Tampa City Council - 09/03/26 PART 2

your patience welcome back to japan city council clerk call the roll please here here can i get unanimous consent to address item number 44 and then we'll go to the south arson is everybody okay with that good okay item number 44 is there any staff here for there we go hello there hello there got me off guard there for a second good afternoon david hay uh planning commission staff um before i begin the presentation i i want to acknowledge danny collins who was instrumental in the in the planning commission's research and coordination with city staff he is enjoying a well deserved vacation so you're all stuck with me this afternoon um i'll i'll be presenting with the assistance of city planning and legal staff and we'll be presenting the results of the research conducted regarding your motion as a reminder your motion asked us to research ways other local governments restrict comprehensive plan amendments to the entitlements approved in a plan development rezoning and to outline the impacts of using similar approaches here in taint to frame the discussion we'll start with florida's growth management requirements state law is very clear in this each future land use category must be defined in terms of uses included and must include standards to be followed in the control and distribution of population densities and building and structure intensities this means any pd future land use category must still include defined standards density intensity and allowable uses within the comprehensive plan itself a pd zoning conditions alone cannot substitute for this statutory requirements in florida pd flu categories are most commonly used for large undeveloped tracks often master planned communities they provide flexibility for unique site conditions and long-term development programs a good example here is pasco county starkey ranch sub area which is around 2 000 acres these pd flu designations are typically paired with detailed development standards adopted directly into the comprehensive plan tampa's development pattern is is very different to pasco's we currently have 26 flu categories all of which include defined uses density and far of florida ratio maximums we do not have a pd flu category or similar mechanism currently and importantly the median comprehensive plan amendment in tampa is about 1.02 acres in size that's a very small scale compared to the large tracks of pd flu categories typically used elsewhere the team reviewed several jurisdictions pasco county was one of them seminola county orange county and the city of gainesville each uses pd flu categories differently but the common theme is that they apply them to large areas and rely on multiple layers of approval map amendments text amendments pd zonings and any adopting ordinances across jurisdictions we found several consistent patterns many require both a map and text amendment adopted by ordinance most apply the pd flu categories to large undeveloped land several jurisdictions are moving away from this mechanism due to complexity and notably cities like orlando miami and fort lauderdale do not use pd flu categories at all overall pd flu categories tend to add complexity rather than reduce them is what staff found in our discussions with the other jurisdictions here is an example from one of pasco's 86 master planned unit developments or sub areas you can see it calls out specific maximums for each approved use the actual design guidelines for any of the area would be further regulated through pasco's land development code right staff found that tampa already has several tools that provide flexibility without needing a planned development flu category first development bonuses allow projects to exceed standard density or far when they provide public benefits such as affordable housing contributions transit or infrastructure improvements this gives applicants a predictable path to additional intensity and density while ensuring the city receives something in return second adaptive reuse incentives support redevelopment of older or historic buildings these incentives already apply within urban villages and are proposed for expansion citywide they allow projects to consider uses or far levels that normally wouldn't be permitted under the underlying flu category which is especially helpful for infill sites third expanding flexible categories like the existing neighborhood mixed use future land use categories can support mixed use redevelopment without requiring pd zonings or a new flu designation and finally the city can initiate publicly initiated map amendments for unique sites where the existing flu may not align with development goals this keeps the process predictable while still allowing for some flexibility together these tools already provide multiple pathways for flexibility and redevelopment without introducing an additional layer of review that a pd flu category would potentially require overall the staff found that introducing a pd flu category in tampa would potentially create several challenges to how the system operates first there's the issue of consistency with florida's comprehensive planning requirements state law requires every flu category to include those defined standards standards for uses density intensity a pd flu category can't rely solely on the pd zonings that are attached to it the conditions in that zoning those standards must be written directly into the comprehensive plan that's to meet state law that means that each pd project would need its own set of site-specific standards adopted through a text amendment which that text amendment would need to be reviewed by the state uh second this creates a more complex approval structure that the staff found um instead of just a map amendment uh with an associated rezoning uh like i had said earlier it will require three separate actions the flu map change to actually change the subject site from the flu category now to the pd flu uh designation a comprehensive plan text amendment associated with that that would establish the project's maximum uh entitlements uh under that um specific uh pd flu and then the pd zoning itself uh would also need to be processed for the um for zoning the um third this pd flu approach requires a mechanism in the comprehensive plan to track and maintain uh project specific entitlements over time uh tampa processes a high volume of small infill amendments typically that one a little slightly over an acre so adding project specific flu standards for each of those sites would significantly increase or potentially increase administrative uh complexity uh fourth it would significantly increase uh staff workload and review timelines because each pd flu designation since it would carry its own site-specific uh requirements staff would need to prepare review and maintain a growing list because if like in pasco there's 86 they start out with one and then it eventually starts uh building uh fifth uh it may reduce the overall transparency and predictability for everyone involved in the development process right now and you all know this the you know you you can go into the comprehensive plan and look at okay this neighborhood is r10 there's going to be fluctuations in the zoning underneath that but they're all capped at the 10. under the under this potential pd flu you could get things that are slightly if if you all agree of course slightly over 10 or it could be under 10 but a citizen would need to research the pd flu because now they since it will now not show on the map as the entitlements so there's that complexity in it and finally adopting the pd flu category could work against one of the city's stated goals uh through the land development code update the city has been emphasizing uh reducing the reliance on pd zoning in favor of a more predictable like form-based and conventional zoning tool a pd flu category would likely increase the number of those pd zonings not decrease them because applicants would need to do an additional pd they could not do a euclidean under under the pd flu category together and it was staffs finding that these issues show that the challenges are not just procedural they affect clarity predictability and long-term administration when combined with the structural concerns we discussed in a couple slides back they suggest that a pd flu category may introduce some more complex uh issues than the overall benefit in tampa's ongoing redevelopment so here we've got uh if i can move this here we've got um south tampa bow's point and how you know how the structure works basically the adopted flu guides the zoning districts that are are contain more detail than what the comp plan does they all have they can't exceed what this map says what staff found was that over time uh the potential is see all these yellows these are uh pd zonings and it would eventually the the the how the zoning map looks here could eventually how this flue map could eventually look with these kind of pd holes in them that then would require further research on what the entitlements were underneath that particular uh flu um if uh so overall um there were just some considerations uh if you all do decide to move this forward it would be one of the recommendations from um the planning commission that we look at the cost of of what the impacts uh potentially could be uh with implementing this so um in conclusion uh our team did find that the pd flu categories are typically used for those large uh tracks of undeveloped land often 50 acres or more tampa's development pattern is again fundamentally different most amendments involve small most currently most amendments involve those small infill sites so um staff found that it potentially could uh increase uh increase the number of amendments extend the review timelines because now you would technically need to go to the state for the the uh text amendment the associated text amendment it it may also conflict with the stated goal that i know we've all kind of been kind of working toward of reducing the pd zoning so given these factors and the other tools such as the bonuses and uh the adaptive reuse incentives that are currently on there in in the uh comp plan update that hopefully you all see uh shortly uh and target amendments that you all can initiate if there's areas where you feel that the comp plan is not in alignment with where the city would like to go um those tools provide uh greater flexibility with fewer administrative burdens is what uh staff found so that concludes my presentation i know i'm available and uh city staff is here as well if you have any questions or or concerns or anything thank you as you can imagine yes i do yeah i'd say that i'm not happy with this presentation would be a significant understatement and i find this to be exactly what people hate about government we have a problem that government should be trying to solve not government trying to create obstacles for the community and and doing things the intent of this motion from the very beginning was figuring out a way to be as flexible with our land use categories and and future land use categories as we are with the zoning and trying to stay take out as as i stated during i made this motion the issue with the sky is going to fall if you approve this because we have projects what happens is they get rejected because of the what if possibilities so because we these categories are so broad that you put us in a position that if we approve a future land use amendment and then we get briefed every week in that right susan you approve this this is what the worst case scenario this you approve this this is what could happen that's generally not what is being presented before us so what i asked you all to do was come before this council to figure out a way that we could inject some common sense here so that we could say that somebody wants to build a a daycare center on a parcel or you know i'm just you know some kind of a hotel or something and we want and we want to do that but i don't want them to put in the worst case scenario that future land use category so um again this is and i you and i've heard words like mostly typical um often not exclusive when you come to this secondly if you're doing real science all you've presented to us is the negatives you couldn't find any positives or you just chose not to because you didn't want y'all didn't want you chose that you didn't want to do this because it conflicts with your agenda and i'm not talking to you specifically i'm talking with the organization it conflicted with your agenda we look we're looking for options to be able to inject some common sense so that we have the flexibility when we chose when we choose to use that flexibility as a council that if someone comes to us with a future land use or i'm sorry a rezoning pd that i can be and it makes sense but i can't approve the future land use because we get briefed that this is the worst case if if you approve this pd they're going to build xyz or they potentially because it goes forever right so we're trying to keep that from happening so i mean my intent is to actually do this is direct the legal department on the plan and the planning commission other necessary city staff to create a process that will allow a comprehensive plan map amendment to be tied to the pd uh rezonings along with increasing the comprehensive plan map and text amendment fees so i also want to increase the uh text amendment fees and uh uh and text amendment fees and return on december 17th 2026. so susan johnson velez legal department excuse me so having been part of all the discussions relative to this um response and and david's presentation and you know every single comment confirm or deny every single conversation we have about future land use i can but but the challenge here is um trying to maintain um compliance with state law as well as our own comprehensive plan as well as our land i'm not asking to return back with anything no i understand so your your motion was that you want to create possibly an endless number of pd flu categories that is that was not my motion well i mean that's what you're no that was not my motion but i understood that you listen to my listen to my motion go back and read the motion the motion was go back and read it the motion was not that is in other words y'all figure out a way that we can do this and i it could be whatever way you think is how can we do this and if it's with i know other jurisdictions do use pds pd future land use that's one opportunity that other jurisdictions have chosen to use i'm not a subject matter expert in this maybe there's something that you guys as subject matter experts can figure out but i'm i know pds are one example future land use pds as an example that other jurisdictions have used in the state of florida that obviously must conform to law because it's widely used and i don't our research didn't reveal any other mechanism that any other jurisdiction has used for you know to achieve what you're what you're saying it was the pd flu category that again as david said was is in jurisdictions that have large tracts of land it's not used in urban areas like tampa not in miami not in orlando fort lauderdale and so tampa is more like those than it is like pasco county or orange county or seminole county that's that's the i mean the findings that we are bringing back to you and the challenges of trying to utilize those that type of process with for example a one acre or maybe five acre i don't know that there are many five acre parcels in the city i mean usually these are 20 acres and above right they're larger tracts of land well and i think you can you can agree as well generally pds are supposed to be for larger scale projects as well but we routinely use those for single family lots on pds in the city of tampa but i conceptually they were intended to be used for large acreage parcels but that has evolved over time where we that's not the practice that we we exercise so i think um and i did i heard your motion again again when you repeated it so i think staff would ask for some guidance you know what well again i i think it's simple susan is that we're again we've had these projects time and time again where the project had merit but the problem is when we go to with the future land use every time i've walked into your office you've briefed me that if you approve this don't it's not about this project it's about you're going to approve a future land use that's tied to that land and if you do that some future developer they could sell that property tomorrow and some future developer could come in there and they're not going to build the daycare center they're going to build the monstrosity of the universe that's going to destroy tampa i mean that's that is every single briefing we get so what i'm trying to do is how do we as a government inject common sense in this so that we can tie this so that we can actually get what we're bargaining for without the catastrophic impact that you present every time which it's the legal buying that we're in i mean i'm not and it's true whatever what you brief us is factually legally correct so what i'm trying to do is fix the process so that we can eliminate those risk factors can so with that being said i mean the motion basically says y'all come back with a plan on december 17th so i'm sorry your your other part of your motion was to um look at increasing the application fee so it's it's not just the application fee application fee for a amendment to the comp plan is relatively low oh that's what i'm saying i want to i want to increase all the fees because we are we are undercharging for comprehensive comp plan updates so but it's more staff time that's going to have to be dedicated to maintaining he should he should reflect the actual cost of doing this well again david hey i i would if if the council does decide i think we would need time to figure out any procedures to figure out what the cost would be because currently this isn't this well yeah that's a lot within the framework i understand it's a process i mean we'll we'll give this would just be this and then of course that fee structure would have to probably be continued because it's it's a i understand it's a lengthy process to do that i mean that's i agree with that but i think we do need to evaluate our fee structures on comp plan amendments because i don't think i think right now we're undercharging for the staff time because i think our staff takes a lot of time and energy and doing these compound amendments i don't believe the fee structure um even comes close to compensating the city for the amount of money it costs us one other um if if you allow me to the um you know while you're dealing with these um issues about particular sites and that it could when we reviewed this you know when you were giving your example of like well they're they only want the daycare but the land use allows you know whatever it you know again that tower that you kind of on your scenario talked about wouldn't have to always come back to you all just because the land use and we you all know this just because the land use sets it out there's all these other parameters compatibility with the development around it um all things like that neighborhood input you're absolutely right but the problem is as susan briefs us every time this goes in perpetuity long we belong when i'm dead ground and daisies are growing on my grave that future language is forever so that's one of the what we're trying to do is close that door so that we don't have that future opportunity because you just don't know what the next generation of people that are sitting in these seats are going to do well what my i was trying to get was though it you know you'd create a pd and a text amendment there's no prohibition on someone five years later coming in going i have this pd flu text that gave me a hundred thousand square feet but now i want 150 000 square feet and if there's a gap there there would be a different city council you know some members might be different that may have different opinions than what currently the council's uh opinions are so it it doesn't i wouldn't say it closes the door it does create another layer but um there's still you know people can always come in and ask for another amendment just like a map amendment i think this is this is staff bureaucracy getting in the way of common sense councilwoman her tech councilman mascot building house i could not disagree more i just couldn't disagree more i mean it doesn't shock me uh no it does it shouldn't because i mean these are these are the rules the state of florida has put upon us well you're anti-development excuse me i'm anti-development yeah um that is not at all what i'm saying we are we have to allow people to do what they can with their own property like we can't reduce that i i just i don't see how in the world that you're going to create something that doesn't exist unless you're going to go through the state of florida to do it i just i i don't just i don't agree with this and it's just it doesn't make any sense to me uh if the the entire point of future land use is to be broad enough that people can do multiple things under a land use we're not going to be able to save every structure we're not going to be able to save everything not everything is meant for every scenario and i think that sometimes you just sometimes it doesn't work and sometimes it does and if it doesn't work it doesn't work but we can't circumvent and create a whole new rule for those one or two times that it doesn't work so i just respectfully disagree i mean others others may not but i do councilman ascalco what does the county do when it comes to plan developments tied to comp plan amendments do they have a different process or is it all all bases it's it's it's very similar to what the process is currently they they do have some different major mods and minor mods but there is no pd flu category they have all their land uses set out maximums that um some require a pd like light industrial planned you have to do a pd there's no euclidean that's permitted but none there's no categories that you know are site specific okay thanks yeah councilman carlson i just think we should call the question and then you you can carry this on offline and then they can come back with feedback from us and then we can when it comes back um we can decide whether we like it or not okay call the question well councilman okay thank you mr calico it's all right we look alike you've got the same haircut but what i'm saying is this you know we only have a certain amount of land left i mean we don't have 10 million acres left we have three or four percent that's what i've been told i don't know how true it is so i mean the city of tampa already has the setting is not there but more likely you know when you're looking at some plan or you're developing some plan that you can't go into a residential district so i'm gonna build this by thrusters in the middle of the main street you can't do it the landslide zone for that so there's areas that have pretty well been already subdivided intentionally by by the past history and current events that hold you to be what it is we used to have three industrial areas we're down to one and more likely we're going to lose that one so what i'm saying is that it's a very hard job that you have i understand that and it's very difficult job that we have well we're both in the same boat and you know what it's sinking because now on the other side of the airport i see the other day a building going up it's almost constructed now all wood four stories and i tell myself wow one match will do what to this building we're living in a different society nature has changed the environment we created the wrong way it was going pretty good until we human beings started doing things and now what we have what enormous amount of flooding enormous amount of areas where you have the whole country the whole world look at nepal look at different things now in different parts of this country in japan and everything else you have things you never had before look how many areas in the north you had snow in june give me a break all these things are happening because we didn't let nature do its job we did what we wanted to do and now we're paying the price it's not going to get better that's my opinion so what you're trying to do is the right thing i'm saying that certain areas are restricted just for residential certain areas restricted for certain heights certain areas you can't do heights unless you have a lot of money you can go over the airport what the hell you want but these are the things that i see that are difficult for you and for us so we're both in the same boat so i'm we're trying to fix something here that may be half broken and we're trying to do things that are necessary but we don't take an advantage what we had before you didn't have a traffic problem and you can correct me anytime you want you just take 10 minutes to go from here certain place not take 25 minutes to go from a certain place and the more we built in the last transportation we have we don't have zero we have zero in my mind we have zero transportation other than the automobile you can correct me again we don't have no rail we have a street car that's been going the same way now for at least 20 years we have ways to improve it we're trying to do that but how are we going to get what used to cost a million dollars now it's 25 million dollars so it's very difficult to be on your side and in this side at the same time so i understand what you're trying to do and it has to get a little bit better we don't even take consideration when you go back 20 years ago how many mental illnesses you find in the street very few now it's either a habit that everybody's crazy or they're saying they're crazy so they can get some money somewhere it is what it is let's face it so these are the things that we're up against mental stress everybody's full of it years ago we didn't have any so something invented somebody that somebody doesn't know what's going on but i i understand the position you're in that's all so susan johnsonville is legal department so you're asking us to come back with an ordinance i was i'm going to read it again so if you want me to is is it to come back with an ordinance i'll read it okay yeah go ahead okay so direct the legal department planning commission and other necessary city staff to create a process that will allow comprehensive plan map amendments to be tied to plan development rezonings along with increasing the comprehensive plan map and text amendment fees and return i initially said december 17th but hearing your concern i changed that to february 18th 2027 so february 18th 2027. okay um uh can can i make a friendly amendment to separate those two because these structures i'd rather not because this it kind of rides because again as david said this would end up creating a process and you know that would increase the okay so i have a motion and a second all those in favor aye any opposed nay motion care with her tech and miranda voted no thank you and can i just i just want to clarify i i'm voting yes and i seconded the first time just partly out of courtesy and curiosity to see what you all come up with not necessarily because i'll vote yes in the final thing okay gosh i thought that was going to be so easy okay very good okay now well now we're going from easy to easier oh we took 46 off so 40 yeah we received about 46. that's a change we did not need that okay so back up back up back up item number 36 if i've got this correct right ask a process question go ahead so we we have a rule that we're supposed to hear things over 20 million two weeks apart so are we just hearing it today yeah so yeah just for for council and for folks in the audience there's no uh sub unless unless a council person makes a motion on something subsequent to this the way this is today 36 we're going to hear 36 through 39 together the way this works today is this is the first reading on the 17th of september we'll come back for the second time around and that's when actually a decision that's the decision point so we're going to hear from staff we'll have council discussion but wait there's more on february on september 17th we'll come back for a vote okay and is everybody clear on that mr shelby chairman these are grouped as a as a one through four items 36 37 38 39 correct i suspect they're interrelated does that mean that they are all going to be held and continued over to the 17th yes that is the intent okay thank you unless anybody objects very good so this is presentation time so we're hearing 36 37 38 39 this is your bite of the apple sir start with your name all right brad baird administrator for uh infrastructure mobility uh good afternoon um so you've already covered about uh up for discussion and up for approval this is 30 items 36 through 39 um we have our our team here in support um including brandon campbell um director of mobility as well as our contractor and our senior engineer uh that are here in support um if i could uh get the presentation to be pulled up uh i'll do it okay okay first um i'll cover total costs of the project back in january of 2026 we had an estimated total cost of 98.3 million um and uh total current costs equal 100.4 million and that is comprised of design of 7.7 million and gmp or guaranteed maximum price of 92.7 million um for a total of 100.4 million um two things changed since january the existing triple box culvert in bay shore at howard is 30 feet shorter than was shown on the record drawings so that means we need to extend that triple box by 30 feet to get under southbound bay shore boulevard and that includes bypassing of an existing 42 inch um it's actually a 48 inch sewer that was lined with a 42 inch polyethylene pipe and that is a gravity pipe uh that acts as a siphon under this triple box um all for a total of an additional 2.3 million so that is almost exactly the difference between 98.3 and 92 point uh i mean 100.4 um the second thing that changed is uh as as you all know we have added a business assistance team and that was added to ensure that we are doing everything we can uh to minimize the impacts to the businesses on south howard um and on swan um so we will cover that in a little bit so uh next slide please you should have a click yeah i guess i'm supposed to do that for the assist okay there we go this this is the proposed flooding solution its primary feature is a 10 by 10 gravity box culvert terminating at the ami pond it includes secondary pipelines that connect the selman expressway and also a 72 inch pipeline that connects parkland estates this is a legacy project that will serve other neighborhoods in the future that flood east and west of howard avenue you cannot do that with a force main if you were to build a force main alternative you're locked in locked into what you can tie into that um so i want to cover the ami pond so going back to the ami pond i would like to clear up a few misconceptions first it is a pond not a vault so it has a dirt bottom it is not silted in you've heard that the ami pumping station hasn't worked in 10 years the existing pumping station works in fact our computer modeling system called scada shows that the two pumps at this station automatically turned on and turned off 177 times over the last 90 days it works just fine so the statement that this pump station hasn't worked in 10 years is blatantly false it pumps water to the cleveland system to the west and outfalls three miles away to old tampa bay the cleveland system however is currently undersized and overburdened so um you've heard a lot about our design storm it's a five-year eight-hour storm which is equivalent of 5.3 inches it just so happens um well let me back up this is this level storm is the city's standard engineering design storm and it's for which we design other projects for so what does this mean it's equivalent of 5.3 inches of rain over an eight-hour period it just so happens we had a storm with identical characteristics with 5.4 inches of rain on august 1st 2015. what did it look like it looked like it had flooded homes vehicles road closures resident displacement no hospital access for a period of time slowed emergency response two bus service route interruptions route 14 and route 19 lost business revenue on swan avenue and of course costly repairs but fast forward to a month ago we had a storm that was smaller a smaller storm only a two inch storm with shorter duration this is what parkland estates looked like one month ago so what does this investment of a hundred million dollars deliver 95 percent flood reduction in palmacea pines and parkland estates yes in palmacea pines so you've heard many many times it does not provide flood phase one does not provide flood relief to palmacea pines that is false it does provide significant relief to palmacea pines no structural flooding for the design storm in either palmacea pines or parkland estates so and approximately 230 homes you've heard different numbers you've heard 220 225 235 it's 230 plus or minus homes and businesses would have been spared by milton milton and if you recall we had in the neighborhood of two of 330 homes um that flooded homes and businesses that flooded uh during uh all right and this is where i need brandon's help so this is before on the left and after the 10 by 10 box and he's going to pause at five hours um and that is when the flooding has peaked you can see um on the right no structures flooded for our design storm on the left it peats at about 96 units i'll say because that as you can see that's not 96 red dots or red squares um so there's obviously more more units in each of those squares than just one so if i could have brandon uh fast forward again and stop it at eight hours the flooding is completely gone in uh palmacea pines and parkland estates whereas in the existing condition there are still a handful of structures that remain flooded and of course the streets um have flooding of of still over two feet at that point right can i for clarity because i make sure we're all speaking the same language when you say 96 or 220 is it structures is it homes because we have a lot of multi-family and that was in public comment we talked about that a lot townhouses multi-family businesses can you give us the common language of what you're referring to it is all of the above okay but when you say 96 what what does that mean is that a structure or is it residents multi-family so if there's businesses if there's four individual family homes in a building is that one structure or is that four four we're counting as four okay so yes four okay four four individual so it's not 96 structures it's 96 homes or businesses 96 residences or businesses okay got it okay thank you for that clarification okay and then if you'll run it out you'll see that um on the left which is the existing condition that the flooding has dissipated by hour 12. um and that is what we're seeing in reality out in these neighborhoods that's right so the south howard flood relief project is a major city drainage project aimed at fixing the chronic flooding we see in parkland estates palmacy of pines and the nearby neighborhoods the root of the problem is pretty simple these neighborhoods sit very very low and because of that low-lying topography they are especially prone to flooding these neighborhoods are also shaped like giant bowls so when heavy rain hits water rushes in fills up fast and doesn't drain the way it should because the current pipes there are way too small city engineers and independent experts are designing this system to handle a serious storm about five inches of rain over eight hours that's enough water to fill the iconic river gate tower and when all that water has nowhere to go it can cause a lot of damage so what's the fix the proposed solution uses a massive 10 foot by 10 foot box culvert system capable of moving roughly 20 million gallons of storm water every single hour think of it as a mile long underground river designed to pull all that excess water out of these neighborhoods the system would start near south howard and bay shore head north turn on to swan avenue and then continue north into palmasia pines by connecting directly to the pond beneath the hca florida south tampa hospital parking deck that pond would essentially become a giant inlet pulling excess flood water out of the neighborhood and sending it south where it can drain properly and remember the sheer volume of water we're talking about a beer can building worth this system is designed to move it out of the neighborhoods fast before it can cause serious damage this approach isn't new in fact it's tried and true similar projects across the city including at henderson and dale mabry are already proving how effective this type of drainage system can be bottom line less flooding means safer streets for everyday drivers and first responders fewer homes at risk of catastrophic damage lower insurance costs and real peace of mind for families and businesses who just want to know their investments are better protected the south howard flood relief project sorry about that deja vu moment you guys just want to see it once right um so why does this work this is is this slide is very important so these two neighborhoods reside in bowls i think that that was covered in in the video the elevation of those of the bottom of the bowls is roughly 15 16 feet um uh palmasia pines 16 uh uh uh parkland states is is roughly 15 so 15 16 feet so between the bowls and the the bay water at mean tide you're talking about 16 feet of fall so that is um a lot of elevation to work with that we usually don't have that much and so so that water flowing full will flow at seven feet per second okay so even during helene when the bay rose to elevation eight these two neighborhoods would have drained very easily in fact we have modeled this condition at eight feet elevation the velocity decreases from seven feet per second to six and a half feet per second or less than 10 percent reduction and the flow decreases from 650 cubic feet per second down to 600 cubic feet per second also less than 10 percent reduction so you have heard people say that with any significant storm surge and that by the way is the biggest one on record eight feet this alternative will not work this is not true simple physics say otherwise it will flow like a river very fast out that outfall let's talk about success stories when we passed the when city council passed the stormwater improvement assessment in 2016 we had um four large projects um on on that map and we had about 100 smaller projects showing us smaller yellow dots all four projects are completed to this day you can see the flooding that existed on upper peninsula which is henderson dale mavery problem fix um southeast seminole heights problem fixed rome avenue which was fixed by the cypress street project fixed lower peninsula had some flooding and this is showing a picture of the pond down there but had had some flooding um problem was fixed in all four cases we used box culverts to fix the problem just like we're proposing here so um because i went because that was that was addressed earlier you can't build this project with with a trench box and install the box culvert that is not true we used a trench box in all four cases this trench box will be 20 by 24 feet long it will move in 22 foot sections so that has a one foot overlap on each side um some of the renderings that the business alliance has shown it showed sheet piling right next to the buildings in the right of way that is not what we are proposing it is not necessary um the the better method of construction is with the trench box it's tried and true and um and we that is exactly what we're proposing brad maybe we could pause there for some questions i know i have a couple yeah i'm almost finished i'm almost finished can we because you're going in the business assistant plan now right yeah so why don't we why don't we pause here because it's on the engineering and the structure i think would be good okay i mean i can take it i think i would rather wait till the end but sure yeah i mean i think it's a logical time because otherwise we would get convoluted between the different components of this okay um you want to start you want to start so a couple of observations you know through this journey i saw a presentation i don't know if it was mr b day or if it was mr campbell but there was a slide that was up here that had a report that was done by the city of tampa in like 1983 1987. i remember 83 and there were there were two from the 80s and i think it was specific to maybe palmasia pines and how you know like you said this is a bowl and the water has you know nowhere to go are you familiar with that do you recall that i'm just going by by memory i recall a slide this week that the business alliance showed where the studies started in 1983 with post buckley shoe and jernigan is that what you're referring to maybe i mean i saw it here during a city council meeting maybe it was somebody from the public that had shown it so the city has known that this area floods and for 40 something years it's continued you know allowing building for the sake of making money not on the city's part but just you know you can't stop the construction i've mentioned this before i went to school at the school that i think it's closed right there on swan and howard used to be st john's creek orthodox right and when i was in school in the 90s the access of armenia going to swan into parkland estates was open now it's closed and you can see the ornamentation did that have any effect closing that entrance on where the water flows i mean because this is going back to the 90s did that create any issue with anything not to my knowledge i don't know if brandon has any more on that but not to my knowledge okay because i remember you know during heavy uh rains when i was a student there which was 92 to 98 we had a football field where we would have you know pe phys ed and it when it rained hard it would fill like a like a lake but it went down but what i don't remember is the area around it flooding and i asked my mother yesterday i said when you took me to school 30 years ago did that area ever flood and she said no i don't remember henderson and dale mabry everybody remembers so the the the question i'm getting to is fast forward to i got here in the spring of 2015 and then in 2015 we had major flooding everywhere when did the flooding in parkland estates start has it been going on forever or was it 2015 because i see a lot of photos and i've heard from the public 2015 what has it always been a thing or is it something that's 11 years old okay that um great question and if i could unpack that so i am told um so that flooding in those two neighborhoods has happened since the 1960s okay in parkland estates much worse than palmercia pines however since that time obviously there has been a lot of impervious parking lots uh residents built businesses built that add to that runoff right they are required by code to retain the first half inch of rain right obviously these storms just the last three that we've seen are are more than a half an inch yeah so that additional to the half inch it is going to result in more flooding yes so and i do want to say one more thing because there has been a lot of questions about this project morphing over the years or changing over the years it has it started out as a parkland estates um stormwater relief project parkland estate stormwater relief project and i i can get to the exact time when that was um identified 11 i think it's 11 years ago then you know i mentioned the smaller yellow dots at the south part of south howard on hills and what were the other two streets and two other streets we've received flooding complaints and those can be tied in in the future obviously we don't have the funding for that right now right so that would be a future assessment increase uh that we could tie those in so between the six small dots and the original parkland estates that's how this project came to be okay so the project if it is approved on this current schedule and looking at the construction schedule which you're going to get to the project begins at bay shore and howard and it starts working its way up north i see here um west swan avenue intersection october 2029 parkland estates may 2030 and then substantial completion so between october and september of 29 to 30 is when we're getting to the the bulk of it what happens to the neighborhoods from now until then they just continue to flood for the next three years yes but we tie in we tie in um immediately adjacent to howard as we move north okay as we move no we tie in those those but still that water with the heavy afternoon storm really has nowhere to go until we get up to that meeting point let's say howard and swan so with the that what is it the ami pond and everything that's existing there in the zom pond and all that have we dredged it cleaned it made sure that the system is completely clear because of course you know it rained what last sunday or the sunday before it's been it's been pretty bad it does flood as we've seen in pictures the water eventually goes somewhere why is it slow moving because it's such a fast amount of rainfall or do we have blockages in the entire system what what i mean the water is eventually going to go away it's not going to evaporate it's going to flow out but what's the issue there uh brandon campbell mobility director um so a couple of things uh in response to your comments let me first go back to you asked about the intersection of parkland boulevard and swan and the closure of that we do have inlets there any impact to the stormwater system is negligible from that closure so just wanted to make sure that we we closed that loop with respect to the ami pond we had it surveyed and compared it to the as built and there's not a current need for it to be dredged it is at the elevation that the as built said that it would be as brad mentioned that pump is still continuing to to work we've got our skater reports that show he said i think 177 times the two pumps had been actuated over the last 90 days so we know that in itself it covers the last four flood events that were mentioned in public comments today and that have gotten some additional attention um there are some pipes in there it's not much there's not really a spine down howard which is of course what we're looking at now the route that the business alliance proposed has some small pipes those are undersized there is some drainage that goes through those pipes so there are pathways for the the water to go of course some of it of course uh soaks into the ground as well uh where where it's in on a pervious surface um but it's it's under capacity and that's why we need to build additional capacity that's what the target of this project is okay and then last question may 20 28 on the schedule the csx crossing that has an existing box culvert right yes okay i know csx is it's complicated to negotiate and talk with them what did i hear earlier today regarding the need to uh was it close off that track there how long was it four to six weeks do we have permission from them have they said it's okay we do not and that's why in the gmp that that is not included in the gmp okay so right now in the gmp we have a 72 inch uh micro tunnel with a 60 inch carrier pipe that will sister up with the existing 5x10 box culvert to provide that flow the problem with that is you have to build two massive structures on either side to tie it back into the 10x10 box will we be taking a 10x10 culvert to a 5x10 at the cf section 5x10 and a 60 inch that we will be drilling as a micro top and that won't create a bottleneck where the you know since we're doing a gravity system that the flow of the water is so intense that by the time it hits the csx track it's going to start backing up if it's too much water so a slight bottleneck there yes because um you know obviously a 5x10 culvert is 50 square feet 10x10 is 100 square feet right so that's half and then the 60 inch interceptor would provide additional square feet so the way it's proposed now in the gmp is a bottleneck however and the reason we haven't we haven't um touted this as a solution um is because we have not started meeting with top brass of csx and that is going to take some some months to do that but the proposal would be to close those tracks for four to six weeks handle the delivery of the one person that's at the end of the spur the one business that would need deliveries kimmins would handle those deliveries with trucks and if csx were to give us the approval to close it for four to six weeks we would then build a 10 by 10 box under or through csx tracks in return for providing them brand new tracks and new control panel new arms um and and then reopen it therefore there would not be a bottleneck okay now i have no we don't know if csx would be amenable to that so that's why that's not in a gmp one last thing really really preliminary estimates say that because because that right now is six million dollars for that micro tunnel and the two structures it's not quite six million but we could we estimate that we could save three million dollars i know the the uh the person that spoke here earlier said well that would cost more money that's not true okay so the water eventually will then dump out at bay shore bay shore now just that section would would also be a 10 by 10. so if you live in tampa you know that you know during heavy storms bay shore will flood and the water will come over if it's high tide and we have a situation like that based on the gravity system is the water pressure flowing down at whatever elevation you had shown 19 feet or 18 is that enough pressure that it'll push the water out into the bay or will the system back up and i know you can do the analogy of if you have a hose and you put it in a swimming pool you can feel the water coming out but is it enough pressure in a system like this where the water will come out or is it just going to back up and stay until just back up and stay in the neighborhood until uh it's low tide and it's you know it flows out naturally what happens so if i get cttv to pull up the the slide that thank you so again we have 16 feet of fall from the bottom of the bowls all the way to the bay on a mean tide right if we um so that if that 10 by 10 box is flowing full on our design storm it will flow full again that's seven feet per second it will not um preclude that flow from happening happening it will only reduce it seven percent so it doesn't back it up at all you still have 93 percent of that flow going to the bay and will there will there be pumps or this is just the natural no this is gravity that's it so there's no backup just in case you know the water pressure is so much and right where to go okay so if it's flowing full it's essentially acting as a pressure pipe okay all right thank you very much okay you're welcome okay uh councilwoman young followed by miranda hello okay um a few questions i'm going to try to stay in order so for the first slide when you had the turtle the total cost of 20 26 versus uh january versus where we are now and um you said the jump in the price was because we added the business assistance team in larger pipes is that correct is that was the second issue but the main issue was um the extension of the bayshore triple box over that was the 2.3 million the business assistance of course is over the length of the project which is uh three years and 10 months okay now for the next slide we had flooding solution and you had mentioned you said um if you could you put that map up it's just the second i think it's the second slide where it says flooding solution okay that's like yes okay so if we draw a line right where you see um hca florida south tampa hospital um so at the top you have uh palmasia pines at the bottom you see we have parkland estates the um per your legend where the green is it says future phase storm sewers um is that and it's it's mainly in the the palmasia pines area so when you say future phase storm sewers is that a part of like if this you know project is is approved are you going to start working on where the green is or is that for the future that is for the future but again there's an existing undersized system there with 12 inch and 18 inch pipes and that's why phase one provides a significant relief for palmasia pines now the future phase two is to upsize those 12 inch and 18 inch pipes and that would be in a future improvement assessment increase so is the the future the future phase storm sewers is that something that you feel is it it needs to be like it has to be done or is it you think what's going to happen in phase one will be significant enough it it needs to be done in the future to fully realize all flooding that um that's happening in the streets for our design storm so in other words phase one it solves the structural flooding in those two neighborhoods and it reduces significantly the the roadway flooding upsizing those pipes in a future phase one can be done piecemeal it doesn't have to be done all at once we can take the worst of the worst and do those first um and and um but two that would solve all the flooding in palmasia pines so when we say future how far out are you thinking it would be um after we finish our watershed master plan that's ongoing right now and then that decision would come back to city council as to what projects are in that plan obviously palmasia pines would be included right and um how much we want to increase that improvement assessment to cover those projects in other words we'll have a list of projects how far down the list do you want to go to draw the line so you said when we finish with the watershed master plan do you know when we finish with that do you want to do you want to speak to that so council uh yuen lee stormwater services director uh we are currently at midpoint okay uh at the midpoint of watershed master plan and uh but as far as this south harvard flooding relief project because it's currently ongoing the planning effort is being done already for uh for the uh future phases in palmasia pines and as we if this one is moving forward when the construction started we can start the design work for the north portion that's the future phases of palmasia pines not necessarily we have to wait until the city-wide uh master plan is being done so we can uh potentially save some time when the construction of phase one is ongoing we can move forward with design future work for the uh palmasia plans portion so we don't really have like a time frame for the future not yet so for the um do you have a call do you know how much it would be do you have an idea uh we discuss internally we can either do the design build contract or we can even uh use our internal staff uh it's it's kind of ranges between i would say 20 some million dollars to 40 some million dollars in that range but what you're saying is with phase one there we're already going to see some significant flood relief so if this future phase storm sewer is let's say not completed in 10 years it would be okay i can i can speak to that brief so the the video that brad showed of the duration of the storm that that model shows what we would expect with just what we're building with this particular gmp so the the reduced duration of the street flooding the reduced severity of the flooding that actually gets into the structures that's all phase one uh when it comes to potential additional future storm laterals uh future phases uh we we can we can choose you know what we want to do when based on uh specific impact of those specific pipes that brad mentioned we don't necessarily have to build those all at once we may even be able to do some of those with our in-house construction team i don't know that just yet um we also as as juan mentioned we can work on design uh through this process of constructing phase one so we don't have to skip a beat on it we just have not uh programmed a construction uh effort for it for these additional future phases okay okay for the um csx the cost i did i admit i don't know if i missed it or not is there a cost to us if if we get that permission to do that to close that for four to six weeks uh not a cost to get the permission um there uh we like i said it's close to six million the way we have it in the gmp now um very very preliminary estimates show we can save um in the three million dollar range to do that and um that's what we plan on doing uh um later this year or early next year if this is approved we would start those discussions with csx if i can add to the the discussion on the csx the two pipe solution is what is in the guaranteed maximum price and it's what is modeled in everything that we have presented to you all if we're able to uh do a a 10 by 10 box there instead it would only be because it is a a cheaper solution a an improvement on the current design uh and that we get that that permission from csx it is only it's only a benefit if we cannot work that out because csx does not give us the permission to do so or if for whatever reason we decide hey this isn't the cost savings that we thought it was going to be i can't quite imagine why that would be but if we came into that scenario and said hey that actually is not the the benefit that we thought it was going to be this two pipe solution that is in the guaranteed maximum price will work i just want to make sure that it's clear it it may not be the absolute best in terms of how it flows but it works and it is exactly what we need and what we have modeled and designed for okay that's from miranda uh thanks mr chairman you know i sit here and keep listening and listening and i try to realize what how and when and where what size of the pipes you have there now for the uh 10 by oh what size do we have there just the pipes that you have on the ground in in uh both going north south mr miniscalco stated that 30 years ago he was in school and i don't think he's that old anyway but number one when he stated that it it's my mind started working what was the population then what was the population 50 years ago how much concrete have you laid down since 50 years ago from the expressway this way south water does not flow north only in the st john's river so we're not near the st john's river and we have a problem and the problem was we created our own damn problem yeah when you look at the houses around that neighborhood how many hot building permits do you have in parkland estates i would say very few how many do you have in palmercia pines an awful lot more yeah i was here then i understand what's happening the population wasn't what it is today the pipes are not of age and you have 30 years or 60 years of growth that wasn't anticipated when you built the pipes some 100 years ago 50 years ago 80 years ago so therefore the problem the ones that was in office then did it because it was right at that time because the pipes or the flow was adequate however population has changed in the last 30 years in tampa and it's going to change continually in tampa and when you were back in the 70s i could drive the streets here in downtown tampa not even looking where i was going zigzag and they were from left north east and south and never hit a human or a car i couldn't even hit a street car because they were taken out so it's also changed here in traffic and it's changing their water why because it's called success people came down because they love the sunshine we only have two seasons in florida summer and christmas that's why they come down that piece is realistic about it so what i'm saying is that in these things at the time that the pipe were put in meant the population it needed for the cause that is gone and now we also have a lot more coming with nature like i said nature we had treated it like a stepchild and now it's getting even with us you have to understand where we're at all of us the cost is expensive but what's the cost if you don't do it yeah so to answer your question on pipe sizes there's at least five different size pipes that i know of and i'm sure there's probably a couple more that either go south and end up at rubidome bay shore or go west through the cleveland system that i mentioned earlier i know there's 36 there's 36 inch diameter circular there's some elliptical pipe there's a little bit larger pipe in the cleveland system all of which are undersized seriously undersized as opposed to what we need to move for the design storm so if that answers your question i'm just going to close by saying this i live by myself if i had my family with me my chances of having a backup in the sink on the toilet will be five times greater than it is now because there's only one there not five people there it's the same thing you got to use basic logic and enforce it and think about what's happening how it got to be what it is and that's all i'm going to say yeah you need less fiber very much chairman if i may i still have 10 slides let's finish this line of questioning please okay councilman bureau uh thank you mr chairman and quick quick question um i hear a lot uh social media allegations etc that this project's going to eat up all of our stormwater funds how do you all respond to that including from the 2016 assessment good afternoon council dennis rojero chief financial officer i have heard those two a couple of remarks before i put on what i think will be a helpful visual aid this assessment in the last decade has collected about 130 million dollars we anticipate over the next 20 years it's going to collect another 360 million dollars so that's a you know that's a 30-year span of almost half a billion dollars and uh let me find the slide it's a little sooner than i anticipated you know if this goes into the future slides i think we'll go with prad and say let's hold up on that you want to hold up okay i have no question yeah i can i can wait yeah so um i wanted yeah i can i can wait until after yeah listen i was i'm okay sure that questioning now just this engineering part that we're here another i've got i've got a few questions do you have anything um with yeah you know what with regards engineering i guess if you will um we're talking so we hear that this uh this and pardon me i'm sorry i got back from missouri last night like at 11 30 uh so i'm i'm tired but we hear about um immediate fixes versus long-term fixes uh this project if approved it's you're looking at about a four-year timeline correct this is a project approved you're here it's about a four-year timeline correct before my time here no no i'm sorry this project here we're talking about a four a four-year timeline start completion yes okay yes um but in earnest the last 11 years but yes the first study was done in 1983. he's talking about start a project start a project to completion of project so when oh when you put it first put a shovel in the ground when he died you're okay um three years and ten months okay so about four years or so um is there any quicker fix than this to this uh to uh what's happening in palmasia pines and parkland estates there is no uh quicker fix correct from from what i from what i hear no uh all the other alternatives and i and i get to that in another slide but all the other alternatives there that are looked at um could get there quicker however they don't they don't move the water that needs to be moved okay great yeah and i'll save everything for afterwards thank you thank you sir so trying to restrict it to just what we're talking about here um the csx culvert like i maybe i misunderstood between the presentation you provided and the information that um brandon just discussed the csx culvert existing condition that is what's included in the gmp is that what i'm hearing yes so uh if cttv could put up the slide that's actually on this computer here there it goes so you can see uh the purple line that's under csx that is sort of in the middle of that page that is the existing five by ten box culvert under csx because it's a five by ten box and we're building a ten by ten along the corridor it needs additional capacity so to to achieve that the the plan that we know that we can accomplish is to add the sistered pipe that that brad mentioned that's here in in red now there is a possibility that if we are able to get that permission from csx we could actually just build the the ten by ten all the way through that would be a value add and it would be a cost deduct but as shown this is what's designed this is what has been modeled for this is what we know will work and that we can accomplish okay so let me understand so right now there's a five by five i'm sorry no five by five by ten yes five by ten so which is 50 percent of what we would just be putting basically yes if we for the rest of the project that burying underneath the ground the 60 inch pipe you're referring to is that included in the hundred million four hundred forty one thousand yes so using the existing five by ten adding a 60 inch pipe is included in the proposed gmp correct okay can we put a 60 inch pipe underneath csx tracks without their permission not without their permission but i don't know if you want to or actually i don't know if let me preface my first let me let me say this and then you guys answer my accusations how in the world did we get to august whatever it is or what what is the date september whatever it is september 3rd 2026 without having these discussions with csx because we have been going on for years okay we have had discussions with csx csx staff and this is what's approved by staff and again it is a 72 inch microtunnel that's a casing pipe essentially and the carrier pipe is 60 inch okay so we do have permission to go underneath their tracks with we don't have permission we don't have a permit or permission in writing from csx which we don't have a permit for that um well we either do or we don't at that time at this time we either we do that that crossing is still it's so all we can brad if i'm hearing you correctly i'll work all we can count on is the five by ten no so you're right so when you come to us in two weeks all we can count on is what is is currently there which is the five by ten which cuts water flow on half uh you only stormwater services director we we discussed with csx in the in the earlier stage of this project and the best case scenario they are open to the open cut but the worst case is going to be trenchless and as as we are currently putting our gmp together and similarly we have the southeast seminal heist we have the similar situation we applied for the permit and we we were granted with the permit with no interruption so is in the discussion right now we have the coordination meeting with csx so this is something that i'm going to have to have you guys come back with something more firm for at least for me for one out of seven because i really want to provide flood relief to these neighborhoods i really really do i mean i really want to get to yes on this i mean strongly want to get to yes on this you know i've always been i've always said that i felt like the engineering was good i've had problems with you know getting to that cost benefit ratio and that we're getting dangerously close to a 1.0 and if we start adding money with change orders or increased expenses for this culvert we could end up breaking that 1.0 cra but before we pass before we vote on a contract of 100 million dollars we need to have we we need to make sure that we know what we're voting on i mean and i think this that what you injecting this variable is really a problematic not knowing for sure of what the engineering will be crossing underneath those tracks yep that's one second john um let we'll let um kim and speak in a second but cx in my experience csx permitting takes nine months six months minimum but nine months to a year to obtain we're well over a year before we get to the csx yeah but i gotta sign a contract so that is typical with every csx crossing as part of every project we've done in the last 40 years you you can't get your permit until you're further enough along in the design to submit a permit but it seems like the and again maybe this is just blowing my mind because again i've been such a fan of the engineering of this and the and i've firmly bought in that this is a project that's going to be able to move the volume of water we need to move with a gravity system i mean you know you know we've had that private conversation i've been good at the engineering but that's under under the understanding that we have the capacity to move it all the way to the bay shore outfall if there's even a variable if there's any doubt whatsoever even if it's the smallest amount of doubt that we're not going to be able to have the same because part of the inconvenience that's going to be caused on south howard was the upsizing of the which i support the upside sizing these culverts to be able to move that volume of water but if if there's even this much doubt that we're going to have to funnel it through a smaller hole then maybe we're not going to realize the the return on digging this massive canyon to put these gigantic culverts in if if we're going to funnel it out so i we've got to close i think from my opinion just one person for my opinion we've got to close that doubt of what's going to happen with csx yeah i mean john good afternoon john's of mine that came as contracting let me see if i can help you this is going to kind of feel like the chicken in the egg a little bit um it always is the dot has a design standard similar to ft ot so they tell us you want to cross under our tracks this is what your parameters are this is what you have to do we've met those parameters they won't review our permit application until we pay them money to do the permit review our design is ready to go to them once they get approved we got approval for the project then we could pay it i think it's 25 000 they want to do their permit review but we meet all their design criteria that they show us they'll have us do things um want to do groundwater analysis what to do soil analysis they want to make sure their track's not going to shift during the crossing but we meet all the criteria for them to issue a permit they can't legally not issue the permit they can make it difficult which they tend to do it took us nine months on harbor island force main to get a permit from csx but we got it so in this case that's why you're chasing i can't tell you today we've got it our design meets all of their design criteria we've talked to them on the phone they tell us once you get the application fee into us with the money then we can start the review process and that'll start triggering soil borings groundwater analysis track settlement those type of things yeah i mean i hear what you're saying but i mean if there's if there's even within the universe that the answer could be no i mean it's a hundred million dollars i've never seen if you meet the dot criteria i've never seen them not issue a permit they make it difficult from time to time but they've never not issued one they can say why not just go for why not spend that money go for the permit and then come back and ask us for the contract um it's probably better can't hold the price it's like a nine month nine month deal we get the product why weren't we doing that nine months ago this is a pretty normal procedure to have the contract in hand before we that's a big gamble i mean even if even if it's a small chance that they say no that's a hundred million dollars is a lot of money to gamble with but a councilwoman her check of that can i just kind of put it in perspective for you with the so the southeast seminal high stormwater project is unfortunately near and dear to my heart um and they had to go under i-275 so same thing they had to wait and get permits um yeah and and it's it's one of those things that i mean obviously you sit on the tpo you know how impossible it is to get well you you weren't there uh when we were really fighting to get csx to talk to us about giving the tracks with with kimberly overman and all of that so i mean like we have fought csx is difficult but i know this is very similar to what we had to do for 275 because they didn't close down 275 they went under it and it was like it was wild it was very fascinating to watch um because quite a few of my neighbors couldn't get to their houses and obviously it wasn't a kimmon's project but it was a huge problem that uh nelson had to deal with but but it went under the interstate no one on the interstate got any like no traffic stopped but they had to we still had to get uh fdot approval to do it you know i i hear what i hear what you're saying again but it just maybe it's because it's coming as a surprise to me and i don't like surprises because this is not something that i was briefed on or understood understood so yeah i mean i so i get the well i mean we'll pivot from that for offline conversations because i sure i have about a hundred thousand more questions reference this issue alone i will say this we're batting a thousand we've never failed to get a permit from csx in any of the projects and i'm just you know i i choose not to go to hard rock because i'm not a gambler i mean i don't like losing money i i hate losing money um i have a couple of other questions like i said we can take i mean unless you feel like if i could answer a question it went in on the answer a minute ago you said you said why didn't we start this 99 months ago csx csx we can't because csx will not accept a 30 percent design for for a permanent application you have to be much further along for to submit that application and in addition to that um so once we finally get to the point where the design is further or far enough along to submit and we delay by months past the 90 day window from june from july 24th which is when the gmp was submitted subcontractors may not hold their prices and prices go up so i just want to make that point i i i understand that risk there as well um just a couple of other questions um and really just a couple the potential of change orders so this is a gross maximum price and again we're getting really close to that ratio what are what i know i heard that i heard during the public discussions this morning about core samples and shoring up walls of constructing this culvert is the is the shoring up of these walls including the gmp or is there a potential of a change order that could come through because you hit solid rock and you're not able to sink those shore structures i'm going to let john okay john's of mine at kms contracting um our price includes the shoring we are using a trench box it's the same trench box we use the upper peninsula and lower peninsula so i was a little confused this morning when they said we couldn't use a trench box so if you if you if you if you start tomorrow or whenever the hypothetical day of starting and you dig on south howard and you hit solid rock and you're not able to use the technology you thought of shoring will that involve a cost escalation and a change order because you anticipate did you didn't anticipate that in your gmp our gmp includes whatever is required whatever it takes whatever it takes whatever it takes to dig that trench to be able to install those culverts okay um how many hours a day are you guys going to work well typically we'll run seven seven thirty till three thirty four um i have a couple business owners along the route that have asked us to work some separate different hours maybe involve some night work to facilitate so you know typical monday to friday seven seven thirty to four thirty and so in your and i'm violating my own thing about going beyond the what we just talked about but because of the business mitigation aspect of this have you guys incorporated into your gmp an escalated work schedule on south the south howard business portion so even like a 24 7 schedule to be able to expedite the minimize the business interruptions we will you know as we as we develop the mot plans and start working and meet with the business owners if we need to do 24 7 we do 24 7. would that include a change order or cost escalation no sir okay and i think that's all i had uh councilman carlson i i want to ask you a couple a few questions um one of the things that's circulating still despite the fact that vick and others have explained this is the idea that council has somehow dealt the council has somehow delayed this project um as i recall we we delayed for two weeks a funding request a year or two ago but as i recall the um the idea for the gmp was that it was supposed to be available in october and now it's september so it seems to be early instead of late um just for the record uh has are there other council delays that i'm aware of or are we just on the project i to my knowledge council has never voted against anything on this um what what is is there anything that council um delayed i don't believe so uh brad baird uh administrator so just for anybody in the mayor's office or in the neighborhood who keeps saying that council has somehow delayed this please stop because they just said on the record that it's not um the other thing is we hear that this has been discussed for 10 years or 11 years who was that this that discussed that 10 years ago because i wasn't on council then um who was it that was discussing this was this yeah was this a plan that was started 10 or 11 years ago was it just a casual discussion that somebody had with the yes so so we're referring to internal because the stormwater improvement assessment was approved in 2016 it was first floated in 2015 where it was not approved and so prior to that of course we're working on project lists where our needs are where the consequences of failure are throughout the city um many more criteria were put into that sorry so you had a whole list of priorities was this project promised to anybody in the neighborhood in 2015 or 2016 do you remember um as a priority over i don't know about promise but remember what i said earlier about it started out as a parkland estates project and then we did have small six small yellow dots at the bottom of uh at the lower end of howard avenue and that that uh were flooding complaints adjacent to howard avenue and those over those 11 years combined to this project so do you think that do you think that did parkland have any uh greater expectation over anybody else on the list that their neighborhood would be prioritized over all the other list of all the other neighborhoods that flooded whether they had expectations that this would go first or so i don't think so so somebody says that the city or city council has been delaying this for 10 or 11 years would that be accurate or is it just that they happen to be on a list 10 or 11 years ago i don't believe so unless i mean was that was this project on the table that's a different answer sorry was this project on the table 10 or 11 years ago would somebody have to because i wasn't on council then i don't know did somebody delay it 10 or 11 years ago was it just on a list with everybody else i mean we certainly had complaints in parkland states there's no doubt 11 years ago 15 years ago we had complaints on south howard um but there there are probably you know there there's five places just in my neighborhood that flooded in these same hurricanes and people lost their houses and um uh the the city the mayor has not gone to visit those folks the the political director from the mayor's office has not gone to visit them the pr people have not gone to visit them um uh the lawyers and the engineers from the city haven't gone to visit them um there were more than 2 000 families that had serious effects to their houses and for some reason the mayor's office and all the staff seem not to be worried about all the other folks and and this is the problem is that we represent people throughout the city and we want to find solutions for this neighborhood but why is it why is it that the mayor's office is only spending their time on one or two neighborhoods instead of the other 20 or so neighborhoods just in south tampa that flooded not to mention east tampa and north tampa um i would categorize i would categorize those as smaller projects which we have done some in south tampa um we but for those folks they lost their houses they had water in their houses their pictures and videos are very similar water came all the way down the streets you know the area near concord a whole neighborhood was wiped out uh by several feet of water and uh other than a little maintenance they're they they're not on a list that has any hope of any kind of long-term solution correct well we i know that um you know the southeast part of bayshore beautiful had serious flooding in helene that was mostly storm surge as you know um i would let me jump back to to the original plan back in 2015 and 2016. um our chief engineer at the time prioritizes those large dots and those small dots and i keep referring to those we had we had five large dots about 100 small dots one of the large dots was was actually not a very large project it was only five million dollars but the other four were large projects um so he prioritized those and that's the order we did them when was the can you sorry before they cut me off when when i appreciate the detail but um when was the first time that that a configuration down howard came up on the plan is that idea 10 years ago because i have i have data going back to the 80s that shows that other recommendations were made you want to do that sure uh union star motor services director the south hovard project was fully vetted around i would say 20 after 2017 uh and brett mentioned about uh benches of smaller doubts and in fact we have targeted fix at six projects previously that uh was in part of our uh quarterly report this is a system but the route okay this is just identifying a problem area but the the idea of putting a a culvert or some kind of massive structure down howard when was the first time that that was proposed uh i think around 2020 2020 so again if somebody says that the city has been ignoring this for 10 years that's not true either because it's only uh at most been presented for six years would that be correct uh we spent about one half million dollars on the six targeted fix in the area but was not uh i mean the results we didn't see much we we still see the flooding happening during the regular summer storm so that's why we figured it we need a larger scale regional project to be able to build a trunk land so that we can tie the local system into this trunk land and send the water to the bay so that's where uh the south hovard project was what it developed so thank you and let me ask a couple other questions the um so so knowing that there's the the the topography of this has been known at least since the 80s that's the oldest documents i have but somehow houses were built in there in the 80s there was a recommendation by engineers um you know we say we trust engineers but there were there were recommendations by engineers to be on the corner i think it was um horatio and habana which is one of the worst uh there was a recommendation by the engineers to build a retention pond there and instead now we have townhomes there how do you all know how that was allowed was there any way that the city again i was on a council back then but it was there any way that the city could have stopped or told people the same thing happened on nights by the way and in bayshore beautiful um where an exception was given to allow five houses to go and what was what was essentially retention pond they all got flooded in these same storms why how did the city allow houses and townhomes to be built in places that that engineers had already identified were were flood zones because of the bowls uh the emi pond in fact was a part of the detention uh retention system that was recommended as part of the cleveland study and since then i think the original study you heard many times including council members mentioned about in late uh 1980s i think were originally studied by pbsj and then multiple studies have been uh conducted since then and one of the uh multiple one of the recommendation was a retention detention system and amf pond is basically a part of that the amf pond was built around 1990. so can i ask another um question related to that is um um in in parkland estates i'm told that there are houses that have been built just the last few years that have very little permeable space and they have they were required to put culverts underneath would someone have a reasonable expectation that an area is going to flood if they're required to build culverts underneath the house uh that's part of the uh construction review and and why wouldn't the city have required to have more important permanent area i also hear that some houses are considering now putting walls so that the flood will bounce off their walls and go into other their neighbor's yard so is that going to be allowed by the city is it wouldn't that wouldn't that exacerbate the flooding problems uh that's a very good question that's part of the uh citywide watershed master plan we are planning we are planning to revisit our technical menu i want to add you mentioned ami pond um when jean dugga was still here she showed an elevation i tried to find it just now and i couldn't but um the the corner i think it's habana and horatio the elevation is lower than the ami pond so how does the water get into the ami pond from from the bottom and i noticed on your map you all say there's no structural flooding but when jean testified before she said there will be minor flooding within the houses so if the flooding goes four inches instead of 18 people still have to replace their drywall and their floors and and their furniture that gets hit so um isn't that still a concern of how how we deal with the bottom of the bowl and problem the sea of pines because the ami pond is high elevation uh we do have an existing uh drainage system connecting to the ami pond and what say that again uh the existing drainage system existing but how does it go uphill you you talked about how the water goes downhill how does it go uphill into the pond it's it's uh by sheet flow pretty much it's what sorry uh by by gravity sheet flow um but how does it go up i don't understand that uh if the elevation of the corner of ratio and habana is lower than the ami pond how does the water get up into the ami pond uh it that's why the pawning is starting in that lower the lowest point someone this morning mentioned that the jewish retirement center you know i was the first person from the city in palmasia pines after the storm i called vic b day and the chief of staff from my car i toured the houses and we asked the city folks to get on and they did but as the neighbors were driving me around one of the things we saw is that it appeared that that pump station in front of the jewish retirement center was not working and it looked like it took maybe several weeks for it to be repaired do you have data that says that it actually was working because it seemed not to be working we do have records showing uh during the hurricane 2024 the ami palm palm station was working we do have record um and also just for the record there was debris everywhere from helene the the ditches had not been dredged out which of course wouldn't have captured all the water but it would have captured some and then there was debris from helene um also you you talked about the the all you all talked about the alternatives um uh i've had engineers look at the alternatives analysis you all say you've looked at 24 but it seems to be a very superficial experts say it's a superficial alternatives analysis usually when you're doing scientific method you start by identifying the problem then you do a big alternatives analysis and you narrow it down in this case it appears that the alternatives analysis was half-hearted and only done after the fact because somebody just wants this to go down howard i don't understand why um but uh you know why was not a why was a thorough alternatives analysis not done early in this process uh original study was done by gmt in 2022 i think they evaluate about 20 alternatives they treated every single alternative the same i do have a match so i've read through that and and many other folks have read through it and it just seems to be not very you know if you if you if you if somebody's given a brief then you know they end up with what they're asked to do while you're at it um one of the big questions were now in the alternatives analysis that we were presented more recently um big b day uh testified that that the main reason that that this alternative was chosen was because we could use the existing drainage underneath csx and at at bay shore now we found find that we can't use either one so why wouldn't we go back and redo the alternatives analysis to do a more a thorough alternatives analysis and look into the fact that that the main reason that this route was chosen is no longer valid uh besides we do have existing box cover that that we can save the time and money but also there are several other reasons because this alternative has no uh utility conflict many other alternatives there are uh there are many uh possibility that we have the structure uh utility conflict including the swan some people propose to let this water just go along the swan to the bay we do not have utility conflict and also we have the wide enough right-of-way by the city so we don't have to acquire additional easement or properties and and also um i think another way another thing that brad maybe yeah um but i'm not asking for the alternatives analysis now but considering that the primary reason that this one was chosen was because those two are available it seems to be invalid now and that we should go back and look re-look at the alternatives analysis but while we're talking about base short can i ask if i could councilman answer that question brad baird administrator the five by ten box that's in there now is in good shape it can be used it is the alternative that's in the gmp is in good shape it will be used if csx does not allow us to put an open cut ten by ten it will be used it's in good shape and then you're going to run into that bottleneck like you talked about earlier right but let me ask you about the outfall at bay short so so you all on coachman you know the coachman area which is another familiar bowl um uh there was a pump and the lean the lean pump was pumping water out and the pump did not fail the backup generator did not fail but it the pump did not have enough force to push the water out when the storm surge hit it so how is it that that a pump cannot push the water out during storm surge but somehow gravity is going to allow this to go down did you all really look at the pressure of an eight foot storm surge compared to the gravity of this going down it doesn't seem like it would only affect it seven or ten percent as i said earlier um the uh we did model that condition where the bay was at eight feet during hurricane elaine it only reduced the flow from 650 cubic feet per second to 600 if it flowed it would have flown during or flowed during helene very well why didn't the pump work and the pump from alene pump station as far as i know and i could get back with you on that it pumped just fine to the bay but why was there why was there flooding then it should have alleviated the flooding if if it was still working because it was running and the back of general was running but but it couldn't push out because of the pressure because it's a hundred year storm and it was eight feet high um another thing um several folks have mentioned the cleveland outfall um don't we have to replace the cleveland outfall anyway and repair it um how are we going to leave the cleveland outfall with with breaks in it that potentially flood neighborhoods i don't know of any breaks in the cleveland outfall the reason that cleveland was not uh used for this project or is not planned to be used for this project it's a three mile uh three mile length from the ami pond to cleveland and it's currently undersized but don't we have to replace it anyway and build a um a larger capacity for cleveland if we're gonna don't we have the question is not just about this project but don't we have to replace that anyway and any idea what that cost is going to be so there may be some point in the future when uh the cleveland system has to be replaced in part we're in whole but there's no plan for that i would also add that while we have not modeled it because this current system the ami pump as it stands right now pumps into cleveland redirecting that down howard will help to relieve some of that burden that is currently on the cleveland system two two quick questions um and i just not on yours um i have a and i apologize that councilman calls i have a 3 30 city call on something so just in three minutes i'll be coming up probably 10 minutes i apologize two two quick two other quick questions um and contrary to the the conspiracy theories being circulated i have no affiliation i've never had any affiliation with the south howard folks in fact if anybody googles it they'll see that i actually have had the contrary with them in the past but they have threatened multiple lawsuits that will delay this for years if if the engineering is perfect and you and the budget's approved it appears that litigation will hold this up for years why wouldn't the city try to avoid the litigation and find some solution because the ultimate thing as my colleagues have said is the neighborhoods deserve to be protected as soon as possible why would we choose a it's going to be three or four years at best before they see any protection um i've talked to again engineers that aren't being paid by the city say there are short term things that we could have done and should do to protect the neighborhoods i don't know why we haven't done those but knowing that the the there's going to be litigation that could slow this down for years why wouldn't we pick a faster path to try to help the neighborhoods this is a past presentation so i'm sorry some of this goes into the next part of the presentation can i just get an answer to that oh yeah then let's move on okay okay go ahead i would say people threaten to sue us on just about everything we do one more follow-up go ahead i just think in project management you know you have to look at all different risks and the threat of litigation is a very real risk that you have to look at i've worked on hundreds of the billion dollar product i never would have that that has so many questions that's more of a statement yeah questions um the the last thing is is um uh again how how is this prior considering your map of uh all the areas in south tampa the rest of the city that flooded you know at least 2 000 families um were displaced because of flooding um but we only have one solution the the biggest question that most people are watching want to know is how are we going to resolve flooding in their neighborhoods and why you know how does this work in with with what's happening with them why why is one neighborhood being prioritized we do need to prevent flooding there why is one neighborhood being prioritized over all the rest okay we'll let answer that question then i'm going to move on i would say that um i think we need to be careful about conflating design for hurricanes versus design for our design storm conditions that that this project is based on um just to help sort of manage expectations and for people to understand what this project does we did model what uh a what the impact would be of this project on a hurricane milton like event of course that is uh the most um prominent and it's something that that people have talked about in public comment it is in recent memory and we wanted to understand what what would the impact of our project be in that sort of a scenario but we did not design it for a hurricane milton we cannot design our storm water systems for hurricanes so it's we've got to be careful uh in how we represent what we're designing for but also assure people what the impact of that design would be yeah i just don't buy into that idea that we don't know what the new hundred year storm is going to be that's it um thank you i appreciate that clarity by the way uh councilman scott we're only halfway through the presentation no real quick to respond to what something he said okay so september 1st 2016 we passed the capital improvement assessment it was a thursday evening and with that i don't know if it was in the backup material but there's a master list it's 251 million dollars of the stormwater projects um and it'll say lower peninsula and you know it's broken up in categories it's color coded what i remember on that list was morrison was one of the projects i don't remember i mean i'm going off memory i may have the list somewhere it's been 10 years but i know that the city had broken down everything that they wanted to do citywide in that quarter of a billion dollar uh amount of money so i don't know if you have it i had it for a long time i have to find it but um brad baird administrator i i do have that list um and we could dig it out uh from 10 years ago um it was quite characterization in the community it was quite the extensive list um i guess only two of you were here uh for that boat but uh uh or maybe maybe councilmember viera was here as well you know i'd appreciate if you could uh email that to all of us all seven council members okay the package from that sure list so we can all see the same information at the same time okay um um mr bear can you continue with the presentation and we'll hold questions until you complete it i will then we'll go through a normal round of questioning two rounds of questioning after this end of the presentation if people should have further questions mr bear let me get to if i can remember where we were the south keep going keep going they're right there you go okay um thank you very much back room all right business assistance plan i mentioned up front this is one of the two things that that changed from january until now um the the biggest thing we probably did to mitigate uh impact to the businesses is is shorten up the construction zone this is comprised of 24 phases i do not recall in my career where we have shortened up the phases this much this is certainly a first at least for me the work will be limited to sections of about 400 to 600 feet at a time so that is huge and we will restore each of those sections close behind um as uh councilwoman her attack will tell you that that was our very top issue on southeast seminole heights we you know had um spread out restoration and it was a big it was a big issue so we corrected that we have a dedicated business support team kimmons will have a four-person team focused specifically on helping businesses stay open and accessible they will work directly with merchants to solve construction related issues including coordinating deliveries now this is important important now most of the deliveries come uh you know via the side streets we do have restaurants that that do currently take deliveries on howard and we will work with them to either move it to the side street or double handle those deliveries um where we have the equipment that can traverse the construction site um load that equipment up bring it to the front door and unload it again and again that will happen throughout the project um signs uh will be uh constructed to help drivers and customers navigate construction find find and find the businesses along the route um vibration monitoring now we we have done this on many many projects that i've been involved in um where you you monitor vibration and this is primarily um vibration associated with uh the restoration where you have vibratory compactors we will if necessary use static compactors as much as we can um and also uh you saw earlier you know there were renderings of sheet piling or z piling as caused it it's we will not be using that technology it's just simply too close to those buildings to vibrate in z piling and could result in vibration instead we're using a large transfer box as mr zemina outline we will document the buildings of course before work begins we have done this many many times as well and if there are existing structural conditions or cracks you put a crack monitor and then you check it on a regular basis to make sure that crack has not widened or moved or lengthened it um we will maintain pedestrian access and basically we will do whatever is necessary to get the pedestrians there with clear signage we will reduce construction noise heavy equipment will use newer osha backup alarms i personally don't like them because of my hearing but uh they uh will reduce noise in the area but um what you while maintaining a safe construction zone and then finally the soho so hoping uh the city's uh so open campaign will remind people that businesses are open during construction encourage the community to keep shopping dining and supporting them we will have help them with marketing um and anything they need uh via social media billboards advertising and marketing um and um any ideas that any of you have on that um i know um councilman carlson that's your business so we'll be uh we would love to hear your ideas on that um next slide um in addition you've heard uh about the street uh escape improvements it will result in an improved south hour corridor with wider sidewalks much like you see in other developments in the tampa bay area so that's just a ancillary benefit of this project addressing concerns you've heard a lot about maintenance maintenance alone will not solve this problem and in fact all the modeling that's done is assumed that the culverts are 100 clean ponds are 100 percent dredged out um and it still shows flooding um in those modeling efforts uh significant flooding so the city and the design uh build engineers have evaluated 24 alternatives including five uh recently from i mean five that the business alliance has provided um and then of course we've received two in the last uh two weeks as well um we've uh looked at those in detail and i will i will address the last one that was uh sent in uh in one of my future slides the added alternatives uh bottom line are more expensive less feasible even more disruptive in some cases less and in all cases less effective and in many cases much much less effective the proposed plan easily protects the families homes businesses better than any other alternative so from there i'd like to first hit on the three main alternatives that have been floated and then i will go to the business alliance um recent alternative so first i want to talk about the swan uh route uh that was brought up early on this route is is 30 percent longer and and let me back up a little bit i we've included a qr code um so you can uh take a picture of that code and go to the detail of this analysis but what i've done is we pulled up uh excerpts from those bullets as i i realize you won't be able to read it or especially the audience won't be able to read it i was going to ask you if dennis printed this i'm sorry i was going to ask you if dennis printed this for this for you no no no the the alternatives are so detailed that uh you know brandon came up with the idea of let's highlight the important one so everybody can read it um so it's 30 percent longer obviously if it's longer it's going to be a cost increase construction timeline could be extended by one to two years um and then finally and this one's big the northbound uh bay shore and davis island route uh or davis island lawn ramp would be closed for two to three months and that is to build the new outfall at that location and keep in mind there is no outfall at that location and then uh the next alternative that's been talked about quite a bit is uh the pond alternative and uh that would require 232 properties as a total of of well over 150 million in value for adequate space adequate space is equal to 70 acre feet of pond required this does not account for uh design or construction costs nor legal fees incurred by eminent domain proceedings so um in summary this this option is simply not feasible um and it would displace hundreds and hundreds of residents in these two neighborhoods and then finally um the pumping alternative has been uh kicked around and there's several several several alternatives uh that have pumping involved um if we were going to remove the amount of water associated with our design storm again that's 5.3 inches over eight hours a box culvert is still needed to bring uh runoff from palmacea pines down to parkland estates um a 10 foot diameter force main would still be needed with uh similar construction impacts you could um install that with a micro tunnel the micro tunnel would have to be uh 144 inches or 12 feet in diameter there are only two or three firms in the world uh that perform large micro tunnels including the one we did with harbor island interestingly enough um we uh took the information from the harbor island micro tunnel which was much much smaller um and i just lost my presentation um and we upsized that and uh put it to current uh dollars and it amounts to about 125 million to 175 million for this options so way more than the 10 by 10 box culvert and finally and most importantly you would never be able to tie in any future neighborhoods to the force main which you can with any gravity system that's proposed and now on on to the new soho business alliance alternative um many red flags jump off the page uh on this alternative and again we've only had a week to look at this but first and foremost does not achieve the project's flood relief goals it's 35 percent longer which means more construction higher costs longer runs through neighborhoods with very very likely results in tree removals relies on three vaults in pump stations and guess what those vaults uh would need to be 12 foot deep uh the construction of the ami vault is very problematic in that one we don't own it two it would require removal or demolition of that parking deck um so uh the hospital uh patrons and uh and doctors and and nurses would not be able to use that parking lot for some time um so you'd have to get their permission since they own it um and then if you look at uh the green line that goes just south of the ami vault and it goes due uh due south i believe that property is not owned by the city so it crosses property lines that city doesn't own and finally um we have csx conflicts if you'll see that um uh diagonal line toward the south that goes along the csx right away that is about 800 feet of pipeline that this engineer is proposing to upsize in my career csx has not approved a parallel pipeline next to their tracks it would very very likely not be permittable um and then as well as that um there's issues with there's issues with the csx crossing that i won't get into but to read more and get more detail on that please go to shstormwater.com and um read up on that and then uh i think last slide before my oh no second to last slide uh myth lack of maintenance is a real cause of flooding it is not as validated modeling and conditions show capacity is is the issue in fact all of our modeling as i said earlier assumes that those culverts are clean and and all the ponds are cleaned out well with every single storm you do have some debris small amounts of debris that remain behind in those culverts phase one does not address palmasia pines that statement could not be further from the truth phase one removes all structural flooding for the targeted storm in palmasia pines the proposed project takes too long to provide any relief um as i think one gentleman said this proposed project is the quickest way to provide flood relief is the shortest distance between these two neighborhoods and the bay and finally the city will use that eminent domain i think one of the charts showed that properties that we would encroach on no intermittent domain is needed the box can be built within the existing right-of-way real quickly because i know i know we've been here a while the construction schedule and i hope the audience can see that i know you can on your screen if this is approved on september 17th october 2026 we would issue a notice to proceed we would start utility relocation uh on november of 2026 um and bayshore boulevard triple box extension would start march of 27 after gasparilla and may of 27 the box cover would start on hat on south howard itself the csx crossing again is um is a more than a year out and it would happen in may of 2028 as currently shown in the gmp west morrison avenue intersection would be reached by february 2029 west swan avenue intersection in october 2029 parkland estates may of 2030 substantial completion september of 2030 and uh this picture that you've seen many many times can be a thing of the past um i won't go through every bullet but um i think the point was made several times this morning um yes it protects families it protects businesses but more than just structures more it provides access for the hospital for doctor's offices for assisted living for emergency vehicles so it is a health and safety issue for this area and with that i will either open it up for questions and i don't see dennis here or invite dennis up to provide his five slides of financial funding but um yeah oh here he is so it's your pleasure if you want to ask let's let's finish the presentation then we can combine because we're going to go very good rounds of questioning did you hear my question dennis earlier yes sir i think you can just hit this one and make sure you're here again good afternoon council dennis for harrow chief financial officer uh just a couple of uh opening remarks again if we could set the table again if council does decide to approve this project i just want to reiterate there are ample sources of available funding the plan you have today and the financial resolution that you have today uses only some of them what doesn't it use it doesn't use any community investment tax renewal funding okay we won't be doing it till the 17th by the way i'm sorry we're not taking any resolutions today it'll be the 17th understood understood but it's part of your it's part of your package i just want to understood understood uh no c no cit renewal again uh at various times we have discussed uh using some of that funding and there's ample funding again nearly about 200 million dollars just for transportation over the next 15 years but we've decided that the roadways and paving are a higher priority than using cit for this project i will note that again the funding plan that you have before you and the one we provided you august 10th doesn't include nor rely on any additional fdep funding we're still very confident that was and remains a very viable funding source but you'll recall there was some discomfort with the uncertainty associated with that grant and there's still uncertainty again i uh began this i think in january giving you no assurances on that funding and i still don't give you any assurances but we're very confident we're going to get a significant amount of funding from that grant but we don't need it for this funding plan you have right uh right in front of you as you've heard uh stormwater mr baird and myself say and i think uh brandon and juan we have many opportunities over the next coming years to continue to ask for increases to the existing grant and that's what we intend to do if i could have the wolf up i got a powerpoint for you is that what you want i'm sorry it looked like they had a powerpoint loaded for you oh is that the old one okay sorry and again this was distributed to council on the 10th of august nothing's changed just a refresh here design of course a little over 7.7 million dollars construction a little over 92.7 million dollars what has already been approved by outside organizations where applicable and by city council you see we're about halfway there 50.1 million dollars can you can you stop there i'm sorry yes sir i think that's a little misleading i don't want to go past that what's been approved as far as funding not for this project so this money is available but just not we haven't approved it for this project that is the next slide this funding has been approved by council for this project for this project yes sir okay great so we've already transferred that money for this project yes interesting and again about about 50 50 this is still requiring approval by again an outside agency that would of course be thea and city council for the project realignments and use of the 2006 cit debt and again one of the ways we are not reliant on that fdep additional funding is to add a request for stormwater improvement assessment funding of 25.9 million dollars full disclosure and we've discussed it there will be if we have to issue or if we have to use that 25 million in stormwater improvement assessment there will be a some interest costs associated with that the reason it's in this format of course is to come up with the total and show council and the public that you have uses of course the 100.4 million dollars we're discussing today and these sources which i've just identified for you one of the things i'd like to add this was belated but we thought it would be helpful you heard me just a little while ago talk about uh the funding that we anticipate over the next 20 years again this is a 30-year assessment we have 20 more years you've heard mr baird say you've heard me say it we have ample capacity in this revenue source for the additional funding for the south howard flood relief project again we've collected about 130 million dollars in the last decade we anticipate another 360 million dollars over the next 20 years again this is a 30-year assessment that'll bring the total at the end of this 30 years almost half a billion 490 million dollars as council knows we have bonded quite a bit of this funding we still have 205 million dollars of outstanding debt service over the next 20 years once we take care of that we have a potential funding picture you see in front of you right now that accomplishes a couple of things it keeps the recommended five-year cip static no change to what we've submitted to council it provides that 25.9 million dollars for south howard and again full disclosure if we have to take that debt out and again we we might not depending on the other funding it's about 9.3 million dollars of interest over that 20-year period leaving and you see at the top left there from fiscal year 32 to fiscal year 46 a little over 90 million dollars what's that translate to over 15 years about six-ish million dollars every year for pay go cip which is approximately maybe a little more than what it's averaged in the past i can answer any questions so dennis again i maybe it's me but the so if you go back so when you're looking at this slide it's 32 to 46. yes you got to go back and the real the other money that you have available we're paying interest on that as well can you go can you throw the other slide that you had up there with the existing money that's been allocated but not obligated oh yeah absolutely and i think that's the key to allocated not obligated it's available for use in this project but not obligated to use in this project that one let's see yeah yeah this is this is it yes um we're paying interest on everything but the grant yes sir we have already borrowed this funding yes yeah so that so we're paying interest on that too so that um i just want to make sure we're clear because that so what is that 29 30 31 something 30 yeah 31 31 million on that and then that's about right so there's 31 million dollars in bonds that we're paying interest on and then in addition to the other pie graph which shows another 25 million yes so that's 56 57 million dollars of borrowed money that we're paying interest on and further to that i mean you haven't asked for but we can provide the interest associated with with those items too because 21 was lower interest rates i guess 23 would have been lower interest rates from day two yes okay so that that's that's a good point that's a good point thank you um councilwoman her tech uh so how this is what we're going to do are you finished with your presentation now is that i just one uh just one final comment and of course this pie chart was provided well councilman her tech has one question i just have one question on this so if you if you could put the slide back up please pie chart yeah no no no this this one so the lower peninsula reallocation um how much in fdep grants did we win for that lower peninsula project i don't think it was fdep but uh there we uh uh you at least the motor service director 25 million dollar from fdep okay so so it was a 25 million dollars so because we got the 25 million dollars we basically got that 21 and a half but it's still borrowed money well yes but we had to borrow it because we hadn't gotten the grant yet it's still cheaper than if we borrowed it today councilman carlson do you have another question or do you want to wait until he finishes with the presentation he can finish okay and then we'll go to round one for five minutes if i could have the wolf oh it's already up yeah just uh again we thought this would be a helpful visual aid to counter the continuing misinformation that this additional improvement assessment funding depletes the improvement assessment funding for the next 20 years obviously you know obviously it does not that's it's all i'm sorry it's helpful okay thank you is that it yes sir you're done okay council so this will be round one five minutes council macross yeah just quickly a statement to the uh the so-called um uh alternative analyses it's what i call afterthought justification when you decide what you want to do then you do an analysis to prove your point i could go through each one of those and and easily pick out what's wrong with the the model of the analysis but i won't waste time right now but we need we should have done an honest alternative analysis at the beginning of the project but dennis could i ask you please mr harrow the um this the pie chart could you put it back up please yes sir so we're almost to 2027 so between 2027 and 2032 this is the question that all the other neighborhoods in tampa that flood after every rain want to know um between 2027 for 2027 through 2032 how much money is there left in this fund that we can spend in their neighborhoods from 2027 to 2032 there will well uh it's the uh 30 million dollars in the uh fiscal year 27 to 31 cip pay go it's what's in the recommended budget right now so that but that those are already allocated to certain projects so the projects that have not been allocated how much more money is there that we can so the people that the people whose areas flooded if they're not in the cip they fled this their their houses flooded there were rivers of water through their houses and in maybe 20 different areas just in south tampa not to mention new tampa east tampa west tampa their families were upended they had to leave their houses they had to go back and rebuild and now there's no protection for them the city has not even done maintenance in their areas what hope do they have for a solution when it when will there be money in this fund that they that we can use to find solutions if they're not in the cip understood in the next five years not withstanding this fought the five-year cip and not withstanding any projects that have already been bonded would be very little funding maybe some uh fun balance so the what the what the opposition said maybe not as precisely true but that 26 million could have been spent through 20 different neighborhoods to try to relieve uh flooding um i'm not saying we should or shouldn't do that but but if the purpose of this slide is to prove that this doesn't take away from from other neighborhoods the reality is that it does in the short term because people flooded um in helene and milton they're just getting back in their houses now and houses throughout the city and there's no hope for those folks the folks in these two neighborhoods are hoping that this will go through even though it's proven that this won't uh prevent all the flooding um even after it's done and um but the folks in the other neighborhoods that were flooded whose houses were completely swamped with water they have no hope whatsoever again that would be a prioritization issue for the department yes sir okay anybody else for round one councilwoman young okay so um i'm looking at so each of these uh for the projected costs and it has where you know the amounts of money um for each these are each like different buckets of money right that will be used for the 92 million yes ma'am so my question is for so you have a stormwater improvement assessment fund uh 31 291 so for each of these um buckets would you be able to tell me how much will be left in it after this amount is taken out after the amounts are taken out i believe are you referencing the resolution yes ma'am uh if i'm not mistaken none we are depleting them you said we're depleting we're depleting them yes okay so with that being said la i think maybe the last meeting we had and you put and you had put up um there was a slide that was put up of projects that had been either completed or canceled um for the south highway project i'm sure we heard in a public comment today about one of those projects being the 56th and broadway which i did myself um my legislative aide brandon campbell saline and also um person who made public comment today fran tate we all met that was in on august 25th so if that if from what came out of that meeting is there's a possibility that we could probably still have a conversation with with the landowner to get the easement to do that stormwater project so in the event let's say we talk with that you know business owner and they say yes you know we will grant you all this you know we could go forward with the project would there be money to do that project there would not there's a one a little over one million dollar balance and that is we are requesting reallocation of that to this project if i could add to that so again brandon campbell mobility director that one million plus uh a little bit that's in that project account is being moved uh within the resolution that you all have in front of you uh as we spoke there was no path forward with that particular project um if there was a new path forward we could re-engage and we'd be happy to to talk to a new property owner or however that new path happened to open up and the money that is in the pie chart that mr o'hero showed that 30 million dollar allocation to the next five years of cip uh i believe we'd be able to find some um opportunity within that allocation uh to to refund that project there we go thank you we could have the wolf up please yes so it may be a it may be that we need to reallocate or move some money around within the cip as shown here if it's not here then of course that 90 million that uh mr rogero showed in the whatever color that was the the big slice would be a potential target for us to fund a new path forward on that particular project okay so here's my i guess dilemma because in one sentence you said we'll be depleting everything and then you say but we will have it so which which one is it will we be depleting the funds or will there be funds available we are and and again maybe uh maybe one of us is misunderstanding your question all funding available and i use that 56th and broadway project as an example all funding available in that project right now we are depleting for the south howard relief fund as the director just said however if there was an opportunity to re-engage on that project that's one of the reasons i wanted to put that cip up you see there's about 30 million dollars over the next five years in the pago cip and then you've seen the capacity still that remains over the next 20 years and i believe those were the funding sources he was discussing yes that's correct i would also add that design effort could be pursued in-house as well without having to tap into the cip so whatever design that we've got i know we did at least some concept development if we need to advance that with in-house the in-house team we do have some capabilities that we could use without having to require some additional budget to be allocated specifically to that so if this this south howard project was approved if it came back and it was approved i just this is my last question okay if it you know comes back on the you know the 17th and it's approved we go and talk with the business owner and they say yes um we would still be able to move forward with their project wouldn't wait until 2030 or whatever we would not necessarily have to wait until 2032 and i think there are it's being a smaller project i think there are opportunities that we would have with our existing capital and operating funds to not excuse me let me restate that with our existing capital funds to pursue that project manascafa no miranda no her tech no council mccarlson do you have any questions i just have a couple observations and some things on ious i'd like to have from you guys yes um one obviously i think the csx culvert issue i need to have additional information on understanding that better and having better assurances um because i i agree with council mccarlson i distinctly remember mr v day when he was in talking about this route because of the advantages of the csx crossing and the culvert being there one of the reasons why this was a preferred route so i think that that being said i think uh i would also like to see have you guys done any modeling with this proposed bottleneck reference to flow rates um so understanding that if we're using the existing if if we're stuck with the five five by ten if what that flow rate looks like and how that impacts versus if we were just doing five by tens all the way up powered and also you don't have to answer me now i'm just i can so let me finish let me finish things you may be able to pile it all together so uh modeling but they're just five by ten and whether we would just be using five by tens all the way powered and also modeling if you're able to get access to doing the tunneling for the 60-inch tunneling or if we're able to do the complete you know project which i guess your modeling already shows but if you're able to go underneath the csx with the full 10 by 10 culvert as i'm sure that's what the modeling currently shows the modeling currently shows uh the two pipes side by side the five by ten plus the additional micro tunnel pipe so it's oh so okay so that's maybe that's where i've missed it because i thought when you had the two side by sides it was two five by tens no so uh the alternate that has been proposed would only be an efficiency add would only be a timeline reduction would only be a cost reduction so we're confident we can we can accomplish the project as proposed so if csx gives you permission to rip up the tracks and put it in it will cost less than the micro tunneling correct fascinating okay interesting um so a couple of other things change orders some assurances because again you know running the math i spent all weekend running the math we're getting really close on that ratio so and i think one of the things we have to protect ourselves are for potential change orders how do we protect ourselves i need a good breakdown on how we're protecting ourselves from potential change orders which would end up making this project cost prohibitive you know that we end up the the benefit would the cost would outseed the benefit so i'd like to figure kind of talk to you have a conversation with you guys how we're protecting ourselves from that maybe kevin's as well i don't know i went and i do would like to say i have 100 confidence in kevin's i mean i know they've been great partners with the city and they've been able to do some really good projects in the city and i i mean so any kind of conversation i have it should reflect badly because i think kevin's has been an amazing partner for the city so i'm very happy that we have them working on this project and it provides a little bit of comfort for myself on the positive side i just want to make sure people what i've observed in this project and i had this conversation with staff as well to reconfirm because it's something an observation i independently came to but then confirmed it with them that the benefit of this phase one doesn't have the biggest benefit and while we're still in a positive variance where we're still we're still able to reap a reward for phase one if we don't have any real true cost escalation where it's the cost benefit is still positive we're really going to reap the war is if sometime we can we can get phase two because the ratio really grows tremendously on phase two of the benefit that we derive from that that being said we can't get to phase two unless we have phase one and so you're not able to get to phase two which is where we get the most benefit unless we have phase one and i think and it's and it's definitely in the science about tying this project in on phase one and having the future for the again after i'm gone dead daisies are growing on my grave some other council will be able to sit here and expand this this project if you have to have that um but i still got to resolve those other issues before i can get to this definitive yes on this um that being said the last thing i'm going to leave us with as far as my observation is our policies on construction and storm water need to be re-looked at this is a really good example councilman's calico council miranda both hit on this hard the growth and growth in building the city of tampa accommodating a half inch of rain is not is not where we are in moving into 2027 climate change is real we're we're having to shed much more water than we've ever thought we'd ever going to have to shed again so as we knew as we approve new projects we're going to have to look at our storm water mitigation more closely and identify ways to be able to if they cannot accommodate the water they need to pay for future infrastructure to accommodate moving that water off of their properties okay councilwoman her tip um well you'll have to see if the state will let you do that yeah exactly i mean the state won't let us do anything yeah well that's that that's part of the issue and uh you know we've debated that a lot in the evening sessions is how do we talk about storm water and i have actually brought that up with with staff and it's not gone where i wanted it to go but um so i you know to talk about those the questions of overruns can can you can one of you remind me about nelson and the southeast seminal height stormwater project if i remember correctly they lost a ton of money on that project we didn't what were the overages like i don't think we paid overages brad bear administrator infrastructure and mobility i do not have those numbers with me i do not believe we came in under budget but i can get back with you on that okay yeah because if i remember correctly we approved that budget right before costs skyrocketed we did and so we won out big time um comparatively and we did yeah we weren't they didn't do any change orders because we didn't because that was a guaranteed maximum price isn't that correct yes that is correct so as i recall and i'll have to verify this for you but um we came in under budget but over time okay if you remember okay thank you so just to just to clarify before i get to councilman carlson i just want to have some assurances with staff and we can have this offline how we're protected in this contract from change order you know that would greatly increase the cost of this if we have we've anticipated as much as we could possibly anticipate to anticipate to avoid that yeah i and i think i said this last time yeah that it's a great question so we do have an owner's contingency and we have a contractor's contingency and um i believe the uh one's five percent and one's three percent and i'm not sure yeah one five one's three um and that's exactly what that's for okay um and i will remind you that in each of the kimmons uh large contracts that we've had uh lower peninsula upper peninsula and then we've had of course other projects um if i'm not mistaken all have come in under budget that's why kim this is a great partner councilman carlson yeah i just want to follow up on and say the same thing um out of all the projects i've seen kimmons do there are only two that i've ever had any complaints about and one of neither one of them have started yet and one of them is the red lights on franklin street which harbour island a bunch of people are against and then there's this one the other ones they were very complicated complex process and you know john's in the room he's highly praised by the community neighborhoods um and and so the community has has great confidence in them um brandon yuan they're out in the community they answer tough questions that the the you know the staff is liked so the question is why why these two projects are so controversial what you typically do scientific method is you go in you analyze a problem you build consensus in the community around the problem then you analyze possible alternatives you build consensus to an understanding about the alternatives and then you you start leading to like a few shortlisted alternatives and you build consensus around that and then you build consensus around a final solution and what happened in this case is that the city skipped a bunch of steps and and decided that that it was a um that this was the right route by the way it's no coincidence that a whole bunch of people from the department quit at the time this project was launching and i've had in-depth conversations with them and i think part of it is that the mayor's office got involved they politicized everything when the mayor decides that she wants to do something and it's the right solution when she's convinced of it she's not an engineer either but when she's convinced she doesn't back down just like on those um on those two red lights it's it's insane that the city would use so much political power and energy and create such a divisive environment i mean she held meetings in on harbor island without without including the neighborhoods association leaders and on this stirring up trouble in the neighborhoods now there's some some people in the neighborhood who are causing trouble too but the um the the issue is that the mayor's office is is stirring up a lot of a lot of problems and troubledness of all the neighborhoods that flooded in south tampa nobody is is complaining like this no there's no hand wringing on it everybody the these other neighborhoods have no chance of getting any kind of solution whatsoever there's they're not in the budget they're not in the plan and they're sitting there patiently waiting you don't hear them uh you know you don't see them sending us the kind of nasty emails we've gotten on this project so there's something happening where the mayor's office maybe combined with a couple people in the neighborhood have turned this into a divisive issue it shouldn't have been this way we have real people whose real lives were affected by this there should have been consensus built in the last couple years this should have been a no-brainer instead there are a lot of questions a lot of doubt and and a lack of trust throughout the whole community on this and there needs to be a way to hit reset on it thank you councilman miranda thank you thank you chairman in fact bretta i'm sure that you're aware of that most of the all these companies that do business with the city of tampa this type of process have to have a bond that they will guarantee the job at certain times for a certain amount of money and we've had defaults in the past where the insurance company picks up the only problem we have is that we can't pick the contractor they bring their own contractor in to finish the job am i correct yes you're correct um we we have defaulted uh several contractors over the years as you know uh we've uh defaulted three just in the last five years um and um i defaulted quite a few early on when everything was designed bid build um we do have two bonds if i could one is performance influence payment make sure the subs get paid and we are very strict i'm making sure that it happens and i'm sure that's not going to happen here but i just had to bring it up to the public field that they are protected to the degree that it is somebody won't be wasted it is thank you very much okay okay if i don't have any of the questions i think we're anybody else i'm going to close out this segment and we're going to move on to as we've finished our business up to today remember there are no votes today this was information we have now two weeks to talk to staff to gather further information um and then we'll come back on the 17th and that would be the day that we will go to the project board or to not anyway going once going twice okay that concludes our regularly scheduled program thank you council yeah thank you council yes oh yes city council attorney just to confirm with the clerk um do we need a motion to continue this i didn't think so so plenty of them items number 30 okay so we are we are going to hear items 36 37 38 and 39 on september at the regularly scheduled city council meeting on september 17 i've got one here what am i doing no i mean i'll do the same i don't need two colors okay so uh we have completed we're done right okay good so let's go to new business councilman carlson enough for council but no you know anyone else councilman vera all right thanks one and councilman clinton and i don't know how you felt about this gil schisler um who's on the heart board is i think he's termed him as a temple terror city councilman and you know he's been such a great champion for transit i thought it'd be great if off-site we could give him a council commendation that's a great idea yeah he said he's a good dude he's a great guy so that's my only motion and all facility anybody who wants to come to all that to be determined off-site we have a motion of councilman bureau second councilman manaskalco all those in favor say aye aye thank you that's it thank you council councilwoman young um i already mentioned it earlier but just because it was uh submitted um in writing to all of you all um i actually did have a meeting um with fran tate with brandon campbell with miss lee to talk about the 56 and broadway project that was on august 25th we met right here in the sister cities room so just because if you're gonna you know submit something on record and write it down we're gonna you know give the truth um also um i attended a few things um i went i was at the buffalo soldiers monument unveiling which was fantastic if you haven't seen the monument it is very very very nice so and it was very well attended um also um you know it's not necessarily um city of tambor but you know our last cra meeting said we would have the house have a meeting regarding jackson house and that did happen and we're continuing conversations with that just to keep you up to date on that we all were at the urban well most of us were at the urban reworks groundbreaking which was very well attended and very well received by the community so i'm very excited to see their projects to come online and then yesterday i also went to a grand opening of uh d rose gastro bar in ybor city which was very nice um very nice also um attendance as well so oh and then the derrick brooks charities community police community policing and relationship meeting where we have um youth that are on the call from all over the county in um i think middle school and high school to talk about how you know students and how do we um you know have better relationships with police and it was a great conversation so that's all mr chairman i forgot one small thing if i may go ahead just reminder to council members those of you all who haven't gotten your names to my office for the veterans board please do what whenever whenever y'all can and we i have yours and i want to see if i may councilwoman young on the comment that was made you're awesome and it's it's i don't hate the player i hate the game so it's okay that's all you're all right that's all in her tech uh yes i have a request by the planning commission to remove tacpa 26-03 and tacpa 26-07 from the september 24th 2026 adoption hearing second motion councilwoman her tech second council of year all those in favor say aye aye opposed i said it um and on a personal night i just want to thank uh the public i want to thank you all um y'all have been just like overwhelming with uh you know thoughts and prayers and good news and good or just you know best of luck and uh all the flowers i think we're gonna have to fill kelly's car today um so i just i just want to say thank you to everyone um you know it it means a lot and i feel very supported and uh you know it's a new normal but uh but i really do appreciate it i appreciate everyone wearing the ribbons today um so uh i just wanted to make a big blanket thank you even though i'll have to do some more um you know personal ones but uh it's just it's meant a lot and i really appreciate it you've been in our thoughts councilman i've been praying for you every day actually every morning that's when i pray and you're going to be okay and i'm going to keep on praying councilman miranda yes sir thank you chairman i'd like to make a motion to have chuck garden general manager tampa bay water present an annual presentation at the october 1st meeting if possible how's that like did you look at the schedule is it good pardon me are we good on the schedule hi i'll be honest with you it's my mistake we're full can i make that's only two this won't take about a couple of minutes oh that's right yeah okay so we need to do do you need a motion to remove that or are you just going to remember okay so then then it's available okay so i have a motion from councilman miranda second from councilman to scott but i hear that all those in favor say aye aye opposed i'm also going to turn in my electric bill that solar does work it was 15.69 i'm going to start i'm going to start sending my electric will second can we just i just want to ask t and i if they can look at our mics uh over the next week because the the reverberation's gotten worse it's not better yeah speaking of which council miranda's mentioned this to me a hundred times and it's referenced people are staying at the podium and they don't realize that mic is is is inside is it possible to put a physical mic there so people actually see the mic and speak and we can put two so they actually see the mic and they speak into it that might be worth pursuing can i make one councilman across since i can't talk to you about this outside it can you ask chuck harden to mint to talk specifically whatever he wants to talk about but also specifically talk about the new sources of water and the and the demand that um that they've negotiated with the city just so that we as we get into droughts if droughts are going to be more likely in the future then i'll have him call you about that okay all right thank you yeah no problem are you done yes sir councilwoman young i forgot i also went to a big fest which was in sofa springs at river tower park which was put on by camille adrian from indian or market it was a celebration of all of the small black businesses that are in tampa and it was a three-day event and it was fantastic y'all she always does a fantastic job so i had to put that out there i'd hate to have those big best people come after you because you forgot them councilman no no yeah okay chair okay uh let's see a couple of a couple information that i have one motion um the as you are aware that we're in the budget season the city council budget is kind of odd um i'm going to spend the next few days going through it uh there's some misinformation out there about how these budgets work how council office budgets work um how council's general budget works i'll have more information the next time we meet which would be our budget hearing i'll brief everybody at least what i find i've been talking to our uh our finance folks and mr shelby and our budget analysts about it and i'm only probably about 10 percent into where where we need to be to get i just wanted to bring that to your awareness of of what i'm looking into and if you guys have any thoughts if you'd email your thoughts to me i won't reply could you be more specific well there's okay so i think we've gone from small time small city to big city mentality and and how we deal with the city side of the budgets one there's a there's been a misunderstanding and misconception that budgets roll over they don't oh they do now you've got more information they do and they don't yes they do and they don't how's that so we we got i've got to clarify that um we've got to clarify that how the budgets are allocated between offices and the general council funding how we're paying for support like if we have like councilman carlson had the you know um temporary help come in or we've had that councilman beer i think we have some temporary help too and how we're paying for that how the budget works so i think we have to really pin down some very specifics of how we handle our budget for council and the high high cost of plaques we should have we should have an office sorry i just had to i couldn't let that go you know who used to get on me with that because i've been doing this thing for 10 years frank reddick remember if we don't yeah he used to always get on me for that so you're not the first so i mean that's just something that's out there i i again i've kind of taken a bite of this i don't know if we'll have to fight in 2027 councilman right yeah you're one you're part of the problem so i don't want to hear from you i just want to make you feel good i don't know i i've been chairman a few times and when i was chairman the whole budget for city council for the month was nine hundred dollars so the whole thing notification you can go to you could go to i used to be able to buy a loaf of bread for five cents well you're old enough well you know you're partially correct you're partially correct uh so uh that's that that's kind of where i'm at on that just i wanted to give against your information the other thing is those of you do not know the charter review commission has finished their work as a committee they wrapped that up this week um now the uh our attorney for the charter review commission is uh putting that language that they've adopted into legalese we're still working on a process of how that will come to us also know that the city council will have be able to move things forward as well um mr shelby am i missing something there we'll be able to reassess and report back i this is it's going to by the way um with regard to the uh council for the um crc uh when the commission ends its work which it has there's a phase two which allows him now to do work for the council city council right and we have to look to make sure it may require a budget amendment to allow that to happen that may be coming to council shortly and that was going to be my next statement is that we've run out of legal money so we'll have to we'll have to supplement that which is the is it's the administration's responsibility to provide the funding for for the charter for the charter for legal staffs but we'll have to do that have the we'll have to have the administration initiate that budget amendment to be able to accomplish that and all they need is the green light from me to the legal department right and they're anticipating that they are yeah so okay uh that being said this is a good segue i would like to one i i said it to um ashley morrow thank you for appointing her she was the chair uh we appointed her as a member she became elected as the chair of the committee um and all the members of the charter review commission that we appointed including the administration they did some really good work i would like to make a motion to provide accommodation to the crc from the city of tampa city councils on a date to be determined uh on site here when they make their presentation to council okay i have a motion from chair i have a second from councilman miranda um all those in favor aye okay that's one for each one yes correct yes exactly yeah that's a nice picture yeah yes ma'am i have a correction for october 1st i went back and reviewed last week's uh meeting there looks like it was a mix-up with staff between two motions so there is actually three most uh accommodations for october 1st the third one is the accommodation that council member young made for less miller oh okay well are you talking about the garden deal how about uh what is it november 9th or something like that no um november 5th i don't know another date there in case that wasn't acceptable november 5th okay never fifth okay so a motion to amend that previous motion i'm talking from okay we have motion from councilman miranda second councilwoman her tech all those in favor say aye aye aye opposed eyes have it any further business any new business mr shelby martin shelby city council attorney some housekeeping matters with regard to the national natural resources advisory committee as you know you've passed the resolution to make the appointments but just in housekeeping i'd like to ask council to remove file number 20 2026-48 for a resolution relating to nrac membership that's scheduled to come on november 17th that's moved at this point please so moved i have a motion from councilwoman her tech second council miranda all those in favor say aye aye opposed eyes have it mr shelby and to complete um the cleanup on that i'd like council to rescind the august 6th motion that appointed alternates when there was no provision for that to be able to be done i have a motion from councilman bureau second from councilwoman young all those in favor say aye aye opposed eyes have it thank you council and mr chairman uh i'm sure you want to remind the public of the budget meeting that's coming up at 5 0 1 p.m on tuesday i didn't but you did thank you councilwoman on that note that is actually because monday's a holiday that will be my second day of chemo so the chances of me um participating virtually are going to be pretty high okay so just a little fyi very good anything else can i motion receive and follow motion of councilwoman councilman miranda second councilman vera all those in favor say aye aye opposed eyes have it we are adjourned