the first avenue and second avenue side, and interior to that are at least ten, and most of those are giant live oaks. And at the end of the streets, there are four to five large oaks living there. And I wanted to point out that none of the pictures that were shown identified the location of the oaks. One showed a large live oak, and on the plan that was shown to us at the college when it was presented, there were no, no oaks or no trees located, and the only, the only thing said was that they would be replaced, but the replacement of a ten-foot tree for a, you know, sixty, seventy-foot live oak just doesn't measure up. And in the pictures today, there was one that superimposed the development on the background of the existing trees. Well, that's not going to happen, and also there was no recognition of location of trees. And the last thing I wanted to address you, there's, the city has a plan, urban, urban, urban forestry or something like that, that looks forward to having a suitable cover for the, for the city, which is a shade. Thank you so much. Next two speakers, please. The next couple cards are not speaking, Madam Chair. Fred Teabasi is against, Angie Anderson is against, Henry Smith is against, and Tracy Thomas is against. The last two cards, Madam Chair, are Lindsay Juarez and Max McCain. Please approach either podium, state your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address city council. Thank you. I'm Lindsay Juarez. I live at 7210 First Avenue North, very close to the school, the preschool. I am 37 with three small children for the record. The housing goal in the comprehensive plan reads, to facilitate the provision of decent, safe, sanitary, healthy, and affordable housing in suitable neighborhoods at affordable costs to meet the needs of the present and future residents of the city while preserving and enhancing the community's physical and social fabric and cultural diversity and while protecting the interests of special needs groups and extremely low, very low, and moderate income households. It was stated that, quote, this rezoning aims to increase the overall number of available residential units within the city of St. Petersburg, end quote. According to the Pinellas Realtors Organization, inventory of single family homes, townhomes, and condos was up 96% in June 2024 compared to June 2023. The absorption rate of single family homes in June 2024 was 30% compared to 71% in June 2023. This illustrates a more balanced market than previous years and not a shortage of housing. The addition of the Raytheon development, Bear Creek development, SPC development, Strom Place, and the 6090 development will further ease housing shortage. Furthermore, the applicant has not mentioned affordable housing regarding this property, and $700,000 to $900,000 is hardly considered affordable for many working class folks. Please vote no. Thank you. Thank you. Chair, I believe this next gentleman needs to be sworn in. Is that correct? That's correct. Yes, sir. Very good. Do you swear or affirm that the evidence you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Yes, ma'am. Hi, everyone. Max McCann, 2648 3rd Avenue South. Great to see all this public engagement here tonight, but glad I get to say the last word in support of this project. My daughter goes to James B. Sanderlin K-8 school on the south side, so why am I bringing this up? Here's the connection. They don't have a full-time nurse at my daughter's school. There's over 800 kids that go there. The nurse is only there part-time because they have to split her between that school and two other schools, so there are entire days when more than 800 school kids are there all day without a nurse, and I just pray that my daughter doesn't get sick on one of those days when the nurse is not there, and the reason they can't have a full-time nurse is because we can't find a nurse who can afford to live here on that salary, so if you think that the housing affordability crisis doesn't affect you just because you already own a home, you're dead wrong, and maybe this project is not affordable or workforce housing, but it's going to add to the supply, and that's going to take some pressure off of prices that's Economics 101, or there might be a nurse who's retired from a lucrative career and she wants to work at this school or even a doctor who's retired and wants to help out at this school. We need it. We need it. I get emails all the time from the volunteer coordinator at my school. They take parents to come into the clinic here with no, they say, no medical training required. They're that desperate for somebody to staff the clinic at this school. So it's a real problem. We need more housing. We need more diversity in our housing stock, too. We need smart urban infill, and if we're not going to do it close to a major corridor near transit next to the Pinellas Trail, where are we going to do it, seriously. That's all I have to say. Thank you all very much. No more speakers. No more speakers. Okay, so this concludes public comment, and now we'll move into our cross-examination, where each party will have five minutes for cross-examination. Staff, would you like to cross-examine? No, staff waives. Thank you. Opponents, would you like to cross-examine? Opponent? You have five minutes. I apologize. I'm not really sure how this one works. I waved last time. It's to ask questions of any person who provided testimony today. Thank you. Thank you. I do have a question that I could not find an answer to. The property right now is land-use institutional, and I had a number of people ask me what would be the default if it sold as is. What happens to the zoning and the land use? Does it default to R-U-N-T-3? How does that work? Derek Hilborn, Manager of Urban Planning Historic Preservation. There is not a default. It is institutional today to reflect the church ownership. It will continue to be institutional until there is a formal application to change it. Thank you. I was told by a representative of the church that in the sales contract, which I know are usually confidential, but I was told this. I'm sorry, Ms. Chair. I think this is cross-examination. If she has a specific question of somebody who, a witness, that would be appropriate. Are you getting to a question? Yes. Yes. Is there an incentive for the developer to develop more units in the project? Is there a financial incentive per the price? To whom are you asking? To you, I guess you would know. Interesting. I was told that there was. Regarding traffic, where will the traffic go from the preschool that is now on First Avenue South? Because the new development would not replace the preschool traffic, it would add to it. So, Ms. Cole, do you know? No. There are two traffic experts here which were introduced by staff and the applicant, and if the chair would allow, I'm sure that neither testified in the case in chief. I mean, if there is an answer, some of this sounds like a site plan, and you're not considering a site plan today. You're considering the rezoning, so that would be my only caveat there. But if there is an answer from an expert, you know, so be it. Okay. I don't see one, so we will continue. That's okay. That's all right. Bear with me here. Sorry. You know, I'm not sure if I have any other questions. I think that's it. Thank you. To the applicant, would you like to cross-examine? No, Madam Chair. The applicant waives. Thank you. So now we move to rebuttal or closing remarks. Each party will have five minutes to provide closing remarks or rebuttal. Staff, any closing remarks or rebuttal? I do thank you. Just a couple clarifications or answers to some comments that came up. First, one thing I wanted to address, there were some references to level of service being outdated. I did want to mention that each year there is an annual update to the capital improvements element of the city's comprehensive plan. Our office is required to coordinate with different city departments to annually update those numbers so that when the level of service is being reported and the staff reports, it is reflecting those annual updates. The second thing is there were a number of comments about the needs of the church and whether the church needs to sell the property. That is not a consideration in the city staff analysis. That is not something that we can take into consideration. Our role in this process is to evaluate the application against the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan and the evaluation criteria in the land development regulations only. Third, there were some references to proximity. We do talk about proximity in our analyses. In this case, you have the proximity references to commercial mixed use immediately to the north across First Avenue and also we talk often about access to transportation options, multimodal opportunities. In this case, you have the Pinellas Trail at the northeast corner of the two subject blocks and you also have Sunrunner stations located within one-quarter to one-half mile from these two city blocks. As you know from our many conversations and other corridor discussions, we are often talking about one-eighth mile, one-quarter mile, one-half mile proximity. So these are things that are included in our staff report analysis. Fourth, there were a number of things mentioned in public comments relating to site plan details, trees, impervious surface, drainage. Please remember that we in our role for this type of application do not do a site plan review and our staff is consistently clear that we are looking at the map amendment, again, based on the comp plan and the criteria and the LDRs, totally independent of the site plan that's being proposed. There is no development agreement here, so we are not looking at site plan details and we often caution, we did it in the neighborhood association meeting here, that there is a concept plan that's been put forward. Once the map category is changed, if changed, there is nothing binding that that concept plan be developed, so we often caution on that and that covers the two site plan details that I wanted to mention. That's it for now. We don't have any other comments, but we can answer any questions if needed. Thank you. Thank you so much. Does the opponent have any closing remarks? A lot of good things were said in the hearing with the CPPC and we paid attention and we listened to their expertise. A member of the CPPC stated that a number of years ago, zoning changed to intensify to 60 units per acre between 1st Ave North and 1st Ave South going west. Neighborhoods, corridors, activity centers have already been planned and allowed for. Zoning is already in place that allows for this concept, meaning densification, multifamily townhomes and multipurpose, et cetera, on the future major streets so that this type of zoning change or addition would not be needed. It is already in place from the Vision 2020 plan. Utilize the zoning that already exists, please. The church has repeatedly stated that the developer is planning for 60 units to be built on the property. They do not plan to max out the density allowed by NSM zoning. However, the site plan submitted by the applicant is irrelevant in this decision as just noted by Mr. Kilbourne. The vote should be based on the maximum effect that this upzoning could carry. The developer is not held to their plan and plans change. During the most recent incarnation of the Old Pasadena Neighborhood Association, residents weighed in on what they love about the neighborhood. The overwhelming responses were large lots, single family homes, historic architecture, significant tree canopy, quiet atmosphere, brick streets, and granite curbs. Several commissioners commented on the unique established character of the neighborhood. The neighborhood. Not what's across any streets, but the neighborhood within the boundaries of Old Pasadena that are recognized by the city of St. Petersburg. We are a neighborhood association and we have a neighborhood map. And we were talking about what is within our neighborhood, meaning in the boundaries of First Avenue South within Pasadena Avenue on Villa Grand. It is not across those streets we're talking about. They noted that it's very similar to other historic neighborhoods in St. Pete. And as someone said, they recommended that we research designating Old Pasadena as a historic neighborhood to further protect it. I noticed the granite curbs around our neighborhood and I believe that with a dense rezoning like this, they would likely be damaged or removed in such a development. I was going to say something else about a site plan. Staff states that the proposed change is consistent with the existing land use patterns in the report to the north, northwest, and east of the subject area. This refers to a small amount of differing land use as shown on the zoning map. It fails to recognize the land use to the west and south of the subject area that are all consistent with the current NT3, which should be the predominant factor. Staff statement mentions the entire First Avenue South corridor but excludes the area west of Pasadena. Members of the CPPC noted that First Ave South west of Pasadena is an entirely different road with two lanes, two-way, speed limit of 30, and dedicated bicycle lane. Therefore, comparison of this stretch of road to the rest of First Avenue South eastward is not reasonable. The line has already been drawn with the western and southwestern boundary of the Central Avenue Corridor Activity Center, as well as the fact that First Avenue South as a future major street ends at Pasadena Avenue. The lines are clearly drawn. We do not have to go over those lines. They're there for a reason. They were put in place by the officials at our city when they put this zoning in place. The recommendation of the approval of this rezoning application has not weighed heavily on the established character of the area. Please consider their expertise and the evidence that has been provided to you in this matter. Thank you very much. Thank you. Does the applicant have any closing remarks or rebuttal? Yes, Madam Chair. I was serious when I said earlier that my task tonight was unenviable because clearly the neighbors feel that infill development on this site at a medium density designation will ruin their neighborhood and nobody likes to hear that and no developer wants to do that. So I want to walk through some facts that we have heard tonight. This project is adjacent to two single family homes. It's adjacent to a nine acre institutional church property, a city waste station, and a city park. It's a quarter mile from the BRT station and it's not only consistent with the neighborhood goals, your transit-oriented development plans and goals, the missing middle goals, all of which are in your comprehensive plan. The characterization of this property being an intrusion into the neighborhood is simply untrue. The lack of acknowledgement that this property is on First Avenue South and buffered from these single family homes by all of these other uses has been omitted from any of the conversation tonight by the neighbors. These two parcels, looking at the map on page three of the binder that we provided to you with the planning report, shows that these are the only two parcels west of Bassadena Avenue that are adjacent to non-residential on three sides and located on a commercial avenue. The thought that this is going to start a trickle-down effect of neighborhood conversions is misplaced. These facts make the characterization, again, a very heartfelt characterization that this change changes the neighborhood, simply untrue. The reliance on one policy in the plan to the exclusion of all of the other goals and policies of the city is also misguided. You may naturally be swayed by brick roads in historic homes and, candidly, that's what my client was swayed by as well. That's what they want to be a part of. The same reason all of these folks love the area is why a project to introduce more residents to this area is appropriate because people will want to live here. This request does not change that. This request proposes to provide medium-density residential on the edge of institutional uses, which is on the edge of an amazing neighborhood. Respectfully, if medium-density residential adjacent to single-family wasn't appropriate, this council wouldn't have approved the last agenda item that you just approved. Approving this change is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the comprehensive plan. Your staff, which you rely upon, has been consistent in their opinion of that. They have been consistent in their analysis of the goals and policies of the plan and your land development code and how this project fits in and helps with your stated goals of introducing a mix of housing along transit corridors within neighborhoods. The applicant's presentation went through evidence of that showing in the various historic neighborhoods of Kenwood and Northeast around the community how on the edge of those neighborhoods this is an appropriate use. the applicant has presented ample evidence for this board or this council to approve this request and we respectfully request that you do so tonight. Thank you. Thank you. So now city council will go into executive session and having the first request to speak is council member Hanowitz. Thank you chair and first of all I want to thank everyone for coming out here and speaking on behalf of your neighborhood and being active in what was happening. A lot of times it doesn't happen so I always appreciate the input from the residents on these issues and zoning issues are some of the issues that we deal with that people are very passionate about and understandably so because you should be passionate about your neighborhood and so I don't fault anyone for being passionate about their neighborhood and being here. What I want to focus on right now is our decision is going to be based on the factors that are set forth in section 16.70.04.1 I'm glad staff made it clear that we're not going to consider whether or not the church has to be sold the factors surrounding that that is not relevant to our discussion. Our discussion is really going to be based on these factors that we have to consider period. There are people that have opinions as to increasing density one way or the other. Again it's all based on different cases and every case before us is different. I know we approved an item before well that approval has nothing to do with this approval because every case has different factors and when the courts look at our record they're not going to look at the record of another case they're going to look at this record. So I want to make it clear that I'm just looking at the factors of this case and I'm only going to weigh those factors. So with that being said the standards of the review the first one is compliance of the proposed use with the goals and objective policies and guidelines of the comprehensive plan and I would like staff to come up and I'm going to start with page five of the relevant considerations of the amendments to the future land use map that was part of your staff report for the May 14th, 2024 hearing before the CPPC and that kind of went through a lot of the factors that are being considered. The first one that you listed is LU 2.5 which is the land use plan shall make the maximum use of available public facilities and minimize the need for new facilities by directing new development to infill redevelopment locations where excess capacity is available. Derek, are you there yet? Because I know you're very organized. So I assume you are but I want to make sure. Okay, I know you do. Okay. So when I look at this I know the objective of LU 2 is on intensive growth and activity centers. That's the focus. And Central Avenue Corridor Activity Center ends east of Pasadena Avenue. Right? So how is it that you apply this to this scenario? It's not an activity center. LU 2.4 as a matter of fact says the city may permit an increase in land use intensity or density outside of activity centers where available infrastructure exists and surrounding uses are compatible and even the objective itself talks about that the future land use element shall facilitate a compact urban development pattern that provides opportunities to more efficiently use and develop infrastructure land or other resources and services by concentrating more intensive growth in activity centers and other appropriate areas. So could you explain to me how this is relevant? Sure. Could we maybe get the staff presentation up and I'll use a map to kind of reinforce and walk you through our approach to this? You are correct. Activity centers do go through a much more extensive and detailed planning process to determine what are acceptable limits because you are using multipliers to amplify density and flow rate ratio. For example, in that activity center boundary, let me just get to this map and then. Right. In that Central Avenue activity center boundary, it is 60 units per acre plus 10 workforce housing, 70 units per acre allowed within that activity center. That's a concentration to that Central Avenue spine. You can see at the intersection of Pasadena where it meets Central and the First Avenues, there still is commercial mixed-use zoning here. And on the outside of that commercial mixed-use, you have NSM multifamily zoning. So just kind of working here. So you'll see this is the CCS mixed-use zoning category. And then on the perimeter of this mixed-use commercial, you have these orange areas which are NSM multifamily. So if somebody was asking in this application for those activity center densities and floor area ratio, we may not draw the same conclusion that we are drawing for NSM, which is 15 units per acre plus the workforce housing bonus. We're talking about a much smaller density number than what you would see in the activity center. And so for us looking at this, you have the commercial mixed-use here. You have this existing prevalence of NSM multifamily on the outside edges of that commercial mixed-use. And that's why looking at the conditions in this corner, we felt that it met kind of the minimum threshold for looking at these criteria because it was a lower density, it was multifamily, and it kind of matched how the other edges of this commercial mixed-use intersection and corridor were being treated. Okay, so basically everything that is kind of on the other side, northeast of the neighborhood is what that focus on is for this LU 2.1. Yes, that was. Yeah, LU 2.5. And 2.5, I mean, I was providing you a more comprehensive answer for all of that criteria on number one. Yeah. 2.5 is a little more specific to public facilities, access capacity and how you're coordinating that. We've demonstrated through level of service that there's plenty of access capacity for what we're obligated to look at. And here we did feel like this is, you know, concentrating this change in an area along a commercial mixed-use corridor at a major node on the west end where these different major roadways come together. And that was our approach to this. we definitely were looking at our analysis and what was around to the north and to the east. You have the institutional church as you've heard to the south. And then you do transition into the single-family homes to the west. And those were the additional pictures that were not in our presentation slides on the screen but were included in the materials that you had received before the meeting. The next one you mentioned is LU 3.4. The land-use plan shall provide for compatible land-use transition for an orderly land-use arrangement, proper buffering, and the use of physical and natural separators. And then it is noted that the subject site is located approximately one block south of Central Avenue and adjacent. Now, I'm curious. What is your meaning of adjacent? Does this mean a common border? Adjacent is usually there isn't a specific numerical number. Typically, if something is touching in a report, I would say that it's adjoining. If it is in very close proximity, generally, I would use the term adjacent. So in this case, we're using and applying the word adjacent as being very close to but maybe not necessarily adjoining. Right. Okay. So to Pasadena Avenue South, both of which designated future major streets. Now, isn't the site bordered by First Avenue South, which is a residential road, right? And that street type is a neighborhood collector road, right? And I don't know if you need Tom Whelan to come speak on the road situation because I'm curious about the road situation here. Tom Whelan, Transportation Coordinator at the City's Transportation and Park and Management Department. Good evening. Hi. Good evening. So I know it was pointed out at the CPPC and when I looked at the map, it appears that the road, the road just north of the property is a residential road and what's defined as a neighborhood collector, First Avenue South. And then when you cross Pasadena Avenue, then First Avenue South, east of Pasadena, is an arterial road, more of a thoroughfare. That's correct. Yeah. Okay. Because that wasn't clarified. That wasn't clarified in the CPPC. Yeah, actually, west of Pasadena Avenue, First Avenue South is a local street. Right. Okay. Yes. And that's what I wanted to clarify. Thank you very much. So how much of the Pasadena Community Church property in question is adjacent to Pasadena Avenue? Because when I'm looking at this, it appears that there's another, you know, when I looked at the property, there's another parcel that is adjacent to Pasadena Avenue, the triangular-shaped property. I think the church may have to answer that question. The owner... No, I think it's owned by the city, actually. This is the city utility. Yeah, that one. That's what I was talking about. This is City Park. Right. And this triangle piece here... It's city. That triangle piece, is that owned by the church? Yes. Isn't that... There is a landscape business there? No, no. There's a little triangular piece, right... Yeah. This right here is a utility lift station. Yeah. Owned by the city of St. Pete. Yeah. Right? Yeah, so... Okay, I just want to make sure because we're talking about it and you talk about it's right beside Pasadena Avenue. It's not clear. It's really not, right? It's... There's another property, right? And so that's adjacent to, right? The property in question. Okay. It's the own lift station in between, yeah. Okay. Okay, I just wanted to make sure. And then it is noted that there... In that same section, two blocks north of the site, there is a 4.95 acre of land zone NSM1 serving as a buffer between its respective northerly adjacent single-family residential zone parcels and the commercially zone parcels located to the south. So that's on the other side of Central Avenue. And there... I guess the comparison was there's a similar big property, right, that serves as a buffer, right, to the other neighborhood. Correct. And that was some of what we were reviewing is this NSM zoning up here. Now, explain to me, like, when you talk about buffers, then how do you... How do you classify the CCS1 that's north of it and the CRT1 that's zoning that's north of it? How do you... Is that a buffer also? Is that not a buffer? What do you mean by that? Like... Maybe transitional is a better term. The commercial mixed-use categories, the red CCS1, the purple CRT, the CCT in blue, those are commercial mixed-use. And you have... You do have some instances of just a hard edge where you have commercial mixed-use zoning and then right across the street you have single-family zoning or in here, too, you have this hard edge of commercial mixed-use across the street from single-family. And the reason... Yeah. And I'm just... The reason I'm asking this is because... I'll give you an example. Like historical northeast or anything on 4th Street, right? There are commercial zone, right, properties right on the edge of 4th Street, CCT1, right? It's all around there, right? That serves as a buffer to 4th Street. We had another zoning hearing right before this that the term buffer was used, again, for the same type of property. So that's what's confusing to me in terms of what you use as buffer because where does the buffer end? How far does the buffer go? And I'm trying to really wrap my head around that because when you look at this neighborhood, there's a residential street. Then there's other zoning. To me, that's a buffer, right? But then you're like, no, there's more buffer. And what I'm trying to understand is, I mean, if that's the argument, then you could go into historical northeast and then the other neighborhood and say, we need more buffer. These commercial properties here aren't enough. We're just going to continue going down the neighborhood. You see where I'm getting to? Yep. Yeah. I would say that we're not arguing a need for a buffer. Okay. We are saying that there's an application that's been made for a rezoning to a multifamily category. When you are looking at the distribution of land use classifications and categories, best practices are commercial mixed use to multifamily higher density to multifamily lower density to single family with ADU. So it is consistent with how you would traditionally apply land use categories, but we are not arguing in our report that there is a need for multifamily buffer to go here. Okay. Okay. Then that helps me. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. In terms of LU 3.6, land use planning decision shall weigh heavily the established character of predominantly developed areas where changes of use or intensity of development are contemplated. It says here that the southern block faces First Avenue South, every parcel located to the east of the subject site up to the terminus of First Avenue South at Bayshore Drive, six miles east, has a future land use designation with permits an equivalent or higher density as the changes proposed. Right? And so there is a comparison again made to the character east of Pasadena Abbey, which by the way, completely different road, completely different road. And so one's a neighborhood collector, which is residential, and one is a thoroughfare, which is arterial. And I don't think that was hashed out before clearly. I know that I think one of the commissioners made a note of it. So what I'm trying to understand is how can you compare the established character of that area with an area, by the way, that has a completely different character in terms of a road that's right beside it? So the roads was a point that was well articulated in the public comments at the CPPC. It was referenced by some of the commission members. We did go back out for this hearing and for your materials to collect additional photographs to reflect some of that discussion and we can go through some of those here. In terms of character, right now, of the two city blocks, in addition to the other things that we've already talked about, on the two city blocks, the east city block has institutional buildings on it, two-story institutional buildings that are running currently a preschool and were running church functions before. So the idea of a multifamily or a single family with ADU, the character of that is going to be typically more residential than would be the institutional buildings that you see there now. That institutional building on the east block runs almost the entire face of the First Avenue frontage and that's a solid frontage without any breaks. So those are the kind of things, obviously there are two ways to look at this and it's been articulated well in the discussion. Are you looking at it from the southwest corner? Are you looking at it from the northeast corner? In our analysis, we were leaning more on looking to the north and to the northeast because it is adjacent across the street from those activities and it was consistent with how the other three corners of that major intersection there were being dealt with. And yeah, and to your point, it's institutional now and I know that I'm glad actually the opponent asked this question in terms of the future land use, you know, whether or not it has to be, you know, institutional, stay institutional. That's a good question because the reality is they're asking, their application is they're asking for residential medium. It doesn't have to be residential medium, right? They can ask for residential urban. They can ask for something else. They can ask for planned redevelopment residential. Isn't that correct? That is correct. So each zoning category has a compatible future land use map category. In this case, their interest was in applying for a rezoning to NSM1 and the compatible map use category for that is the RM. So if it stays NT3, there would need to be, still need to be a future application to amend the underlying future land use map category from institutional to residential urban, which is the compatible land use category for NT3. Right. Okay. LU 3.7 in the report, land use planning decisions shall include a review to determine whether existing land use plan boundaries are logically drawn in relation to existing conditions and expected future conditions. And your report says the proposed land use boundary would be logically drawn in relation to existing and expected future conditions. I mean, this statement is conclusory and there's no analysis provided as whether the existing land use plan boundaries are logically drawn. I understand what you're saying. I think we've described our approach to these criteria in number one by looking at the map and how the commercial mixed use is dealt with by having a multifamily NSM transition into the single family outside of that. Okay. But it is a conclusory statement. There's just not an analysis there. I understand. Yeah. Okay. So going through the other factors, you know, factor two, it's not really applicable. Factor three, whether the proposed changes would alter the population density pattern and thereby adversely affect residential dwelling units. It does not include or public schools. Why is that when that is what our standard is? I'm sorry. Could you ask that question again? So our standard under our ordinances, the question is whether the proposed changes would alter the population density pattern and thereby adversely affect residential dwelling units or public schools. Why is public schools not included in the relevant considerations given that that is a part of our standards of review under the ordinance and what information have we been given on that? We haven't been provided any information from the applicant on that. We don't do school concurrency anymore. It's no longer required. But we do continue to report out new developments to the Pinellas County School District so that they can continue to plan for projects and changes that are being approved through the city. Are you saying that even though our standards of review and maybe legal can explain this to me why does it say or public schools in there if are we not supposed to consider that? Derek's right about the stripping of concurrency with schools and the Community Planning Act of 2009. It could be a relic. Okay. That's what I want. And, you know, look, we always look at the criteria kind of on balance and, you know, if there's some things might be addressed a little bit more than others as you go through the comp plan elements and the various criteria. Okay. Then I'm going to jump to some of the other ones that, you know, four we kind of covered. Five is fine. Six, the amount of availability of vacant land and land suitable for redevelopment for similar uses in the city or on contiguous properties. Derek, how do you evaluate the availability of consolidated lots throughout the city? Like, for instance, how does the 65 acres of historic gas plant that is up for redevelopment come into play in the analysis? I'm just wondering, it's, there's really not an analysis to that, so I'm just trying to understand it. Right. There isn't a detailed analysis on the number of lots available. Right. We're evaluating the application that is received against the criteria, but there is no specific calculation or counting of parcels. Okay. And then, number seven, where the proposed change is consistent with the established land use pattern of the areas in reasonable proximity, I think your focus, and you said before, was northeast of it, but not really the neighborhood and the other parts of it. Is that correct? I mean, when you take proximity into consideration, and there was a lot of focus of some of the areas on the other side, how about the focus on the area south of that or southeast of that, for instance, as opposed to just north and northeast? Yeah, well, so the area to the south is the church and they are the applicants. And west. Yeah, right, and west. Right. And then going west, so this picture on the screen is an example of the single-family area moving to the west. And do you consider two streets after that or three streets after that? I mean, how far does it go? Because I know we were considering two or three streets on the other side of central, right? Right. A neighborhood was mentioned right on the other side in the buffer, so I was just wondering how far? I mean, you're always going to have an edge between two different zoning categories. Right. And so for us, the NSM-1 multifamily category is typically applied as the lowest non-single-family edge to a single-family neighborhood. So in this case, when somebody is proposing multifamily and those multifamily tenants depend on other services within proximity, we're looking at, are those available? Is it consistent across the street, First Avenue South? Is it available to the east? To the west, it is a single-family neighborhood. There's going to be an edge between two categories at some point, and in this case, it's on that west edge of the west block. Okay. Okay, that's just some of my questions for now. I'll let other council members weigh in with their questions before I give my final comment. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Chair Gerdes. Thank you, Madam Chair. You can keep those down. Sorry. First, I just want to thank everybody for coming out. I know these get long and I appreciate all the input. Selfishly, it's nice to see West Siders in here. And so I just appreciate all the input and all the work that's put into it from all the sides. I'll address, just personally, real quick, listen, I went to this preschool. I learned how to sing in this church. I've been to probably too many funerals that I'd like to have gone to at that church. But so that does not weigh on this decision, but I was going to identify the elephant in the room. Can we go back to page 14, the map we were on? Okay. Derek. Yeah. Having served on CPPC, I have nothing but love for you in the utmost respect, but I am going to disagree. So the NSM-1 just north of CCS-1, the orange, yep, that's never being developed. It's a power grid. So I appreciate that it's NSM-1. I'm not sure I would call that a buffer into the neighborhood with it being a power grid. And then just east of there, along Pasadena Avenue, right across from where First Avenue north hits Pasadena Avenue, that NSM-1 area, yep, so on the west side of that property, there's already developed NSM-1. This council, which I voted no against, made the border of Pasadena Avenue, NSM-1, which I still don't agree with today because it really borders on the other side of what is Lake Pasadena, a neighborhood, and I'm just, I'm not a huge fan of it. So the idea that there is orange surrounding that activity center with NSM-1, I just think, yes, it's NSM-1, is, by the way, I don't even think the townhome thing is happening. This, I think, and this isn't because of you, because what you're doing is stating a fact, the picture of it is a bit misleading because the buffers just don't exist. And then the NSM-1 that's attached to the power grid are all single-family homes that act like NTM-1s. They are not townhomes. And so, this just paints a different picture, in my opinion, than what's actually happening on the west side. And I just wanted to point that out. Second, I'm really glad, sometimes I'm very scared of going after Council Member Hanowitz. Today, I was very happy to go after because I thank you for bringing up First Avenue South west of Pasadena Avenue because, let me tell you, as much as I heard a couple of people talk about a traffic problem, I don't believe we have a traffic problem on First Avenue South there. I believe we will have a traffic problem if this were to happen. But, I don't believe we have a traffic problem today because it is a neighborhood road. The difference between west of Pasadena Avenue and east of Pasadena Avenue, if you want to call that a major corridor or a future major street, then you should drive down 38th Avenue on the other side of Tyrone Boulevard and tell me that that's a future major street because it's just about the same thing. It's totally different character. The speed limit changes, the lanes change, there is median bike lanes, now there's street parking. It is a neighborhood road. In fact, I've had complaints about cars staying too long on that road. And if you've ever, not that this is relevant, but if you've ever been at that light at Pasadena Avenue and First Avenue South, I don't know about you, but I don't want a hundred more cars in front of me at that light. To get to relevant criteria, I think CPPC, and again, to be completely transparent, I chaired CPPC for two years. Those people are so significantly smarter than me, it's ridiculous. and their knowledge, their wealth of knowledge, their understanding of how things fit into our city. When I think about Chair Wanamaker and committee member Michaels, the wealth of knowledge is something I hope to have in multiple lifetimes. And I think they, if my colleagues and anybody in the public read these, their comments, I think they hit it on their head. I look at LU 3.6, when it talks about weigh heavily on the surrounding neighborhood. I'll be honest with you, I even look at the single family portion of this development and I know that this is part of site plan, but when you're looking at the plat of these, even the single family homes, in my opinion, don't fit the neighborhood of the character. That's not even touching the townhomes. And so, the character of this neighborhood, and again, selfishly, not part of my decision, I love this neighborhood. If I could move there tomorrow, I would. But it's, from a 3.6, 3.8, and then relevant criteria 3 and 7, I just can't, I can't get myself on board with this. I have, I have pushed the limits on development in District 1. Raytheon, Bear Creek, 6090, the new SPC property. When I got elected to council, I made a big stink about District 1 being the least dense district in the city. We have drastically changed that in three years. But we've done it, in my opinion, thankfully, thankful to my colleagues, in a very intentional way. And I just don't see this fitting. And so, again, I'm going to go back to, I think, 0 to 7 from CPPC, and I think everybody knows, I don't normally go on tirades like this. 0 to 7 CPPC speaks volumes. And I, again, going back to Chair Wanamaker and Commissioner Michaels, I think they did an excellent job spelling out, so I won't repeat because it's already in the record. And I could go on with some of the emotional part of this. But I travel this road probably every other day. I have a niece and a nephew that go to that school. My godson and goddaughter go to that school. I am there often. And this, when I look at the criteria and relevant criteria and the land use, it's just, they don't jive. They don't jive for me. And so, I hope that my colleagues see that. I hope I have made a case for something that is within eight blocks of my family. This is a place where this council has done amazing work in bringing density to the west side in district one. This just isn't, I hope that my colleagues see the facts and the relevant criteria around this and then please hear me when repeating that because I really, I really don't believe this is a spot we need to be doing this. That's all I have for now, chair. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Driscoll. Thank you. More lights. Yes, please. So, thank you to everyone who has taken the time to be here and to speak on this. It's been really helpful to hear the different perspectives and people on both sides, on each side of this speaking so passionately. It is a fantastic neighborhood. It's, there is something very special here. I've been trying to figure out what, what could work here because I don't, I don't believe that all of it should just be single family homes. having, having more people being able to live in a place where they can travel safely whether they're on foot, whether they're on a bike, catching the bus, the proximity to the trail. I mean, this is, to me, this is just calling out for sensible increased density. I do wonder about, I think, is it block 69 that's the, the one that has the split where, oh, Derek. I don't know the exact number of that one. Let me, sorry, it's, I know what you're asking though. It is, the westernmost block is the one that currently has the platted alley through the center and the easternmost block is complete. There is no platted alley through the center. Right, so, so, the one that has, the one that has the split, the one on the western side is what I'm wondering about because, could it, I ask myself, could this work if those were all, if that was, if that matched the rest of the neighborhood and then we had the townhouses on block 70 on the, on the eastern side. So, I just wonder if this could be retooled a little bit so that it does have a little bit more sensitivity to the neighborhood. I know that's not, that's not something for us to vote on. I'm just, it's kind of a rhetorical question but it's also something that I'm posing to the development team. Kate, yeah. Thank you, Councilwoman Driscoll. I think at this point in City Attorney Dima and I have had several conversations about this as we have had with staff as to what these options would be and while I think his opinion would be that's not something that you could vote on tonight, it's certainly something as I very honestly said, the development team desires to be part of this neighborhood and provide a product here and if there was a consensus of the council that that is something that the council could support, I know, not polling, I'm not asking for that but those opportunities certainly the team would go back and have those conversations with the church as the seller of the property and see if that's an application that we could bring forward. Thanks. Because if we were just talking about Block 70, this would be an easy thing for me to be supportive of. It's the other part that I'm concerned about I wonder, Mr. Clemens, have you been sworn in? I would love to ask you a couple of questions if you don't mind. Good evening. Thank you for being here. Sure. Anytime I see your name on a project, I know it's going to be a good one. Thank you. And part of that is because you understand our city and even more importantly, you understand our neighborhoods. So tell me, and again, I know we're not doing site plan stuff right now, but this is about compatibility, and you know a thing or two about that. And so I'd like to get your perspective here on how, tell us why you think this is compatible. So some of the issues you were just raising was exactly behind our thinking in developing the site plan that there is a difference between the east block and the west block that the east block has no direct borders with any of the single-family homes in the neighborhood, whereas the west block does. There's the two houses to the west. And so in developing the west block, we did separate those from townhouses into narrow lot single-family homes, so they're not the same size lots. But one of the points that we tried to look at from designing it, and that one image that was shown during the presentation, is that there's two houses, there's two existing houses west of 71st. They're two stories. They have 15-foot setbacks, and they have a nice line of trees along the west side of 71st. What we wanted people to see then on the west side looking east is two single-family homes, two stories, with a 15-foot setback and a nice row of trees and sidewalk along that side. The fact is, those are 35-foot lots, not 60, 70, 80. There's a lot of double lots in the neighborhood that are 100-foot or more. So, yes, the rhythm along First Avenue South would be different, but the rhythm along Second Avenue South facing the church to the south would be different, but what you would see from one side of the neighborhood looking towards this new development would be very, very similar in scale and in arrangement. Does that answer your question? Somewhat. And then in terms of the east block, again, that's where we did step up the intensity to townhouses, but even there, we divided them into four-unit buildings. It was not one continuous row. There's sort of the, and that block is where the existing church support buildings are located. So, again, as we showed that those buildings are two-story, gable roof parallel to First Avenue South, and it's a series of buildings that are relatively close together and have a certain setback from the street. So, we've done a series of five, four-unit buildings, two-stories tall, gable roof parallel to the street, and in a similar location, although I'll note that it was not pointed out, the existing institutional buildings have a row of parallel parking, a row, not parallel parking, a row of perpendicular parking adjacent to First Avenue South, and that would go away with all the parking brought to the middle of the block so that we would actually, in our opinion, improve the streetscape along First Avenue South by bringing front yards and more landscaping to that area. And because we were setting them back enough, again, because it was raised as a point, preserving as many of the existing street trees as possible. Thank you. Speaking of things going away, will these plans eliminate everyone else's access to the Pinellas Trail? That was mentioned by one of the speakers. So, in what way would, what was the question? Would it eliminate the access? No, no, no. No, not at all. Okay. Thank you. Now, as someone, as an architect with extensive experience in infill development, and again, you know, this is about character. Yeah, and I think there was a lot of good points raised today by members of the community, and I think there's been some good responses we've heard already from council that, you know, how people do care about their communities and how important that is for St. Petersburg and always has been. You know, I've been consistently an advocate for over 30 years now of having a diversity of housing types in our city, and always those things are going to raise questions, and they're going to raise disagreements about where's appropriate and how it is done as appropriate. You know, in my experience in working in St. Petersburg and doing, you know, being one of the very first person, very first person, actually, I did the very first fee-simple townhouse project in St. Petersburg because we didn't have any rules for fee-simple townhouse projects at the time, and so I've, you know, and I live in a three-story fee-simple townhouse, so I guess I'm, you know, one of those people that don't think of them as being a bad thing to live in or to live nearby even. You know, I hope my neighbors don't think I'm a bad neighbor because of the kind of house I live in, but I understand that that's, you know, that different neighborhoods have different characters, but I also believe that neighborhoods can have variety and that that can be a good thing, a good thing in a neighborhood, and I, and again, but I also understand that there can be a lot of difference of opinion on that. I, I do believe that these type of uses can be appropriate transitions, I think is the term that Derek preferred, between different types of components of our neighborhoods, and all too often in St. Petersburg we've used the word neighborhood to mean homes. To me, neighborhoods are places where people live, but also go to school, also work, go to shop, and worship. All those things together are what make neighborhoods. So they're not just one use, it's, and then how you combine those uses and mediate between them is really important, and that's what we're here today to discuss. All right. Thank you. Let's see, those were answered for the attorneys. just procedural questions. With these two items, do we need to take up each one separately? No, you can take them together like you would normally do in L and a Z ordinance. It just happens to be in the context of an appeal. Right, right. This is standard otherwise. Okay. Okay. And then, in order for the appeal to pass, we need a super majority. That's correct, and with Council Member Muhammad absent today, a super majority of the council is five affirmative votes. Okay. And could you explain to everyone what a yes vote means? Yeah. So, the presumptive motion will be made in the affirmative to grant the appeal, and a yes vote means you're approving the rezoning. A no vote means you're denying the appeal and thus denying the rezoning. So, it's straightforward. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. We've had many conversations as a council and with different developments that have come before us regarding the need to increase our housing stock, and as one of the tools in our toolbox, to increase affordability, and missing middle housing is a big part of that. There's not a whole lot of area left in St. Petersburg where that can happen on a scale like this. I like the idea that it is primarily townhouses and single-family homes. We're not talking about a tall condo building or a large apartment building here, but this is the type of moderate density increase that we've talked about and that I have supported all the way. And I know some of this team, and I know that when it comes down to the design and creating something that will truly blend with the neighborhood and be something that everyone can ultimately embrace. I have a great deal of confidence in this team, and I know that they can continue to listen, that perhaps with some changes, and you heard everybody wants more detail. Everyone already gave opinions on things that have to do with the site plan. So you've got some marching orders here, but I think that you have put forward something that is reasonable and that will really help to have more people being a part of this wonderful neighborhood. So I am supportive of it, and I'll move approval. Second. Councilwoman Watney. Thank you. I, too, wanted to thank both everyone that came out today and also all the emails that we were sent. You can tell that everybody that lives in this neighborhood loves the neighborhood. And, you know, we all love our city. I wanted to mention, because a lot of people talked about the CPPC. I, too, served on the CPPC before I was elected to City Council. I know I've got a lot of friends on the CPPC and still do, and I'm glad that we always respect everybody that serves on these boards. And they're volunteers to our city. They do this in their spare time, and they do a wonderful job. I also was in church leadership in my church for a long time. So I know about churches, and I know churches right now are going through a lot of financial hardship. Membership has been affected by COVID, had a big decline during COVID, and really hasn't recovered yet. So I'm sensitive to church leadership and churches, especially this historic church that we have in our city. What a beautiful building. And somebody brought up about William Harvard, and he's the person that not just designed this church, but designed the inverted pyramid in the bandshell right here in Williams Park and other things in our city. So I want to start with some questions. Some of the comments people talked about level of service standards. So Derek, can I pick your brain a little bit? And can you, on page 10 of the staff report, it gets into level of service standards and compatibility with the comprehensive plan. Can you talk about that? Because people question, had traffic issues, stormwater issues, and wastewater issues, but there's a lot more when it comes to level of service standards. Can you kind of talk about why in our comprehensive plan we have these things? And before this, these sorts of developments or these rezonings come to us, they need to meet the criteria that we have in our comprehensive plan. We're required to, but also it's important to have these. I mean, this is why we do, oftentimes, do planning work. So level of service is a key consideration whenever we're looking at these. Hearing the public comments, it was important to me, that's why it was important to me to clarify in our closing remarks that these considerations are updated annually in the fall through that capital improvement element update update so that we are staying up to date and relevant as these changes come through and get implemented over time. So in addition to updating the numbers, that then influences the decisions that are made in the capital improvement budget and plan for the city on a five-year rolling projection going forward. So all these things are connected, which is why it is such an important part of the analysis that we do and the map decisions that are made. Okay. All right. Thank you. Another issue that came up by a lot of people that spoke here tonight was Vision 2020. Vision 2020, I believe, was approved in the early 2000s, 2002, or something like that. And can you talk a little bit about Vision 2020 and Vision 2050? Because can you talk about why those visioning exercises were done? Sure. Fortunately, I've been around long enough to address both of those. All right. Well, I started with the city in 2000, fall of 2000, and shortly afterwards, the city started the process of the Vision 2020 conversation in the community that ultimately led to a total redesign and revamp of the city's approach towards zoning. So at that time, we were using a zoning code that was designed and adopted in 1977 and had a very suburban model of design regarding building height, setbacks, lot sizes, and it was very incompatible with the physical development that existed in the city. So I think when that was adopted in 1977, there was a hope at that time that the city would grow into this suburban model that was popular. Over time, because that really created a lot of problems, I think there was an understanding that we needed to change that code and do a better job recognizing and reflecting the existing physical conditions in the city. And so there was essentially a parcel-by-parcel analysis to identify what are the lot sizes, the lot width, the building heights, the building setbacks, the design standards, and design a zoning ordinance that acknowledged that and then attempted to maintain that character going forward, but still allow for consideration that communities do evolve and change over time. Populations in the community itself kind of shift from one region of the city to another. So making sure that we're preserving procedures to address cases as they may come up going forward. Probably the biggest change that we made at that time was to organize the zoning categories into a neighborhood corridor and center concept. The idea was that we would expand mixed-use opportunities, but we would concentrate them along corridors and also where those corridors intersected, we would have more intense centers. And so that zoning is now center corridor neighborhood. And the neighborhood suburban multifamily that is proposed here is the lowest multifamily category generally that we have in our menu of options, which is why it has neighborhood in its title. And across the street, you start to get into higher density mixed-use, so we start to change the nomenclature to corridor commercial zoning or corridor residential because now you're indicating something different that's higher density, higher intensity associated with a corridor and a center. So in this case, it is on a corridor, but the category that's proposed in the application is not a corridor category. It is more of that transitional neighborhood scale density and design. Okay. And so we had Vision 2020. That's Vision 2020. And then about five years ago, the city adopted Vision 2050. Yes, right at the beginning of COVID. So Vision 2020 was, just to answer your earlier question, it was adopted. There was a preliminary adoption in 2006. It went into effect September 10, 2007. And then there was always this idea that we would come back and evaluate how is the city doing with the Vision 2020 plan? Is it going the way that we thought? Now, over that time, we have consistently brought forward changes to this council year to year and tried to stay in front of any evolution of ideas or changes that our community is considering. That's a little different than how it was handled before. Before, interpretations would get written and stuck in a three-ring binder and tucked underneath the zoning counter at the front desk. That wasn't a very transparent way of dealing with our code. And so since the adoption in 2007, we've really worked to make sure any of those changes are coming through this council through formal text amendments. With 2050, we did an analysis. Obviously, you probably remember that through the 2050 discussion, there was a lot of focus on neighborhood character and how's the community doing in protecting its neighborhood character. So we continue to be very sensitive to that. Some of that information is going to feed the residential LDR update that our development review services division is in the process of executing right now. And then we still have comprehensive plan text amendments that need to come forward to reflect those St. Pete 2050 inputs. But obviously, we have been prioritizing the application with the warehouse district area, and the Pinellas-Sunrunner Central Avenue corridor. And we've been working on those, as you know. But once those are wrapped up, then we'll be resetting to implementing the 2050 updates to the comp plan, too. Thank you. So we've had these two vision and being somebody that served on the planning commission for a long time, the city has always been known for our zoning. Going back to the Nolan plan and, you know, back in the... 1920. 1920? Yep. Yeah. So the city has always been very smart when it comes to zoning, land use and zoning. Where I'm going with this is when we did the 2050 plan, we started with the demographics in a forecast of where we're going. And when you have 1,000 people a day moving to your state and your city's growing at over 1% a year, you've got a lot of people moving to St. Petersburg and where are they going to live? And what sort of services do we have to provide to... And that's where the level of service comes into play here. So let me shift a little bit to slide number 10, which compares NT3 and NSM1, and it talks about density. And we had some of the speakers this evening talk about how much density. And, you know, I figured... I did a calculation myself, but what's the maximum density that we can have on this parcel under NSM1? How many total units? Our calculation was 152. If they were using the missing middle bonus option, then it would be 152. And that was reflected in the materials that were prepared for you. Good, good. Thank you. I wanted to just touch base quickly on some... the L.U. 3.6, which was referred multiple times by speakers. The other one I wanted to talk about was L.U. 3.15, which states that the land-use plan should provide housing opportunities for a variety of households of various age, sex, race, and income, providing a diversity of zoning categories within a range of densities and lot requirements. Can you just expand on the response that's written down there? Sure. So L.U. 3.15, as you just read the description, so our response to that was brief. It simply says that the proposed amendment to the NSM-1 zoning district will allow for an increased base density as well as a workforce housing and missing middle housing density bonus to provide housing opportunities to citizens of a variety of ages, sex, race, and income. So it's a very general statement that is confirming these are providing additional housing typologies through the multifamily zoning, but it's not dictating the application itself, although you have a concept plan, and, again, we're very careful about speaking to details on a concept plan. So for us, we just are making a general statement here without any specific detail related to anything that's been provided by the applicant. Okay, thank you. Well, let me just kind of wrap this up and just state that I, too, look at what can we do here and what, you know, just from a reasonable point of view and what I see, to me, seems seems reasonable. I represent District 3 in St. Petersburg, which includes Shore Acres and Snow Isle. I look at those two neighborhoods and we've got a compatibility of uses within that neighborhood. It's not just all single-family homes. We have apartments, condos, townhomes, in both of those neighborhoods. And what has been stated here today, to me, it just passes as this a reasonable way to go. And that's where I land on this. So I'll just leave it right there. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Council Member Gabbert. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I just want to start out by thanking everyone for coming here this evening and spending your night with us. We've all been here since 8 o'clock this morning. So we're still smiling. You're still smiling. Hopefully, you're smiling when it's over. Thank you, staff, for all of your hard work on this. And I want to thank the CPPC for their hard work. I so thoroughly appreciate their expertise. I agree. Some of the smartest people we have volunteering for our city. And so when I first started reviewing all the materials, immediately, you know, had to lean towards this 0 to 7 vote because that speaks volumes to me. I have always been a proponent for density along our corridors, much like Council Member Driscoll said, near the trail, that, to me, speaks volumes as well. And then the increase in the missing middle housing. Those are things that I've worked very hard on, things that I have always encouraged across our city. This particular section, I'm struggling with. This is really kind of getting me in a place where I just don't, I probably won't know until I push my button where I'm going to land. But Council Member Gerdes, I purposefully did not push my button earlier because I wanted to hear from you. I appreciate your love for your district. You're born and raised there. You know it better than anyone else. And I share with you the concern specifically over LU 3.6, the character of this area. that, to me, I continue to go back to. Very much have a concern about changing the character of this area. So, Derek, I kind of want to talk a little bit more specifically and pardon me if I'm going to beat it to death a little bit on NSM-1 and what is allowed there compared to right across the street on First Avenue South where it is already zoned CRT. And looking at Google Earth, it looks like across the street there is really like doctor's offices and one-scale buildings and things like that. So, if we're kind of thinking about, you know, potentially what could happen in this area across the street, let's say all of those doctor's offices got together and decided to sell to a developer. Tell me about what could go across the street there. Sure. Well, I appreciate you bringing this comment up because there is, there was a comment from City Council Member Copley Gerdes that was talking about the utility substation to the north that has the NSM-1 zoning on it. Again, whenever we approach these, we're looking at a very macro level based on map category because nothing's permanent and these things do change over time. So, in this particular case, to your point, it was mentioned in public comments that the buildings across the street are primarily single-story office buildings today. But you are correct. They could be consolidated and they could be redeveloped under CRT-1 zoning. That would allow a base 24 units per acre up to 32 units per acre with the bonus and the height there would be 36 feet. So, see, that's where I'm torn is because I'm very familiar with what First Avenue South is in that and I agree with you, Council Member Gerdes. That's very different than First Avenue South continuing east, right? But I'm very familiar with what that is and then I have to think if that could have been allowed across the street already, then why would we not look at sensible density bonus on this side of the street? And so that's, I'm very, very sensitive to the character of your neighborhood. I am. I know your neighborhood. I just have a hard time saying if it could be allowed right there, more so than what we're talking about, why would I not vote for this to be able to be rezoned? And so that's just where I'm at. I can't seem to, most of the time I've got a pretty definitive thought process by the time I get to this point. I'm still really, really struggling with it. The other piece that I'm struggling with a little bit is the traffic addition as I said, I'm familiar with this roadway and that it's very different than First Avenue South heading east. So remind me, I looked it up, but I want to make sure I'm right, Sunrunner. We talked about Sunrunner and access to transit. But isn't the closest stop 66? Closest stop is Pinellas Way South at First Avenue South to go eastbound. And then the westbound stop is First Avenue North that's 66th Street. Okay. Okay. And how far is that closest stop? I think it's within half a mile, is that right? From the northeast corner of the proposal to the station, it's a quarter mile. Okay. From the northwest, furthest northwest corner to the station, it's closer to a half. Okay. All right. I just wanted to make sure that I was accurate on that. So, like I said, I'm sensitive to everything that has been said here this evening. I want to continue to hear my colleagues and I'm thankful for all the questions that they have asked as well. I'm really torn on this. So, just know, regardless of how I vote this evening, I want what's best for this neighborhood. And I want what's best for our city as a whole. And so, I'll continue to listen and contemplate. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Council Member Hannaultz. Thank you, Chair. And I pressed my button because nobody else pressed their button. I know other council members haven't spoken, but Council Member Gabbard brought up something and it made me think about, and Derek, if you want to come back, in terms of the, what can be done in the area. So, right now, the institutional use there, let's say this is approved, right? And let's say the church is doing really bad and they want to sell the rest of the institutional land and now you've created a situation where it's like, well, now you have our youth on the other side because there was a comment that there could be no trickle-down effect to this, right? There's no trickle-down effect. But we know the reality is once you change the zoning there, you have the institutional use where the church is and that whole area and we could get another application, right? With the same basis, right? It's like, well, you changed it here and now you go down, right, further. Could that happen? Just like the change of use can happen on the other side of First Avenue, Sal? Sure, anything can happen. They could submit an application to rezone and change the categories there, absolutely. Right, no, I'm just thinking because, I mean, this is a huge piece of property and so when I think about it in terms of NT3, that neighborhood, and look, Historical Northeast is in my area. I will tell you, you cannot just compare one neighborhood to the other. The sizes are much different. Roser Park is a small area. This is not a huge area. If you put this beside Old Northeast, Old Northeast is much bigger. So whatever impact that you have in terms of changing, it changes. I don't, to me, when I look at all these cases, to me, they're all different. I can't look at something and that's why sometimes people think, well, if I voted somewhere, you know, in one of the cases before us a certain way, then, oh, she's probably gonna vote. No. Every case is different. Every neighborhood is different. Do we agree that we need density in our city? Yes. The issue is where because you do have to have the whole analysis. Density, just one part of it. There's all the other questions you have and all the other. So I, I, you know, I think that does matter because I do worry about that change. As soon as you change it, that's a huge part of that neighborhood, right? I mean, how much land is the institutional land total? I don't know. I don't know that we have the acreage number for the entire church property. Okay. Okay. Well, anyhow. Okay. That's all I just wanted to say and just to finish off before because I wanted to hear when everyone said it. Look, to me, it is hard. I have neighborhoods in my district and I do believe in diversity of housing. I have it in my district, Crescent Lake neighborhood, Crescent Heights, Historical Northeast. They have a diversity of housing and I've had neighborhoods that come and, you know, they're like, oh, we only can be, you know, single family. But this is not, whatever your neighborhood is today is not going to be what it is 10 years from now or 20 years from now. None of our neighborhoods are. The question is whether this is the right thing now based on our land use and right now are zoning throughout the city. I think Commissioner Jeffrey mentioned we have lots of areas where we have plans and increased zoning, including, by the way, in your neighborhood when we added accessory dwelling units not that long ago. So it's not like we aren't doing things throughout the city targeted, really targeted, whether it was the NTM, whether it was, you know, expanding accessory dwelling units, you know, all the central avenue corridor, all those things are really targeted because we want to drive the development in certain areas. And then you have all these other cases that come before us, these applications that we are also increasing zoning throughout the city. I can't even count how many. One day, actually, I may have to have that sit-down conversation to see how much zoning have we increased on parcels like this throughout the city that we change parcel by parcel. So we are tackling the issue of adding, I think, density. But I can't get past, and by the way, the missing middle housing, they mentioned the house in Crescent Lake and there was a picture there. I know exactly where that's at. That's in my neighborhood. That sold, one of those sold for $900,000. Okay? It sold more. This is missing middle housing. It sold more than some of the single family homes in my neighborhood. So sometimes you have single family homes that are actually more affordable than some of the new development or the townhouses or whatever. So I, you know, I look at things much more broader and I just, I'm not convinced right now that based on the factors that have been shown, the appellant has met the criteria, and I want to put it on the record, they have not met the criteria based on our comprehensive plan. We have a higher standard. We're reviewing a unanimous decision by the CPPC and a supermajority is needed to overturn that CPPC decision. That is because of the deference we give to our CPPC and their expertise. And I have a really hard time with the facts of this case and knowing that and seeing what they said and approving this. I cannot. And so with that, I'm going to be a no on this because there is no way that I would be able to prove based on these factors. I don't think the appellant has met their burden based on the questions that I've asked them today. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. I'll go ahead and go. I do know, you know, I've got to say, Councilman Floyd, you haven't gone. Would you like to go prior because I'm supposed to go last? I mean, it's at your discretion, Chair. I'd be happy to go after you or before you. Go ahead. Okay. I'll keep it simple. I've been contemplative this whole time trying to weigh the factors. the thing to me is that zero to seven CPPC decision is significant to me. I've leaned on the CPPC's advice before, but at the same time, I look at what we're being requested to do and only what we're being requested to do. I'm not speculating as to anything that might happen there, any reason why it's happening. I'm just looking at, you know, is this the right place to put NSM-1 zoning? And I'd say when I do that, I look at what the CPP said and I understand where they say, you know, it's, you know, maybe a character change for the neighborhood. Maybe they considered that it's not directly abutting a major street where a staff was looking at it from a different perspective. It's very close to an activity center. But ultimately, where I've fallen is exactly where, oddly enough, Council Member Montaneri mentioned at the end, which is, I tried to consider it in respect to other places in the city. Where I live is not applicable at all. It's much more urban. I live literally right next door to Corridor Commercial and just a block away is neighborhood suburban, so it doesn't seem very applicable. But I pulled up the maps and I looked at neighborhoods more like this and Shore Acres and Snell Isle are what came to mind. Heavily residential, single-family home neighborhoods and there is neighborhood suburban multifamily and it's the gentlest way for us to increase density and in certain areas. And I think those neighborhoods are some of the, I mean, aside from when it rains too much, thriving, most thriving, beautiful places in our city. And so I just have a hard time thinking if I put blinders on like I have to for this decision and I see that NSM-1 is what's being asked for and that it only abuts the neighborhood with two single-family lots, I do struggle to say that it is going to be as impactful as, that it's going to be too impactful. And so I understand the difficulty that this decision is made with because like I said, it goes back to relying on the CPC's expertise a lot, but I just don't see how it's gone overboard. And I do like the, you know, comments about how we can, maybe if this doesn't happen in the future, be more responsive to the neighborhood's needs and talk about the different parcels and I'll leave that up to the applicant to think about, but that's speculative in the future. But yeah, I end up falling similar to where Councilmember Montaneri is. You know, it's NSM-1 is a very gentle increase in density compared to even the chart that we had up and what is nearby and could be possible. And I think there's an argument to be made for not saying I would support it or anything, but there is an argument to be made that you could request a different, more intense zoning category here because it's actually right across the street from a more intense zoning category from NSM. So I do think there could, someone could make that argument. Again, not saying I would support it or anything, but so NSM does seem to be a light touch and generally fit in with a lot of comparable neighborhoods in the city. So I'll leave it there. I just figured I'd let everyone know what I was thinking. Councilmember Driscoll. Madam Chair, I've already spoken. If you'd like to go ahead. It does not matter. Go ahead. We're voting soon. Go ahead. I will do this just to make sure. So again, thank you to everyone that came out and this too is super, super difficult for me because we've been here before and lived experiences mean so much to some of the decisions that I make. So when we talk about the CPPC, again, that 07 is crucial. It's valuable to me. But then when I look at a lot of the committees and boards and commissions that I've served on, the committees are comprised of those at the time. And I know that we're looking at what we think is best today. But when I think about where we were as a city five years ago, 10 years ago, and the commitment that I made to housing, I'm struggling. Sitting on a board where you've made recommendations and those recommendations are not received, it's disheartening. The level of expertise we have on CPPC is phenomenal. But then I'm looking at the overall goal of this particular vote is to provide the housing. Now, is $850,000 workforce affordable? Absolutely not. I couldn't afford it. I couldn't afford it. So I'm struggling with the balance. It's housing, yes. It's going to be very nice housing. So you're going to have some nice neighbors because they can afford to purchase that. So you're not going to have the issues that some brought before in regards to affordable housing. So I'm thinking about it. But that 07 said a lot, still says a lot. So I'm going to, I don't know if anyone else is going to speak, but I am more prone to, because I think about where I live. And when we purchased our house, it wasn't, you know, you think that you build, you buy in an established neighborhood, you're good for life. No ma'am, no sir. I've had people die, homes be purchased, demolished, and something completely different put up right across the street from me. I have a church that went through the same thing. They were in dire straits, and they wanted to sell their land, and they called and asked me, what do you recommend we do? I said, put housing on it. I asked them to put housing on. So my perspective is more toward housing. I don't, I'm huge with preserving the look of the community. And I've heard the comments and the recommendations as to how can we confer what the importance of maintaining that character looks like. I don't know if that's what we're voting on today. I'm not sure. But that 0 to 7 still resonates with me. So I'm going to leave that there. I am freezing. Y'all not cold? Oh my gosh. I am freezing. But that 0 to 7, it really stands out to me, but also the need of us wanting to address our housing stock instead of just a little bit more. So I'm going to leave it there. Councilmember Dreskel. Thank you. And Chair Fick-Sanders, you just reminded me of one of the criteria that we're not able to consider, which is the price of the homes. Neither are we able to, nor are we able to consider the criteria does not include who's buying the property, who else could buy the property, what else might happen with the property, the terms of the sale, the price of the homes, the age of the trees, whether or not the trees are going to be taken out, the age of the current residents or the potential future residents or speculation regarding adjacent zoning and what might happen to that in the future. Right? There was a comment that was brought up and I believe that Councilmember was addressing that comment, but a slippery slope argument about future speculative zoning is not relevant evidence for your consideration. That's correct. Thank you. I appreciated Councilmember Floyd's comments as well, talking about different neighborhoods and how you often have, especially around the edges of a neighborhood, some moderate increased density. I think about Coquina Key, which was one of the examples that was given and how when you first go over the north bridge to Coquina Key, you come onto the island and the first thing you see is townhouses that have been there for quite some time and there are actually a few more that are being built right now along the water. Those have been there for a while and if you go back on the southern end of the island, more townhouses, more condos and you've got duplexes and things like that. There's just about anything you can think of. Mostly single-family homes and I live in one of them. And we also have a mix of different price points, if you will, and it actually makes for a wonderful neighborhood. And we've all mentioned, some of us have given other examples of that type of mix of housing types that actually, for the neighborhoods that we're talking about, it makes them more interesting. Now, this is a neighborhood that doesn't need anything added to it to make it more interesting, but we do need more housing. And having this very careful density increase at the edge of this property where you've got commercial around it and you've got that incredible access to multiple modes of transportation just makes sense. I am very thankful for all of the work that was done by city staff, by the applicant, and by the CPPC. Reading the report from them and the way that they handled this was admirable. And I always put great value in their input. This is one of those few times where I'm seeing things a little bit differently. but I think that if this passes today, I think we're going to end up with additional good housing for families who are able to live in St. Petersburg and really get that same bite at the apple that we all are so proud to have gotten ourselves. We need to be able to share St. Pete with more people and this is a great way to do it. Thank you. Okay, seeing no further requests to speak, this J3A and B has been motioned and properly seconded. Can you please open the machine for voting? Council members, cast your votes. Now that all present council members have voted, can you please tally and announce the votes? Madam Chair, motion to approve agenda item J3A and B passes 5-2 with council members Gerdes and Hanowitz voting no, council members Driscoll, Fitzsandris, Floyd, Gabbard, and Montenari voting yes and council member Mohammed being absent. So now we're going to go ahead and move. Trying to move? Trying to move? No, I'm trying to get there. We're going to move now to item J4 which is continued from last week's city council meeting and is quasi-judicial. I struggle here. I'm still in no hurry. What are we doing? Madam. What are we doing? Yeah, I know. It's not easy. Okay, could you go ahead, Patty. Can you please swear in all your speakers, including city staff? Who's here needs to be sworn in? Bill Boyd. Okay, he's, okay. Derek is the only one. Can you close the door? Are you the only one, sir? I might be the only one. Okay. Do you swear or affirm the evidence you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do, yes. Okay, can you also please read the ordinance title? Yes, Madam Chair. Ordinance number 793-Z, an ordinance amending the official zoning map of the city of St. Petersburg, Florida, by changing the zoning of seven publicly owned parcels generally located south and west of Tropicana Field and bounded by I-175 to the south and 18th Street south to the west from Downtown Center-2 DC-2 to Downtown Center-1 DC-1 providing for repeal of conflicting ordinances and provisions thereof and providing for an effective date. And, Madam Chair, we do not have any cards on this. No cards. Okay. So, moving on to presentations, we'll begin with the city staff presentation and joining us who've been here with us. And, Chair, we don't have to do the whole song and dance today. I think the presentation will be limited to evidence that's responsive to Councilmember Driscoll's request from last week. Okay. And, given that there's no other folks here, there will be no cross or comments. No cross, no closing remarks, none of the above. So, after Mr. Kilbourne presents the new information, go straight into executive session. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Kilbourne, the show is yours. Good evening again. Thank you. Derek Kilbourne, manager of urban planning, historic preservation. Given my dance background, I'm really disappointed. I know, right? I was ready for a show. I would have liked the song and dance. I'm just saying. Essentially a third reading right now, so. I am here tonight substituting in for Liz Abernathy who had a prior commitment and I'm here to give you an update in response to the question that was raised at the last public hearing. I think in your backup materials, you've been provided copies of the email exchanges that had occurred with Mr. Rob Roth. Initially, Rob Roth had contacted our office as identifying as the HOA president for the Central 16th Homeowners Association and in that particular email had identified several concerns relating to future design aspects of the project and particularly property located across the street. In response to that email which was first received on April 17th, it was several hours later on that same date, April 17th, that we provided back to Mr. Roth an email acknowledging receipt, a statement that his comments would be included in the official record for the project moving forward and that it would also be included in the agenda packet. We closed that email by stating that if there was anything else that he needed further inviting him to contact our office. After that, there was no follow-up and then, of course, we moved into the public hearing presentation by Liz Abernethy, Director for Planning and Development Services. Just in the last couple days, there have been a number of emails going back and forth between Ms. Abernethy and Mr. Roth. Ms. Abernethy provided him some additional detailed statements relating to the development agreement and specifically articulating that there is a traffic parking management and micro-mobility plan that is going to be required as part of future design phase of the project, that the development agreement also required an increase in the open space, which was a second concern from 10 acres to 12 acres and also identifying or describing in a little more detail the location of the parking garage under the existing zoning and the proposed zoning. Parking structures are an accessory use in the existing zoning, so the rezoning, whether it's approved or not, does not directly affect the location of the parking structure because it is allowed under the existing zoning today as an accessory use. Just prior to the start of this public hearing and apparently after the earlier presentations, thank you, by the way, for the Sister City engagement that you've provided those students over the couple weeks. The engagement from Ms. Abernethy and Mr. Roth, he initially indicated he was going to attend this evening prior to this exchange. I don't see him here now and that may be because in his final exchange with Ms. Abernethy, he was stating again that he was okay with the lot being rezoned as long as the feedback would be considered at the appropriate time and then Liz was, Abernethy was responding to him stating that his concerns would obviously be considered at the appropriate steps in the design phase and that they would be forwarded and included and that Liz also, again, Ms. Abernethy also agreed to follow up when those points come up in the timeline. That concludes our update here and we have additional team members here who can maybe answer any other questions you might have. Council Member Driscoll. Thank you and thank you, Derek. That is exactly what I was looking for. It was kind of disappointing when we did get the response and it was just basically confirmation of receipt. So I am absolutely thrilled to hear that a conversation is taking place. As you know, I could not talk to him and so, you know, it was a little frustrating that I was hoping that this, you know, this resident who actually represents a development, you know, not just himself but neighbors as well, it was important that he's being heard and what you're telling me now is that not only that but that he has made a real connection with Ms. Abernethy and will certainly be kept in the loop and valued as we move forward with this. And by the way, that was fantastic. I mean, is it Leland? What a great presentation. You should be so proud and that was just really cool to see. So I'm happy for you and for him and tell him he did a great job. I will think. Did we, so in the last, when we left off last time, was there already a motion in a second? No. I don't believe so. I would confirm with the clerk. Just yours. Just yours to continue to this meeting. Right. Oh, okay. That was the only. All right. So we're at a clean slate now with that. Sure are. All right. Thank you. Second. Now that we have a motion that has been properly seconded, no further requests to speak. Can you please open the routine for voting? Council members, now that all the votes have voted, will you please tally and denounce the votes? Madam Chair, motion to approve agenda item J-4 passes 5-2 with Councilmembers Floyd and Hanowitz voting no. Councilmembers Driscoll, Vic Sanders, Gabbard, Gerdes, and Montaneri voting yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And so now we will move on to open form and do we have cars or anyone on Zoom? Zoom. Beverly Comstock? No. And how about Fred? Nope. That's it. That's it. Okay. Do we have any announcements? What? I would like to announce for those, we are looking for a city representative for the PSTA board. The applications and requirements are on our website. If you would like to apply for that position, they are due August 15th for us to decide and vote on on August 22nd. But again, if you would love to engage in your civil participation with working on behalf of the committee and the city, please go out and complete an application by August 15th. Any other announcements? Seeing no other announcements, see you August 8th from Chair. We'll see you after the first thing.