City Council - Jul 10, 2025

Welcome to the City of St. Petersburg City Council Meeting. Your elected officials are Mayor Ken Welch, District 1 and Council Chair, Copley Gerdes, District 2, Brandy Gabbard, District 3, Mike Harding, District 4 and Council Vice Chair, Lissette Kanowitz, District 5, Deborah Fick Sanders, District 6, Gina Driscoll, District 7, Corey Givens, Jr. and District 8, Richie Floyd. Good afternoon. We'll call to order the July 10, 2025 City Council Meeting. If we could do a roll call, please. Gibbons. Here. Floyd. Here. Curtis. Here. Gabbard. Here. Harding. Here. Hanowitz. Here. Rick Sanders. Here. And Driscoll. Here. Okay, today we will have our invocation given by Reverend Michelle Robertshaw, Provost of Cathedral Church of St. Peter, followed by a moment of silence, and then please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. Please stand. Let us take just a moment to let the distractions of the day fall away so as to focus our hearts and our minds on the work set before us. O God of wisdom and peace, we gather today as leaders and stewards of this amazing city, a city alive with hope, history, and promise. We give thanks for this place that many of us call home, for its rich diversity, its creative spirit, its neighborhoods, and especially its people who care deeply for one another. Bless those who serve this city, the committed members of this council, the dedicated staff, and the citizens who offer their voices and their vision. We pray let us not forget that leadership is a sacred trust and that our work here touches lives in ways we never may fully see. In this chamber today, may there be wisdom without pride, conviction tempered by compassion, decisions rooted in what is right and good for all who call St. Petersburg home. Help us to honor the dignity of every person, to protect what is beautiful in our city, and build what is needed for its future. May our actions reflect the best of who we are and the hope of what we can yet become. Together in your holy name we pray. Amen. Please join me in a moment of silence. Words cannot express the tremendous grief we are experiencing as we mourn the tragic loss of one of our own, our colleague, assistant city attorney, trusted advisor, and friend, Michael Joseph Dima. Son of St. Petersburg, born here, graduating from the IB program of St. Petersburg High School, obtaining his college degrees at American and Brown, and his law degree here at Stetson. Son of St. Petersburg, honorably serving our city assistant attorney for more than a decade, and forever leaving his imprint on our hearts and our city. Thank you. Please also continue to stand silently for a moment of silence and reflection for those who are affected in all the communities across Texas who have experienced devastating effects of tragic flooding, where many lives were lost. Our thoughts are with those victims, their families, and everyone impacted by the terrible disaster. Thank you. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Please be seated. Provost, thank you so much for those beautiful words. That was a great way to start off the afternoon. Thank you so much. Okay, council members, we have an agenda in front of us, and CB7 has been moved to reports as Ebb 6. If there's no other changes, I'll entertain a motion. We have a motion and a second. Seeing as no other council members wishing to speak, clerk, could you please open the machine for voting? Council members, please enter your votes. Seeing as all present council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. I want you to approve the agenda. Passes unanimously. Okay. Okay, thank you. Okay, now we have our consent agenda, council members. Clerk, do we have any public comment? Okay, let's go to public comment, and then we'll go to council member Jerusalem. Karen Neesmith, approach either podium, state your name and address. You'll have three minutes to address city council. Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Karen Neesmith. I am here on behalf of USF St. Petersburg, which is at 147th Avenue South in downtown St. Petersburg. Should I go ahead? Yep. Okay, great. So I am here today to express enthusiasm and gratitude for a partnership that USF St. Petersburg has with the city of St. Petersburg, and particularly special thanks to your grants office and your Office of Sustainability and Resilience for our partnership on a USDA Department of Agriculture grant for $350,000 that will enable us to purchase industrial composter on our campus. We're very excited about this project. We've worked very closely and very well with staff from the city, and I just want to say a couple of things. We had envisioned this project before it started. We had a group from USF St. Pete sustainability faculty, our student green energy fund, USF's not centered for entrepreneurship, and we had put together a business plan to actually do this project where we purchased an industrial composter and we envisioned a project where students would actually participate in a sustainable business class and kind of run this student. It would be a student-run project. So this grant actually came about as an opportunity, and we threw our staffs together, and we're able to apply and get the award. So it's so cool. The timing is really great. The goal of this initiative is to divert food waste from our campus dining operations, convert it into compost that then can be used for landscaping, urban agriculture, and community gardens. But then in phase two, scale it so that it is collecting waste from other downtown partners that include restaurants, bars, farmers markets, urban markets, and then return that compost back to the community. And meanwhile, we will be able to give students hands-on experience in managing and operating a sustainable business. So together, we are doing a great thing. I know you all hear a lot of complaints that come to this meeting, but this is just a message of gratitude and thanks. Thank you so much. We're very excited. Thank you. No more speakers? Councilmember Driscoll. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Karen, for speaking on that particular item. If I could pull every single item from Consent Agenda B, I would, but because I really, really love you all, I do not. But quickly, I just want to summarize how full of good news Consent Agenda B is. Some of my favorite things and some of the things that I've been working on since day one are moving forward. You know, everything from supporting the training of our police officers to expanding our wellness center services. And one day when Dr. W. is actually here and standing in front of us, I will tell you how Dr. Wanowich and the wellness center saved my life. I will save that story for another time. We're enabling the chess club to continue its wonderful historic tradition and talking about artwork on the Pinellas Trail, expanding our art westward. Bike lane enhancement, something that's on the minds of a lot of people these days. It's a great thing to talk about, and I love seeing that we've got some work to do, more work that's being funded to do on that. One of my favorites, work moving forward on our fire department's training facility, something that I've asked for for a long time. I know Councilmember Gabbard has always been very supportive of it from the time she started with me. I know we pulled the Center for the Arts discussion. I think that's a great opportunity that we have. And then finally, our partnership with USF on the Green Cycle Composting Project. So just wanted to bring to everyone's attention that even though we don't talk about these items individually and do reports on each one, it is a whole agenda full of good news. And I am just absolutely thrilled to see that this week. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. And thank you for celebrating all of those, Councilmember Driscoll. Okay. We have a motion and a second. Do we have a motion and a second? Councilmembers, I'll entertain a motion. We have a motion and a second. Seeing as no other Councilmembers wishing to speak, clerk, could you please open the machine for voting? Councilmembers, please enter your votes. Seeing as all present, Councilmembers have voted. Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Mr. Chair, I motion to approve the consent agenda passes unanimously. Okay. Thank you. Let's go into open forum. If you would read the rules, please. 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 individual 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 City 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 reach 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 the quorum. If live public comment is disrupted by violations of the rules of the quorum, the chair is authorized to accept public comment by alternate means, including by email only, and we do have two speakers, Mr. Chair. Okay. Let's call both of them up. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. The first two speakers, Mr. Chair, Saba Bragg and I believe it's Catherine Sutherland. Can't read the last name. Please go to either podium, state your name and address for the record, and you will have three minutes to address City Council. Good afternoon. My name is Saba Bragg. I live at 301 First Street South and serve on the Board of Directors for the Salter Condominium. I'm here today to ask our City Council to please support funding for the Clean and Safe Program. I truly believe this program is essential, not just for how our city looks, but for how it functions. This program is designed to bring in daily street cleaning, but what's even more important is that it also expands homeless outreach. So we're not just moving people along, we're helping them connect with real services and support. I know many of you on this council have heard countless stories from residents and business owners. Some are absolutely heartbreaking when people talk about seeing someone in clear mental distress or sleeping in dangerous conditions, other involved moments of fear, even feeling threatened. My husband and I have personally experienced that fear ourselves. We've both been in situations in downtown where we genuinely felt threatened by an attack. And I know we're not alone. These stories come up again and again, and they show why we need solutions that are compassionate but also effective. Funding the Clean and Safe Program creates cleaner sidewalks, making downtown more inviting. But just as importantly, by inserting trained outreach teams in this program, people experiencing homelessness can be guided toward mental health care, addiction services, and ultimately stable housing. So we're focusing on the root issues, not just pushing them around. It is not just more human, it is also more cost-effective. Providing a permanent supportive program, save tens of thousands of dollars each year by reducing the need for emergency rooms, law enforcements, and jails. We should also encourage our bars and restaurants and shops to sweep and maintain their storefronts daily. A small act that makes a big collective impact. So again, I'm asking you to please support funding for the Clean and Safe Program. This is more than a cosmetic fix. It is an investment in making downtown safer, healthier, and more welcoming for families, businesses, and our most vulnerable neighbors. So thank you so much for your time and for considering these ideas. Thank you. Starting block. Hello, my name is Catherine Sutheran. I live at 301 1st Street South, St. Pete, Unit 2701. I moved, I wasn't planning on speaking, so I'm completely unprepared. I moved here, we moved two and a half years ago, came from Orlando, and wanted to share a couple of experiences we've gone through. In Orlando, 20 years ago, downtown Orlando was the place to be. It was bustling, thriving, best restaurants, everything. People really were driven to be down there. If you go down there now, it is a ghost town. It is filled with the homeless. It is filled with trash. The sidewalks are falling apart. The shops that I used to love down there, they're all shut down. So I watched one city go backwards. On the other side, March 2020, I went to Sarasota with my daughter. We went to go shop in St. Armand's Cay. And we went downtown, and it was filled with homeless. A man pulled him, started urinating right in front of us. My daughter was 17 at the time, somewhat horrified. Another one spit at us, and it was really daunting at that time. Then, you know I go down there a month, two months ago? It's amazing, the difference. The best shops. They've got art galleries. We didn't feel unsafe. You could walk the sidewalks and not worry about somebody peeing on you. So I really would wonder what Sarasota was able to do. But my concern now is, is St. Pete going to go by way of Orlando, or can we go on a more positive path? I've watched, and this literally a man defecate, holding on to the side of the subway railing, meaning the subway to the food store next to Publix, right in front of me. Something I never, ever want to see again. I've had a man urinate right in front of me. And you're going, how is this happening in St. Pete? Sidewalks, they're so bad in some areas. I tripped over a sidewalk, went flying, ripped my very favorite pair of jeans that I've owned for, I don't know, 15 years. I thought I would have brought my kneecap, and I'm surprised I didn't. And I don't know who would be accountable for that. Behind the Hilton, same thing. I have to walk like this now because I can't look forward because I'm afraid of some of the sidewalks. And these are things that we should be able to address. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Any more speakers? No more speakers, Mr. Chair. Okay. We'll go ahead and close. You need to sign up. You're going to have to fill out a card. Why don't you go ahead and just give us your name and your address, and just please fill out a card when you're done with your three minutes, okay? I apologize if it's my first time here. That's okay. My name is John Castricone, and I'm representing 101st Avenue North, a building called the One St. Petersburg. It's a condominium association. You can have your three minutes first. Yeah, sorry. I'm sorry. I apologize. Once again, my name is John Castricone. I'm the maintenance manager at the One St. Petersburg building. We are a luxury high-rise condominium located right in the heart of St. Pete. We are home to hundreds of people who deeply care about the city and its well-being of its people. I'm here today not just for representing my staff and its residents of our building, but also speaking as a neighbor and a community member who sees the challenges our downtown faces on a daily basis. We've become increasingly concerned about the ongoing safety and sanitation issues around our property. Regularly, sometimes daily, we find individuals sleeping in our stairwell, alcoves, tucked away in the surrounding landscaping. More troubling, we are frequently having to clean up human urine and other types of waste in those same spaces. This is not only unsanitary, but it's a dignitary issue as well for the people living in these conditions and for our residents and staff who encounter it. Our team works hard to maintain a safe and beautiful environment, not just on our own property, but for the entire block. We routinely clean sidewalks, landscaping, and debris, not only belonging to us, simply because we care, but this is becoming increasingly difficult to keep up. The demand on our staff is rising. We understand that this is a complex problem. We're not here to point fingers. We're asking for a partnership. We're asking for more visible support from the city services, whether that's in the form of additional policing in key areas, better outreach for the unhoused individuals, or sanitation services that relieve the burden on our teams that are currently shouldering alone. We love the city, and we want to be a part of the solution, but we also need to protect the safety, peace of mind, and dignity of our residents, our staff, and, yes, even the vulnerable individuals who find themselves seeking shelter on our doorstep. Thank you for your time, and we'd like to consider our concerns seriously so that way everyone downtown can make downtown a safe and clean environment to work together. Thank you very much. Thank you. And no more speakers. Okay. All right. And thank you for filling out that card. Okay. We'll go ahead and close, open forum, and move into new ordinances. If, clerk, you could read the title, and please swear our witnesses in for everybody in. Just read the title. Oh, just the title? Yeah. I'm sorry. It's not quite. Let's see. Just read the title, please. Okay. Proposed Ordinance No. 138-HL, an ordinance of the City of St. Petersburg, Florida, designating the Rural B. Gilbert House, located at 1027 38th Avenue North, as a local historic landmark, and adding the property to the St. Petersburg Register of Historic Places, pursuant to Section 16.30.070, City Code, and providing an effective date. And the public hearing is scheduled for July 24, 2025, and there are no cards, Mr. Chair. Move of approval. Second. We have a motion and a second on E1. I mean, I did have a question, but go ahead. You want to press your button? So, Chair, can I just... On first reading, normally, because it's quasi-judicial, we wouldn't do that. We wouldn't? Okay. All right. Okay. We have a motion and a second on E1. Seeing as no council members wishing to speak, Ms. Clerk, could you please open the machine for voting? Council members, please enter your votes. Give me a little grace. Seeing as all present council members have voted, clerk, please tie in and ask the vote. Mr. Chair, motion to approve agenda item E1, passes unanimously. Okay. Thank you. We will move into reports. And if I had to guess, we'll probably get presented F3 and F4 together by Brjesh Prayman and Raul Quintana talking about the library. Oh, and we have Mike Jeffries. Good day, council. I appreciate the pleasure and the opportunity to be here today. I do want to talk about this item related to the library. What it is related to is really, in the simplest of terms, damage that was done due to the storm that was not included in the original scope of work. So if I could use a simple analogy, we're renovating the inside of our house and the storm damaged the fuse box, the breaker box. And because of that, we couldn't get our work done. We are tracking the cost of this separately. We are coordinating with risk management and audit to make sure and pursue any FEMA reimbursement as a result of this damage. But it was needed to be addressed so that we could complete our work within the facility. And with that, I ask for approval. Well, can we take F3 and F4 together? Yes. Okay. I'll move approval of F3 and F4. Second. We have a motion and a second on F3 and F4. Seeing as no other council members wishing to speak, clerk, could you please open the machine for voting? Council members, please enter your vote. Seeing as all present council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. I wish to approve of unanimous F3 and F4 passes unanimously. Okay. We're going to move on to F5 where we'll continue to hang out with Rajesh. So this is an attempt to keep us prepared. And during the line item review, we did speak about, by example, you know, what we're dealing with in our permitting processes. Today, we may have a certain amount of permits, but we can't be guaranteed probably in the next week we get dropped, you know, 15 permit packages for 1,500 linear feet that we have to review in two weeks. There's a balancing point on how we want to staff up because I don't want to have to hire people and not have the work and the time and the resources for them. So this gives us that ability to staff up, but it also gives us flexibility during emergency. I'll give another example with the two storms that hit. While different parts of the city were impacted, engineering staff was still spending a lot of time with FEMA and daily inspections and damage assessments. But at the same time, the rest of the city was still operating. We still had to do projects. We still had to respond to other items. So this gives us also that flexibility to bring in resources to help us with coordination, specialty inspection services to support us as staff extension as needed. So with that, I do ask for approval. Move approval. Second. We have a motion and a second on F5. Seeing as no council members wishing to speak, clerk, could you please open the machine for voting? Council members, please enter your votes. Seeing as all present council members have voted, clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Is it your motion to approve with unanimous F5? Passes unanimously. Thank you, council. Thanks, Bryce. Appreciate it. Okay. We're going to move into F6. And I think we have Beth Herondine joining us. Hey, Beth. Yeah, that was quick. Good afternoon, chair, vice chair, members of city council. Thank you for the opportunity to talk about this Center for the Arts item. I appreciate it very much. Let me just get my notes. Okay. So because we have a few council members who have joined since this effort started several years ago, I wanted to just give a little bit of history. So first of all, the Center for the Arts site is bounded by First Avenue South to Fifth Avenue South or Dolly Boulevard and from First Street to the Water. So that's the area that we're talking about and is home to Allang Stadium, the Mahaffey Theater, the Plaza, the Dolly Museum, the Firestone Grand Prix, and of course, the parking garage that was built in the late 1980s. So that's the area that we're talking about. And historically, there really hasn't been a master plan or a coordinated effort for this specific part of downtown. So when the Dolly began talking about their potential expansion plans in 2019, administration council and staff started to discuss a master plan of sorts or a coordinated effort for this site. So a consultant was hired in 2020. There was a committee of the whole in 2021. And the consultant reported back to, I believe it was PSNI back in 2022 with some conceptual drawings on what could be there with a focus on opening the view corridors to the water and accommodating future parking needs and then creating opportunities for retail in a new parking structure. We know a new parking structure has to come soon since this was built in 1987. So it really opened the door to the conversation. So that's kind of where we were. And then more recently, we engaged ASD Sky in July 2024 through the continuing services contract to continue the development of the master plan. And they did some site visits, some stakeholder meetings, data collection, and gathered some economic impact information. So they actually created a two-phase, again, conceptual plan. And I'd like to emphasize that these are conceptual plans. So they put together a conceptual plan, both a phase one and phase two vision that would cover 15, 20-plus years for the site. And the phase one included the garage, a potential conference center, enlarged plaza, and new visitor drop-off. And phase two in this concept included a potential waterfront amphitheater. So we did review those concepts at an April 2025 Economic and Workforce Development Committee meeting. And then the feedback that we received at that April meeting is really what brings us to today. So at that meeting, the committee members asked us to refine the plan focused on phase one, the phase one area, which is really the Mahaffey, Dolly, Plaza, and Garage area, with input from an expanded list of stakeholders, which you'll see that include the Downtown Neighborhood Association, the Saturday Morning Market, and the Florida Orchestra, and to also look at potential changes or upgrades to Alang to make it more of a multipurpose facility, and to also remove the conference center project. So really, again, we're kind of looking at what's more doable for the phase one. So we're here today to ask for an amendment to the task order that was initially created in July 2024, and this amendment will allow ASD Sky to do this additional in-depth study, meet with more stakeholders, and dive further into that phase one area. So we intend to, or hope, to bring this back to EWD for review potentially in September, but I'm not sure that's been confirmed yet. But again, that would be the opportunity for us to bring back a further refinement of the concepts for this area, something that is doable, achievable, addresses stakeholder needs, but is also something that works for the city as well. So that's where we are, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Gabbard. Thank you, Chair. So I pulled this from consent because, to Councilwoman Driscoll's point, there was a lot of great stuff in the consent, and I wanted to make sure that we had a separate conversation about this item. So I went back. I was unfortunately not able to attend the April 24th EWD meeting. However, I have listened to it twice now. I listened immediately afterwards, and then I listened again when this item came over on the agenda. And I'm having a real struggle with spending this money today for a myriad of reasons. And I don't want to belabor the point too long, but I'll just kind of hit the high points for me where I'm at with this. So first of all, in reviewing the EWD meeting for a second time, I did not hear any conversation. I didn't hear anything about there needing to be another large sum of money dedicated to this in order to be able to come back with the feedback that was asked from the stakeholders. I have had conversations with stakeholders since that meeting, and even in the last couple of weeks since this came on the agenda. It has been shared with me, and maybe I haven't talked to the right people, but it's been shared with me that there has not been any further outreach. And so I'm very concerned why we would go down a path of spending another $103,000 to continue to move forward with this study and this plan. when I sat down and off the top of my head made a list of every project, plan, everything that we have going on in the city right now, that we're trying to bring things in for a landing. And it's a lot. It is a lot of effort, and most of it lies within CDA, right? I'm very sensitive to bandwidth, incredibly sensitive. We have a lot of projects that I think are very worthy, that we have already done a lot of substantial work on, that I think we need to see come to fruition. We have an innovation district master plan. We have a marina that we're talking about. There's this port master plan. I mean, the list goes on and on. And so to throw this on top of that in some sort of accelerated way, I feel like just dilutes what we really need to be doing in our city right now. And, you know, we have people, we had three individuals come again today and speak about the concerns with the way that downtown is today. $100,000 would double the budget that we have for outreach for downtown right now. So I would much rather see us be spending that money in a very proactive way in trying to work on the issues that currently exist in downtown versus spending all of this effort to try to reimagine what it will be in another 20 or 30 years. The need is too great right now. And if we are not focusing all of our efforts on the people that need us to focus our efforts on them and their needs, downtown Center for the Art Master Plans, what are they for? And then when we talk to the stakeholders, there are real capital needs that need to be addressed in the existing assets that we have. Councilmember Floyd, at the end of EWD, you mentioned, I want to see what those capital needs are so that I can compare them. I don't know if you've had a response to that. I would like to see that as well, especially before I throw another $100,000 at this. So for me, I'm a no. That's why I pulled it out of consent. I want us to get real about how we start to address the needs today in downtown. And then I'll be open to conversations about moving forward into the future. Thank you, Chair. If I may respond. Thank you, Councilmember Gabbard. And I completely understand that. I guess I would, two things. First, I would like to say that when this began, it was championed by another staff member who has since retired, Chris Velestra. And we thank him for his work. So this is relatively new to Brian and I. And I would say that the urgency is not the right word, but the timing of this, there are a few reasons that we've continued to move it forward. But again, we want the feedback from Council. The parking garage was built in 87, and it is nearing the end of its life. And if it needs to be replaced, we want to replace it in a smart way or fix it or replace it. We want to do that in a smart way that makes sense for the long term. And then there are capital needs at the site, specifically with the Mahaffey Theater as well. So investing that money, we want to make sure that we're doing that sort of with a larger, with a longer-term plan in mind. And then, of course, the DALI has embarked upon their expansion and such. So that's why the timing, that's why we're moving it forward now. But I very much appreciate your sensitivity to the bandwidth and the workload. But that's the reason why we've come today to move it forward. Okay. Council Member Gibbons. Thank you very much, Chair. I appreciate it. I did have a question for you, Beth. Why this particular site? If we are going to do it, why not another location? Like, for instance, the Historic Gas Plant District? Who determined this site? Well, specifically, because we do need, if we're going to keep the Mahaffey Theater there, which is part of, you know, and we're going to keep, the DALI is expanding, and we have these assets in that area now, before we invest a significant amount of money in the Mahaffey, in the garage, in those things, I know the orchestra is looking for a potential home, before we invest. And historically, we've invested in chunks. This is a good thing. Let's do it. We'll invest here. This is a good thing. We'll do it here. There hasn't been an overall overarching plan for that very large, very important piece of property. So that is really what this study is, so that we're not doing it necessarily in the piecemeal way that we've done it in the past. So to my colleague's point earlier, the stakeholders. What did we hear they say the needs were for downtown? What do they want to see? Well, we've only, again, the items here today for approval, and I would say, Council Member Gabbard, we have reached out, and we are just at the beginning of this next step. So we do have a much expanded list of stakeholders. The, you know, big three, the DALI, the Grand Prix, obviously, who it's been spoken with before, the Rowdies, the Florida Orchestra, the Saturday Morning Market, the Downtown Partnership, the Downtown Neighborhood Association. I'm losing some. The Chamber, the Downtown Partnership, I said, which actually we're meeting with this afternoon to go over some things. So in the initial conversations, we're really just listening to what their thoughts are, what their needs are, what they envision, especially for things like the Saturday Morning Market. What would you actually need if you were to relocate to this expanded plaza from a parking, from an electric, from a water standpoint? The Florida Orchestra, if you were to build your headquarters here, what would you need? Square footage, rehearsal space, event space, things like that. So we're taking all of that information in from the Downtown Partnership, from the Chamber, all of those things, and then it's my job, along with James and Brian, our jobs, to work with ASD Sky to take that information and refine it and package it in a way, because obviously everybody wants everything. That's just how the world works, including me. So it's our job to take all of those wants and all of those desires and put them in a package and bring those forward in a way that we could actually achieve it, rather than just throwing everything in the kitchen sink onto that site. What makes sense for St. Petersburg now and in the future? So I certainly hear those needs, but there are a couple of stakeholders that I'd like to be invited to the table, like the Imagine Museum, Carter G. Woodson African American History Museum. I see St. Petersburg as the cultural arts destination of the South, right? We are the museum capital of the Southeast, and as we talk about the future, would like to envision the future of that cultural arts hub at possibly a different location, and then compare both conceptual plans. If we're going to spend $103,000, I'd like to get more bang for our buck. I personally don't want to spend the money, but if we did spend the money, I'd like to know what they can give us, how we can compare both plans, right? What is the economic impact of downtown St. Pete Waterfront versus the historic gas plant district? Excuse me. So I would like to know if that is an option. Certainly. Again, yes. Again, this started in 2020, so the city's evolved, the plans evolved, so I'm certainly happy to get this feedback. Understandable. And I just say that because, again, if we're going to spend $103,000, I don't want to bite off more than we can chew, and then ultimately we end up regretting it because we've already spent this money when the money could have been spent cleaning up downtown. But thank you, Beth. I appreciate it. Of course. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council Member Driscoll. Thank you. This started several years ago, really, with the plans that were brought forward and the discussions with the Salvador Dali Museum on their expansion. And, you know, at the time, Chris Balestra and I talked and others of us talked about how Dali has plans, the Mahaffey and the Florida Orchestra have some needs, things they'd like to do, the Grand Prix evolving. They're always getting better and better, and because they're not here permanently, we always want to have them part of the picture of what the plans are to make sure that it works for them. We have the parking garage that's aging. We have Allang Stadium that's just, you know, we absolutely love it for our rowdies, but we feel like we could get more use out of that. And so you look at all of that, and it was suggested, you know, we really need to just do a master plan for this area. It's not an either-or thing about this versus another place. As Council Member Gabbert pointed out, we've got a few different master plan processes going on right now, and I think that's important. Some of the areas, like the Center for the Arts area, have been kind of pushed to the back burner for a long time. And with the Dali Museum moving forward, with the Grand Prix gaining popularity all the time, and with the Florida Orchestra really needing to have a home base established, it was time. And so I believe it was last year we were able to get into the budget, just enough to get started with this study. I will admit that I, too, expected to see more for that. I was surprised at first that there had not been stakeholder meetings at the level that we're looking at doing now. But this is what we wanted. It's just like with the library that we just voted on. It's costing a little bit more than what we thought. But I don't think that much more when you think about all of the different assets that go into this. The reason that you have, and in the presentation it lists, the stakeholders that would be included is because they are actual stakeholders. They either have a home in this area, or they operate in this area at one point or another, or it's a business organization that has clients or members who are active with this area. So it's a little bit more geographic than centered around. It's not an arts master plan. And I kind of hate that it's named the Center for the Arts because it's much more than that, and maybe out of this we'll be able to get a new name for the district. But it really just goes beyond the arts, and yet it stays within a specific geographic area. The Downtown Waterfront Master Plan was established in, what, 2016, 2017? Was when that was finalized. And a reimagining or an updating of this area was part of that talk all along. So we're catching up that southern end of downtown, and making sure that the success that we're seeing in the downtown core continues to travel southward while meeting the needs that we have at some of these facilities. And it's city-owned, so we have to take care of what we have. This is the way that we do it. I'm happy that you have the stakeholder meetings already lined up. So let's talk about moving forward with this no matter what, but what would it mean if we don't have help from a third party and it is placed on you to get this done? That would make it a little more difficult and would take a considerable more time if we did not have help from an outside party. Right, and I see a real value in getting some outside expert help on something like this. It's important. So I'm very supportive of this. I do want to make sure that what is brought to us is something that we can then grab and start running with and narrow it down. What we were presented was the kitchen sink, right? That meeting showed you all and gave you some clear messages on what we don't want. So I hope that that scope, if you will, has been narrowed already as you go forward with these stakeholder meetings because what I want brought back to us is something that's realistic and something that's got buy-in from these immediate stakeholders. I do think that it should be open to others who come in because part of the beauty of the Center for the Arts is that it is for everyone. But the people who are operating these facilities, we need to know what they think, what they're planning, and how we can help them. And also look at what the costs are for the city facilities that we have that need repairs, that need upgrades, that need to become more sustainable so that they can continue to drive revenue for our city, for the city, big C and little C, for those who have their businesses and operate their businesses there. So I do see the value in having this third party. I'm just really hoping that we have something more solid that comes back and having these stakeholder meetings I think is going to be a huge part of that. If you all could do it yourselves, I totally trust you to do it. I just, I mean, it is a bandwidth thing and sometimes you have to pay someone to help you out. So thanks for the work that you're doing on this. And James, I know Beth isn't alone. I know you've got, you know, you and Brian are helping out with this too. And I certainly appreciate all that you're doing on this. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Council Member Fick Sanders. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Everyone has made valid points. And my first question, and now listening to others, it has grown a little bit. But when I saw this and I hear what the definition of stakeholders are perceived, there were some names on here that I would have liked to have seen. So when you say that the Center for the Arts is geocentric, taxpayers' dollars that are paying for this come from citywide. So let us not forget who's paying for it. I don't want us to lose that in the narrative. When I see things like, for example, I guess because I'm intimate with Saturday Shops, although they don't hold their shops downtown, it's because they weren't invited downtown. So let's look at the bigger picture of some of that. So I do think that because you might not operate from this area, that you still are considered a stakeholder. So I do think that I would love to see a broader list, what that looks like. So basically, to me, that gives other organizations hope and the opportunity that they too will be able to do what everybody else is doing downtown because downtown doesn't have their own bucket of dollars that this is coming from. This is coming from all taxpayers. When we look at some of the other programs to meet this deficit that we are having to cut because of where we are with the budget, I too was looking at the rush in this when there are so many organizations that have been waiting and waiting and waiting. Now, I do understand we need to get some professional feedback on this. So, you know, I'm not challenging that. But I just want us to look at our priorities. When we bring things like this to us and when we have council members asking for follow-up information that we do not get, at some point, we just need to start saying no if we don't get what we asked for prior to wanting to get to a yes. So I think it would have been a little bit more helpful to have that information that council members asked for. And then, too, I want us to be mindful of the narrative when we always say downtown, downtown, downtown, downtown. Downtown is not equitable for everybody. So I know that that's the location, but I do need us to, there are a lot of people that are listening to us that are saying the same thing. Why is everything downtown? Why is everything downtown? We need to have a more general narrative as to how it would benefit the city as a whole. It would be a destination for everyone to participate. It would be a destination for everyone to possibly have that. And I agree. Carter G. Wilson, they might not be located downtown, but they partner and have partnered with the James Museum, which is downtown. So I don't know why their name isn't listed on here as well. So to me, everything for me is about presentation and the narrative and what's written in black and white because it doesn't tell the entire story, especially of some of the things that you're asking for us to approve. We may get it, but those that are listening don't understand what it took to get to this point. So $103,000, it might not sound like a lot, but I think it's the principle, and I think it's the perspective that it's showing and that it's giving. And I just would like to see this stakeholder list grow, but I also want Council Member Flory's request to be met. You know, we lose that kind of stuff sometimes, and I just have to say, I can't say it enough. If we ask for follow-up material, we're not asking because we're just trying to give you something to do. It helps us make a more educated decision. Understood. You know, because we stand here in the position of our constituents that come to us and ask us questions, and I know, I don't like to be able to go back and say, I don't know, you know, I'm not sure, or let me go back and find additional information for you. Hopefully, when we make decisions like this, I'm going to support it, but this is a perfect example of when we ask for information, when we give the narrative of when you are trying to get to yes, because, you know, when we talk about different aspects of the city, I got a whole lot going on in my district, too, and I can't seem to get $10,000, $15,000, $20,000 for that. So, we're making compromises up here, and so, you know, again, I want us to be mindful of the narrative. I want us to be mindful of the geocentric area that we tend to favor, so when other areas ask for this, I want us to realize that we're setting a precedence, and don't act like we forget when we bring it back to you and just say, well, we did the same thing for another area of town. So, that's my input, my two cents. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Vice Chair Hanowitz. Thank you. Well, this all went in a direction I had no idea. I'm looking at an A&E agreement, and frankly, it's $100,000. It would be y'all's decision if you didn't have the $4,000 allowance. Clear. I mean, there's a $4,000 allowance that we're talking about that's added in here that you just, that would be an administration decision. So, I, look, the only thing I'm going to say, and I'm just going to ask, you said it, Beth. Is this going to help y'all? Okay. James, is it going to help you? If we're going to move forward, is what it is. You have an old garage. It's 1987. I've heard about this. I don't know how long. It has to be figured out how that's going to be configured. What's the cost of a new garage? I'm just, just throw the number out there, please. Approximately $35,000 per space. Okay. You're talking in the millions of dollars. Just the garage itself. And I don't even know how much money has to go into the Mahaffey and whatever. And if we have experts that are going to help out on this, that's fine. In terms of stakeholder engagement, look, it says including but not limited to, you can expand however you want. Frankly, there's lots of master plans out there, whether it's the Skyway District, District 2, or whatever. I don't expect my neighborhoods to be part of that. If they are, that's great. But, you know, there are going to be stakeholders that are closer to it and then there's broader stakeholders and all the money that we pay for everything comes from everyone, no matter what. I don't care if it's TIF money or whatever money. It's all our money. But, you know, I just want to make sure that, look, everybody has a different perspective we all do based on and this affects more downtown, obviously, council member Driscoll District than mine, for instance. But there are other projects that we have, master plans in other districts too, that affect other council members and don't affect me either. And I understand why they may be needed for that area. I personally, I don't think, I may have some master plan. Not sure I have anything in my district and maybe and the chair doesn't either but I understand the reasons why. So I appreciate your work, Beth. You weren't involved in this in the beginning. You just got pulled into this and I honestly, I feel bad because somehow you get stuck with some of this stuff that all of a sudden you come here and you get all these questions and you got pulled into it and you're standing there and you're the nicest person. and you're getting pulled in all these directions. My husband might disagree. Well, yeah. But you know, so I appreciate you standing there nicely smiling but this is a, it's not a ton of money. There is a, look, and there's not an agreement obviously from our last meeting as to how, where this is going to land, how it's going to land and it's not crystallized and hopefully some crystallization comes out of this. So that's, that's where I'm at. Thank you for, for your time on this. Thank you. And I would, I would just like to emphasize we absolutely can add stakeholders to the, and we will. So. Thank you. Council Member Floyd. Thank you. I started to put myself on here but I wanted to hear what everybody had to say first since we were going in a slightly different direction. My point previously when I brought up the, you know, wanting to know the full picture of capital costs was so that I could compare it to what administration presented to us. So I had not thought, oh, I need to see this right away. I was just hoping next time it was brought to us we had a comparison because there are capital expenditures that need to happen in this area that I want to see happen in this area that have to happen because these is where, this is where the assets are. And so, you know, if someone else, I know people are not necessarily totally on board with this today. If somebody else wanted to present like how we're, I want to see us move forward with making a decision about, or with some sort of planning for the area because I want to see a long-term home discussed for the orchestra as soon as possible. We have to have a discussion about parking, the parking garage there. Some of the other stuff, yeah, superfluous to me. And some of our needs, but what I think our needs are as a city, but something has to happen here. And this is how y'all have chosen to do it. And it's broader than what I think is 100% necessary, but I do think something is 100% necessary to get going. And so, you know, I'm open to other conversations about how we move forward, but right now, this is what's in front of me. And so I'm happy and grateful for it. And, you know, I do think it dovetails nicely with the Dali's expansion as well. And so there's just a few things. And I'll also say I'm grateful for you putting so much emphasis on the stakeholders. My comments at the last one were not to be like, I wasn't trying to be like, oh, you need to go do this or that or talk to X, Y, and Z person, but just like explain your reasoning for why you did or didn't talk to somebody. And so I see that you've just expanded massively and I understand the implicit reasoning there. So I'm grateful for that and I'll leave it there right now. I just want to make sure everybody knew where I was coming from. Thank you. Thank you. So I guess just to follow up on that, Beth, I mean, is it possible that when this comes back, whether it's EWD or a cow or however it ends up coming back, that, and I know we won't be in design build, so it won't be exact numbers, but I mean, can we have a side-by-side of what you believe is kind of the path forward as you've limited it down? Because just like you said, which I thought you put very well, everybody is going to want everything. It's going to be, frankly, our job to narrow that down more yours than ours. And so I think if you had that and you were in a position to show the side-by-side, I think that, to Council Member Floyd, we just had a conversation right about, earlier today, about how when we're packaging these things, it's easier to do. So if we know that we're able to, and they're cheap and they're less expensive to do, and so as we're, I think, looking at them side-by-side and see what we can pull over and what we get if we do it together, I think that would be very helpful. I don't know if that's possible or not, just to piggyback on Council Member Floyd's comments. Yeah, I would say that that's absolutely possible. And knowing, having a better idea of what a Center for the Arts Master Plan looks like would help us to be a little bit more accurate with a side-by-side, if that makes sense. Yeah, I think that would be great. Okay. Well, thank you very much for the presentation. Council Members, thank you for the conversation. I'll entertain a motion. Move approval. Second. We have a motion and a second. Seeing as no other Council Members wishing to speak, Clerk, could you please open the machine for voting? Council Members, please enter your votes. Seeing as all present Council Members have voted, Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Mr. Chair, motion to approve a gen item F-6, passes 6-2, with Council Member Gabbard and Harding voting no, Council Members Driscoll, Fick Sanders, Floyd, Gerdes, Givens, and Hanowitz voting yes. Okay. Thank you so much. All right. We're going to go into new business. G1 is mine, and I am respectfully requesting a referral to the Youth and Family Services Committee for an update on the city's education and youth opportunities and programs. This is a staff request I've been working on with Doyle on getting this presentation to YFS, so I'm very excited to get this update, and I'd entertain a motion for approval. We have a motion and a second. We'll give it to one of you. We have a motion and a second. Seeing as no other Council Members wishing to speak, Clerk, could you please open the machine for voting? Council Members, please enter your votes. Seeing as all present Council Members have voted, Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Mr. Chair, motion to approve with your item G1. Pass this unanimously. Okay, now we're going to move into Council Committee reports. I'll turn over H1 to Vice Chair Hanowitz. Thank you, Chair. Respectfully requesting City Council approval of a motion to refer to the discussion on the Clean and Safety Program to the Committee of the Whole, and we vote. So with that, I move. Second. We have a motion and a second on H1. Seeing as no other Council Members wishing to speak, Clerk, please open the machine for voting. Council Members, please enter your votes. Seeing as all present Council Members have voted, Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Mr. Chair, motion to approve agenda H1. Passes unanimously. Okay, folks. That's all we can do until 5.01 where we'll have public hearings. So City Council will go into recess until 5.01. Thank you, everybody. To our public hearings with J1. Clerk, could you please read the ordinance? Opposed ordinance number 611-H, an ordinance of the City of St. Petersburg, Florida, amending the St. Petersburg City Code Land Development Regulations, clarifying uses in the NT3 District, amending provisions related to development potential, building envelope, including setbacks and building and site design in the NT, NTM1, NS, and NSM districts, amending provisions related to building design in the CRT districts, amending use restrictions in artist enclave overlay districts, amending fence, wall, and hedge regulations, amending landscaping and tree protection regulations, amending parking and loading design standards, amending sidewalk regulations to create a payment in lieu option, including procedures, amending development standards for accessory dwelling units, amending development standards for accessory structures and ancillary equipment, amending home occupation regulations, including use restrictions, amending provisions related to height measurement, amending provisions related to allowable encroachments, and building setbacks, amending procedures related to rehearing requests, amending procedures related to dock permits, creating a new application and review process for reasonable accommodations and zoning requests, providing for new and revised definitions, revising existing graphics, and adding new graphics, providing for severability and providing an effective date, and we do not have any cards on this item. Okay. All in one breath. Kirk has got a bone to pick with that ordinance. Yeah. All right. We've got Corey Malishka joining us for J1. Welcome, Corey. Thank you very much. I'm here with Scott Ball, your deputy zoning official as well, so we're going to be both presenting on this item today. And many of you heard about this through the HLUT meeting. So in 2007, we had a citywide rezoning that created the NT zoning district and then neighborhood suburban zoning districts, and they also had design regulation. In 2017, council adopted amendments including many changes to these standards, including floor air ratio bonuses. In 2019, staff provided a report at the Committee of the Whole on the FER limit and utilizing these bonuses. And since 2017, there have been almost 2,000 new homes constructed with the 356 of these homes utilizing the bonuses. The proposed changes before you today will evaluate the bonuses for potential changes, provide feedback for stakeholders, also addresses several items presented at council committee meetings such as fencing materials and design standards, as well as including refinements to the code language related to residential standards, provide clarity and consistency for items identified by both staff and stakeholder meetings. The modifications that we did make to the code change do include additional FAR to the bonuses, modifications to some of the building design regulations to the fence regulations, additional sidewalk payment in lieu option, additional language for screening of ancillary equipment, additional language for elevating homes and flood zones, as well as code cleanups such as consistent code language, adding definitions, roof height measurements, approval or modification of sections of the code for compliance with state statutes. We did hear a lot of concerns about the size and bulk of the residences being built as what necessitated the code change in 2017 where we have the FAR. And the maximum building coverage standard was also established as part of that change in 2017. And I'm going to go to Scott to discuss the bonuses. Evening, Council Chair and Council Members. For the record, Scott Borey with Development Review Services. The first change is to FAR bonus H, which provides a .06 bonus for each additional front facade articulation with a max .10 bonus. It requires a minimum articulation of six feet resulting in the maximum bonus being applied when the minimum articulation is provided. Therefore, the .06 bonus is not necessary and is proposed to be removed. A minor change is included for the FAR bonus for planting larger shade trees as it contains a typo indicating the minimum spread is 8 to 10 inches when it should be 8 to 10 feet. That would be problematic. Yes, it is. The current FAR bonus for solar ready is vague. To address this, we're adding a 200-amp electric panel and conduit running to the roof for future solar installation to be provided. This solar ready bonus is proposed to be reduced from .02 to .01 to offset new bonuses proposed for solar installation that provide a .01 bonus per kilowatt installed up to a maximum bonus of .03 and a .01 bonus for residential EV charging capability. Another new FAR bonus is proposed for preservation of existing grand trees. It will grant a .02 bonus for each tree with a maximum bonus of .04. Preservation of existing on-site grand trees is not currently incentivized. During stakeholder meetings last year, attendees from historic neighborhoods indicated that new homes are typically built with taller interior ceiling heights and lower foundation walls resulting in new homes with lowered front porches and increased building heights compared to the historic homes in their neighborhoods. Based on this feedback, staff is proposing a .03 bonus for homes with front porches that are elevated at a minimum 18 inches above grade where 12 inches is currently required with limitations on building height to encourage construction of new homes that are more to scale with existing historic homes and existing historic neighborhoods. During the workshop with DRC members, a commissioner expressed an interest in adding a bonus for quality materials on exterior facades. As a result, staff has included a .05 bonus when exterior facades are proposed with solid wood siding, brick, stone, and or raw iron throughout all structures. A .03 bonus is also included when brick or stone veneer or hardy board are utilized. Staff has been seeing a prevalence of new single-family homes built to maximize the entire buildable area of the lot with large two-story box-like structures. To help break the box, a new FAR bonus is proposed for providing a minimum 20-foot separation between the principal and accessory structures as well as between second-floor portions of the principal structure. The visual effect of this bonus can be seen in the bottom picture where there's a separation between the structures that breaks up the massing of the buildings on the site. In the top picture, the massing of the second floor of the new home stretches from the front setback line to the rear setback line with no breaks. Existing structures in special flood hazard areas typically cannot adhere to required setbacks when elevating the structure to meet the current FEMA flood elevation. To address this, staff is proposing a setback encroachment option to allow existing single-family homes to be elevated to meet FEMA elevation requirements when specific criteria is met. Another change for properties in flood zones is to add an allowable encroachment for wooden platforms for energy meters as the platforms that are required for these meters in flood zones typically encroach into the required side yard setback. Staff has been processing numerous variances for these platforms that are only usable for servicing energy meters. The last flood zone related change is for new structures in special flood hazard areas which have an elevated risk from storm waves. In these areas, the Florida Building Code requires the lowest horizontal structural member supporting the lowest floor to be above the designed flood elevation which is where building height measurements in flood zones start and it ends up adding approximately two feet to building heights. To accommodate this, the proposed change is to allow an additional two feet for building height measurements for structures that are subject to this Florida Building Code requirement. This new provision was modified between first and second readings as the originally drafted amendment only applied to VE zones and has been clarified to ensure that all structures and special flood hazard areas subject to the Florida Building Code requirement are included. The next amendment is for repetitive design. The code requires new homes to be varied from all other homes within three parcels with a minimum of three or four following variations required. architectural style, roof form, exterior building materials and architectural details. These regulations do not account for new homes proposed with a different number of stories or varied heights and widths. With the proposed change, new homes with varied habitable stories will not be considered repetitive. Also, a fifth variation is added for new homes that have varied front facade heights and widths. A change is proposed to expanding the maximum width of a blank facade allowed from 16 feet to 20 feet for facades located in the rear one half of the lot that are not visible from the right-of-way. This is a new home that received approval of a design variance to allow for a 20-foot wide blank facade located in the rear one-third of the home. The photos were taken from the crown of the road and at that distance, a distance of 16 or 20 feet for a blank wall is barely noticeable. Currently, doors, windows and other architectural details or features are required on all sides of a home with no blank facades allowed that are greater than 16 feet in width. This can create challenges when a kitchen or closet is proposed on the interior of the home and cabinets or shelves make providing window or other feature impractical. Here are the approved elevation drawings for the new home and these are the measurements of the widest blank facades on the home. This is another new home that received the same design variance. Here are the elevation drawings for that home and this is the elevation drawings including the measurements with the widest blank facades. A change is proposed to allow ADUs on neighborhood suburban single-family zoned lots with at least 4,500 square feet that are located on an alley and on corner lots that meet the minimum lot area requirement. At this time NS corner lots and lots on alleys must meet both the minimum lot area and lot width requirements. Next amendment is for side setback waiver requests for docks. When a property owner that seeks a side setback reduction for a dock obtains the sign-off from the abutting property owner on the side where the setback reduction is being requested the notices are to be mailed to all waterfront property owners within 200 feet on both sides of the request. This allows property owners that are not affected by the request to appeal and send it to a public hearing. In all instances where this has occurred the DRC has approved the setback reduction. This change will revise noticing requirements so that only the waterfront property owners within 200 feet on the same side as the setback waiver request are notified. The last amendment on this slide is to add an exception for installation of walkways between public sidewalks and curbs that do not meet the minimum ADA slope requirements due to existing grades. Staff does have one change to the proposed LDR amendments that are before you related to accessory dwelling units located on page 50. It's within section 16.50.010.5.2 subsection 1. Staff's proposed change is to increase the amount of square footage excluded from the size of an accessory dwelling unit for enclosed parking spaces from the 200 square feet per parking space listed to 300 square feet per parking space. This change results in the proposed amendment being a clarification to memorialize staff's interpretation that has been implemented since 2022. That concludes my portion of the presentation. I'm going to turn it back over to Corey. Thank you. So some of the other items that we looked at were payment in lieu for sidewalks. So this is a new fee or actually in payment in lieu instead of providing variances left and right. We were variance fees only $350 for someone to request a variance where, you know, a sidewalk may cost a few thousand dollars. So the intent of this is to instead of just providing a variance, they do a payment into a fund and then this fund will be used by your transportation department to implement the sidewalk master plan that they are working on to add sidewalks where they should be. Another item that came up through PSI, this was many years ago now, was about metal fences. And the issues were basically the code requires fences to be constructed of a stock gate, board and board, shadow box, tongue and groove, picket, split rail, and chain link. Others were using typical construction material. So we kind of just put a little clarification in the code that, you know, we do not want roofing material as fencing material. Another item that came out was the walls that were over six feet tall in the neighborhoods on creating an impact in the front yard. So we did do some changes to that. So we limited the wall height now to be within four foot, solid, two foot above that would be transparent. We also did receive some comments from our engagement with the community. also looking at expanding the bonuses for M, which include the preservation of existing shade trees. We also looked at creating an FAR bonus for increasing the elevations of foundations. And these were from the public hearing meetings that we had over a year ago now. And also increasing the required porch width to utilize the FAR bonus A. Other additional comments that were made at these meetings did include, provided general support for the restrictions of non-traditional fence material. Also comments provided interest and support in the payment in lieu option. As well as they did still have expressed concerns about changes that would permit domestic equipment that was stored in the front yard, which that portion has been removed from this update. We did receive some comments from the Tampa Bay Builders Association. Of course, they would like to expand the available list of architectural styles, amend the repetitive design requirement, which we did, increase the FAR bonus A to the second story balconies, which we did not, allow an exemption to the required front porch minimum when consistent with the architectural style, which we did not, and then strong support for payment in lieu, which we are proposing. They also looked at increasing the allowable encroachment for elevated ancillary equipment, which we didn't do that for the actual equipment, but we did do that for the electric platforms. Portions of the stairs and stoop below the design floor elevation, they were looking for an additional encroachment. We did do a little tweak to that of an additional two feet allotment and typically in the NS zoning districts because we allow the 15-foot setback in NT, so we would allow it in NS, especially if you're in a flood zone. Also remove the requirement for fenestration at the rare, so that's where we do have the 20 feet instead of the 16 feet. And then we did have two committee meetings before the HLUT, and we had general support of the proposed code amendments, including restrictions on non-traditional fencing materials and also interest in additional requirements or bonuses that further regulate the physical massing of the residential structures. We did have a DRC workshop and meeting, and they had a general consensus as well, but they did include potential for incentivizing the utilization of higher quality building materials, also looking at making sure we get an arborist report if they were going to go for the preservation of tree bonus, as well as looking to prioritize certain bonuses in the code, which we do not at this time. So the planning development review services, division does recommend approval of the following changes to the code based on the comp plan elements seen before you on the screen, which do include land use element, that the land development and regulations will be amended as necessary to ensure consistency with the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan, as well as encourage more consistent interpretation and administration of the land development regulations among city council and the commission designated in the LDRs, as well as the city shell on an ongoing basis review and consider for adoption amendments to an existing or new innovative land development regulations. And in conclusion, again, the development review commission made a finite consistency with the city's comprehensive plan. They did recommend approval to city council of the proposed tax amendments and the land development regulations by a six to zero vote at a public hearing on April 2nd, 2025. Thank you. And staff is here for any questions. Okay. Thank you. Council Member Gabbard. Thank you, Chair. And thank you for the presentation. A lot of information and a very quick presentation. So I just wanted to put a couple of pins in something you said and then ask a clarifying question. So Council received an email from one of our largest ADU developers. And I believe what you said addressed that issue, but went over it very quickly, Scott. So I just want to make sure that I understand and that we have a conversation about it. So all of city council received this email, so I don't need to read it, but essentially the concern about the exemption of the square feet. And I heard you say in the presentation that it is now 300 and not 200. Correct. That's how staff's been. Okay. So Derek and I spoke earlier today and on the matrix, there is line number 100, which addresses this particular issue. And at that time, I don't think you guys had come to kind of a consensus of what you thought was appropriate. So how will that be amended based upon how we vote today? Do we need to make a motion to amend this with their recommendation before we vote for the entire package? Yes. Okay. So Chair, I would make a motion to amend line item 100 from the matrix of regulation code updates to reflect... I'm sorry, Heather. So the line item in that is just a assistance tool for council. What you would really need to propose amending is the ordinance itself. And I believe it was on page 50 and its changes to section 16.50.010.5.2, number one. Okay. Very good. So then, I would make my amendment to section the 16.50.010.5.2, number one, to reflect the exclusion of up to 300 square feet. Is that correct? Yes. Does that work? Okay. And I still move. Is the motion approved with that change? Yes. Okay. I second. Well, I believe we have to have the motion to amend that section first. And the amendment... Yes. So my motion right now is to amend that section to reflect the 300 square feet. Second. Council Member Gabbert, do you want to finish your comments before we take that motion on? Can we go ahead and do that motion and get that one out of the way? Council Members, any council members wishing to speak on that motion for on page 50? Okay. So we have a motion and a second on an amendment to the ordinance of J-1 with no other council members wishing to speak. Clerk, could you please open the machine for voting? Council Members, please enter your votes. Seeing as all present council members have voted, Clerk, please tally and announce the vote. Mr. Chair, motion to pass the amendment to page 50 passes unanimously. All right. Very good. Keep going. Thank you. So my only other clarifying question because it also came up in that email. It's come up in a couple of other conversations that I've had with the chamber. Is there anything in here that we are preempted from doing now that Senate Bill 180 has passed? So we have gone over this with the Fine 2 Co. before Liz departed us. We went through that with Michael Dima as well. We also had a chance to go through with Christine and Heather just to make sure that we are good and we're on agreement that we feel that we comply with that. Senate Bill 180 is anything that makes it more restrictive, right? So, okay. I just wanted to make sure because that question has come up. New legislation. We started this process so long ago that it just, I felt it was best to say it out in the sunshine so everyone that is concerned can hear that we have addressed that concern. And for further clarification, we did have to actually remove some items that Council wanted that would have been more restrictive. Okay, very good. Thank you for the clarification. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Vice Chair Hanowitz. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Gavard for making clear that issue because that is something that every time you make changes people are very aware of and we go through a very, staff goes through a very solid process of making sure that we're in compliance and I know that this package has been going on for a long time. We've had many committee meetings on it and there has been a lot of stakeholder outreach and that's what I want to cover. Like, y'all did a fantastic job. Really, I mean, this is the type of stuff and I remember like when you touched the LDR the first time it made changes. I mean, there was a lot of public outreach, a lot of input and there's no one in the room which is shocking but that just shows you, I know that you had conversations with Old Northeast and all these other stakeholders that are very active whenever these type of changes happen, the builders and so on and so forth. So, kudos to you because I know they had reached out to me. I'm sure other council members got kind of some of the same feedback and so it just kind of shows that this was a, the product of a lot of feedback from lots of stakeholders, city council, DRC, other experts in the area and also just kind of fine-tuning LDRs that have been in place and making sure that the things that we had there were fixed because when the issues came up, so you all keep a list and you update that list and then you come, Scott keeps the list, I guess. So you have a list and you keep that list so people understand and you know and it takes, it's a process to make sure you kind of fine-tune these LDRs because it is a lot of work to do all the engagement that's done to get this to this final resting place. So, thank you all. I don't want to say final resting place because it sounds like it's not going anywhere but in a final product. So, thank you so much for the work you've done. Legal, you've done a great job on this and so I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Council member Driscoll. Thank you. So, with the amendment regarding accessory dwelling units, do you feel confident that the concerns have all been addressed? Yeah. Okay. Yes, I do. Good. I just want to make sure I heard from more than one person who had some concerns about that and it's something that has been successful since we've expanded the opportunities for ADUs. I want to make sure we don't do anything that hinders that progress. And the one change will actually open it up to more areas in the city with a 4,500 per foot change. And a little background of the 300, we didn't have really a restriction in the code previously. So, our code typically looks at accessory structures and limits them to 67% of the main. And so, we typically, if you had an ADU, we didn't restrict the garage space. But we had a lot of certain developers coming in and doing a one-car garage but it was 900 feet wide because the ADU was 800 feet on top of it. So, that's where we came up with the 300 feet. We were looking to tighten that up a little bit because we still have the 100 additional square feet but we did hear some outpouring today from one of the top ADU builders. So, we went back to the 300. Yeah. And as far as the lot size, I think, so this is taking it to 4,500. It was 4,800. Well, it was in the NS. So, we said 10,000 square feet. Oh, yeah. So, there's certain areas that we took it down the 4,500 if you had the traditional elements. Right. You did lower the NT to the 4,500. Yeah. So, it would be more consistent. I remember when I first started I think it was 5,200. It was 4,800 for the ADUs but then there was it was only an NT. Yes. So, we expanded to NS with the 10,000 square feet or if you are on a corner lot or an alley and then there was certain neighborhoods that have traditional development patterns but they're zone NS. So, and actually the council actually recommended that we do those changes and I believe it was chair. So, we did which will open it up more to more residents. Yeah. I'm just thinking about all the progress we've made on this just with ADUs. It's been extraordinary. So, I think there's some people out there would like us to even lower the 10,000. Of course. Of course. Baby steps, right? Well, we're doing it the right way and that's all thanks to you and all of your work and your guidance. So, thank you. Thank you, chair. Thank you. Heather, did you have something? And I just want to clarify too on the 300. That's not a new regulation but when we previously wrote in this section it was a little bit different than we had done accessory structures as Corey stated. So, staff made permissible interpretations of the code. it says to make these calculations and those calculations have been made at 300. So, we're just codifying what that is. Again, there was a concern that going to 200 might trigger SB 180 and so we were just changing that to 300 but that's what everyone's been getting and we do have the application data showing that that's how the calculation has been made. So, this is purely a codification of a process we've been doing for the past three years. Thank you very much for the clarification. Just quickly, Corey because you mentioned it thanks for the work on the ADUs and NS. That's, I was talking with my aide earlier we don't really have NT on the west side so it's nice to it's nice to grab some of that on the west side so thank you for making those changes and to the whole team thank you for all the work I know it's been a long time coming and a lot of work and multiple iterations and committee members and stakeholders and legal combs and so just a big thank you for all of the work to all of staff and legal. Okay, council members we have J-1 as amended I'd entertain a motion for approval. Move approval. Second. We have a motion and a second seeing as no other council members wishing to speak clerk could you please open the machine for voting council members please enter your votes seeing as all present council members have voted clerk please tally and announce the vote motion to approve agenda item J-1 as amended passes unanimously thank you thank you all right we're going to move into G or excuse me G thinking Gertus J-2 we're going to talk community development block grant we're joined by Carly Piniella I think how are you? Are they reading the resolution or no? I don't think we need to read that one you don't? Nope all right you're up good evening everybody chair and council members I'm Carly Piniella housing development coordinator I don't have a presentation for you but I did provide a memo I know it's a bit technical so I'm kind of just going to break it down briefly for you what we're asking here so as you can see this project has been ongoing since about 2022 using CDBG coronavirus funds and they had an original $850,000 and now we're asking for an additional $129,000 and change and this is not to continue exactly the same project for the bathrooms and the showers we recently went out there and saw just the amazing work they've done with those dollars there's some really beautiful facilities now that are really helping the community and really just bringing a lot more to that property and the amazing work that they do and so this additional money is going to kind of be for to kind of make it aesthetically pleasing and separate so if you've ever been there where these bathroom facilities are built it's backed out to a permanent supportive housing and permanent housing residences so this will kind of create that separation between give some sheds so they can store their extra tents do some site work and things like that we also have representative here from Pinellas Hope if you have any other further questions but so this money really is in addition to the money and the project that they were doing so they can kind of complete this and bring it you know to its end move approval second Carly thank you for bringing this and thanks for all the work at Pinellas Hope I got to tour for maybe the fourth or fifth time in my lifetime over at Pinellas Hope a few weeks ago and Carly I think you hit it on the head it really does like create a transition it's raised they've had some water issues through rain and so it's just a beautiful well structured building with storage you hit it on the head you did a great job of describing that and the way it sits in between the the supportive housing and the rest of the property I just think it really is an amazing project so very excited to support this okay we have a motion and a second for J2 seeing as no other council members wishing to speak clerk could you please open the machine for voting council members please enter your votes seeing as all present council members have voted clerk please tally and announce the vote Mr. Chair motion to approve a gen item J2 passes unanimously thank you all right then we're going to go into J3 another community development block grant all right so thank you so this also like you said is additional again there's a memo included but it's a bit technical so I'll give you some background on this project so this project started in about 2021 and this is for Abundant Life Ministries Church we have a representative here in the back we have the pastor here if you have any questions but basically they wanted to turn part of this church into a community space so they can offer services like meals and counseling to the community and so they were originally funded around $59,000 and then they were given additional money over the years to do this and they ran into some troubles when it came to getting C of O and that was due to some issues that they had with the first contractor and the work that we gave them the money for was completed but when they came out for code they discovered they needed to do some additional things to bring this up to code for fire and so you'll see that we're asking for money so they can put in a firewall and do some other code related updates to the property and so it's about $84,000 in additional funds move approval second okay we have a motion and a second on J3 seeing as no other council members wishing to speak clerk could you please open the machine for voting council members please enter your votes seeing as all present council members have voted clerk please tally and announce the vote Mr. Chair I'm motion to approve a gen item J3 passes unanimously thank you Carly thank you guys have a good night thank you and just real quick before we go to open forum and I didn't mention it on J2 Pinellas Hope is actually going to be here next week giving us a presentation on everything that's going on over there so you might even get to see a picture of that new bathroom no pressure Joe all right but and thanks for being here so looking forward to that presentation next week okay we're going to move into open forum do we have any speakers okay no speakers we'll go ahead and close open forum council members announcements council member Driscoll thank you Chair I just wanted to remind everyone that next Thursday July 17th the downtown business association has its annual sunrise sale it is literally at sunrise 643 a.m. many of our downtown businesses will be open and ready to welcome you in your pajamas where some of the places if you're wearing your pajamas you get extra treats or discounts I thought about it because for and this is actually this is actually the first year that I don't have to be there for it to cut the ceremonial cake because so many businesses wanted to have the cake ceremony in front of their business that they decided just not to have a cake because they couldn't play favorite and I was like all right I'll go later in the day but usually it's a day where I'm there in my pajamas cutting the cake and then switching out suiting up for council this year I'll be taking it a little bit differently but I wanted to remind everyone because this is the time of the year when a lot of our local business owners are hurting the most especially the retailers and you know given given the events of the last fall with the hurricanes and and all of that it's just been extra tough and so I wanted to give them a shout out and invite everyone to make your way downtown and see what they've got in store it's almost like Black Friday in the middle of the summer so that's at 643 a.m. next Thursday July 17th thank you thank you Councilmember Fick Sanders thank you real quick you just reminded me of something Councilmember Gabbard Saturday Shop is now moving in your neck of the woods tomorrow night and so if you all are available between 5 p.m. and I want to say was it midnight tomorrow night we're having Food Truck Wars yeah at the Gandy Derry Derry Lane yeah so we're branching we're branching we're branching out so it was Food Truck Wars and I didn't realize they actually had entertainment and things on the inside so if you all are free come on out and support your favorite food truck well yeah we're in District 2 now come hang out in District 2 that's right District 2 come see the Northside thank you Chair thank you well I just I won't go down the rabbit hole but I want to quickly thank all of you for some of your flexibility today it's greatly appreciated from this Chair and I won't say any more so I don't cry alright if that's nothing else for the good of the order City Council is adjourned thank you everybody thank you Chair have a good week thank you