Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


TAMPA CITY COUNCIL

Thursday, September 23, 2010

9:00 a.m. Session

DISCLAIMER:

The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied upon
for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.


08:53:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: City Council will now come to order.

09:05:49 The chair will yield to honorable Gwen Miller.

09:05:52 >> Good morning.

09:05:53 It is my honor to have our special guest for the

09:05:54 invocation, pastor Antonio Hawkins, currently serves as

09:05:57 senior pastor of Abiding Faith Alliance Church, whose

09:06:08 ministry was founded in 2004. Under his ministry and

09:06:08 leadership, Abiding Faith Alliance membership has grown

09:06:10 over 200 in the past six years.

09:06:12 Pastor Hawkins is a member of the greater Tampa Bay

09:06:16 Ministerial Alliance in which he serves as

09:06:19 vice-president.

09:06:20 Pastor Hawkins attended Florida Agricultural and

09:06:27 Mechanical University, which is known as FAMU, as well

09:06:32 as St. Petersburg college where he majored in

09:06:34 elementary education.

09:06:36 He has taught at both Oak Park and West Tampa

09:06:42 elementary schools. Pastor Hawkins is the father of

09:06:43 two daughters and one son. He is the son of Wilhelmina

09:06:43 Johnson who served as director of nursing for the

09:06:46 Deeper City Health Care Center and James Johnson who

09:06:49 served as production manager.

09:06:53 Pastor Hawkins and his family have always been

09:06:56 supportive of government in our community and have

09:06:58 always served the City of Tampa, and please stand with

09:07:05 me and remain standing to welcome him.

09:07:18 Let us pray.

09:07:20 We come the best we know how first to tell you thank

09:07:22 you.

09:07:23 Lord, we thank you for this opportunity to approach you

09:07:29 through grace and we ask you now that you would endow

09:07:32 wisdom and understanding upon those who have been

09:07:34 selected to lead and represent this great city.

09:07:37 We ask you now that you would bless every speaker that

09:07:40 shall come forth, that this meeting shall be run in

09:07:44 decency and in order according to are divine purpose.

09:07:49 We will be so careful to give your name to glory and

09:07:53 the honor.

09:07:53 In Jesus' name we pray.

09:07:55 Amen.

09:07:56 (Pledge of Allegiance)

09:08:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Roll call.

09:08:14 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.

09:08:17 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Here.

09:08:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.

09:08:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

09:08:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.

09:08:24 >>> Here.

09:08:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have one memorandum from councilman

09:08:34 Curtis Stokes.

09:08:35 Please be advised they'll be late for the City Council

09:08:37 meeting on Thursday, September 23rd, and I will




09:08:43 arrive about 9:30 a.m.

09:08:45 Thank you very much.

09:08:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Good morning.

09:08:49 Before you, you have the addendum to today's agenda.

09:08:53 The addendum is lengthy but the addendum is relatively

09:08:56 brief.

09:08:57 Items number 60 and 76 on your committee reports are

09:09:03 going to be declared conflict of interest by two

09:09:06 council members and therefore items 60 and 76 will both

09:09:10 require recording separate votes to record their

09:09:14 abstaining.

09:09:15 Item 106 under staff reports, a request by Elaine

09:09:24 Mallory from moving Hillsborough forward to reschedule

09:09:26 the presentation to October 7th at 10:30 a.m.

09:09:30 Item 108, Cynthia Miller, director of growth management

09:09:34 and development services is requesting a continuance to

09:09:37 October 21st, 2010, under staff reports and

09:09:41 unfinished business.

09:09:42 Item 114 is council's rules of procedure.

09:09:46 I am going to -- when that item comes up -- be

09:09:50 presenting a substitution that has very minor changes

09:09:53 to it which I would like to explain to you when I take




09:09:56 up that item.

09:09:56 And for the afternoon, two items.

09:09:59 Item 116 and item 118 both scheduled for 1:30.

09:10:04 The first one being at 2301 North Dale Mabry.

09:10:10 That is going to be requesting a continuance to

09:10:12 November 4th, 2010.

09:10:14 That's 10-314.

09:10:17 Item 118 related to property at 2718 north 40th Street,

09:10:22 an appeal of the VRP decision, you have received a

09:10:25 memorandum from assistant city attorney Ernest Mueller

09:10:28 stating the appeal cannot be rescheduled again because

09:10:30 of a misnotice, and that at the time this matter is

09:10:33 taken up the appeal will be deemed automatically

09:10:35 denied.

09:10:36 Council, I am not aware of any other additions,

09:10:39 deletions or changes to today's agenda, and I present

09:10:42 it to you for your approval.

09:10:43 >> Move approval.

09:10:46 >> Second.

09:10:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion on all the changes.

09:10:50 All in favor?

09:10:52 Opposes?




09:10:54 Okay.

09:10:58 Thank you very much.

09:10:59 At this time we will take public comment, if you wish

09:11:02 to address council, we will take those persons first

09:11:04 with items on the agenda.

09:11:06 If you are here for items first on the agenda, you may

09:11:09 come forward at this time, state your name and address

09:11:11 for the record.

09:11:12 You have three minutes.

09:11:13 Items on the agenda.

09:11:18 Okay.

09:11:18 >>> Good morning.

09:11:24 My name is Patrick, I live at 709 south Delaware

09:11:28 Avenue.

09:11:31 Correct me.

09:11:32 This is a public comment period for the entire day, you

09:11:36 make your public comments.

09:11:38 Is that correct about that?

09:11:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: With the exception of those items set

09:11:41 for a push hearing F.the item is set for a 9:30 public

09:11:44 hearing then the time to make those comments will be

09:11:46 when that hearing is opened.




09:11:47 >>> Okay.

09:11:49 Then I'll wait.

09:11:50 Thank you.

09:11:59 >> My name is Elena Coates, 3604 West El Prado

09:12:00 Boulevard, here in reference to item 14, the renaming

09:12:11 of Gadsden park.

09:12:12 I wanted to thank the council and wanted to thank the

09:12:14 Parks Department, Karen, absolutely wonderful working

09:12:21 with me.

09:12:22 I don't know what I would have done without them.

09:12:24 And Lori.

09:12:25 They guided me through every step of the way and kept

09:12:27 me informed on everything.

09:12:29 So I really wanted to extend my thanks to all of you

09:12:32 for the renaming of the lake.

09:12:37 And in honor of merchant who died on a parachute

09:12:42 accident on that lake.

09:12:43 So thank you very much.

09:12:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else?

09:12:52 Any items on the agenda wish to address council?

09:12:55 If you wish to address council you may come forward,

09:12:57 any other item or anything else.




09:13:00 Okay.

09:13:00 I assume not.

09:13:01 Then we'll move forward with our agenda this morning.

09:13:03 Anyone who wishes to request a reconsideration on a

09:13:06 legislative matter?

09:13:10 Request on legislative matter?

09:13:12 Seeing none.

09:13:13 Then we'll move to the first item on the agenda.

09:13:17 Item number 1.

09:13:19 Councilman Mulhern, do you want to take that item?

09:13:27 Do you want to add something to it?

09:13:29 >>KAREN PALUS: Parks and recollection recollections

09:13:36 director.

09:13:36 Regarding item number 1, that is a request for the

09:13:41 ordinance revision.

09:13:42 And it was a request that was a great granddaughter,

09:13:51 the property donated to us in 1927, adjacent to the

09:13:55 Rivercrest Park.

09:13:56 She came forward about a year or so ago to determine

09:14:01 which property it was.

09:14:02 We were able to work with her.

09:14:05 She could not be here in support of this but it's




09:14:07 something that's very solid in her heart and she

09:14:11 appreciates council's support in this effort.

09:14:12 >> Okay.

09:14:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 1.

09:14:21 >>MARY MULHERN: That's it?

09:14:22 Okay.

09:14:23 I move an ordinance being presented for first reading

09:14:25 consideration, an ordinance of the city of Tampa,

09:14:27 Florida renaming certain real property located at 5000

09:14:32 north river Boulevard, Tampa, Florida dedicated as

09:14:36 river crest linear park to Ignacio Haya linear park

09:14:45 providing for severability, repealing all ordinances or

09:14:48 parts of ordinances in conflict herewith providing an

09:14:51 effective date.

09:14:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

09:14:54 All in favor?

09:14:55 Opposes?

09:14:55 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Caetano and Stokes

09:15:00 being absent at vote.

09:15:02 The second reading of the ordinance will be held

09:15:04 October 7th at 9:30 a.m.

09:15:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item number 2.




09:15:10 Do you want to read that?

09:15:11 And Mr. Fletcher, do you want to speak to it?

09:15:13 >> Good morning.

09:15:19 Chip Fletcher, city attorney.

09:15:20 This ordinance before you is a proposal that came out

09:15:22 of the experience that we had with what you are

09:15:26 familiar with some time ago.

09:15:28 We looked at what was available in terms of best

09:15:33 practices for nonprofit organizations and included a

09:15:38 draft ordinance that -- developed a draft ordinance

09:15:42 circulated to council, I think many months ago from

09:15:45 perhaps a year ago when council had inquired how we

09:15:48 were going.

09:15:49 The focus of the ordinance is not to micromanage the

09:15:52 organization but to require that certain best practices

09:15:56 be put in place, developed by the nonprofit related to

09:15:59 conflicts of interest, anti-nepotism, whistle blower

09:16:05 policies, those types of things to make sure that they

09:16:07 have those types of practices in place, but allowing a

09:16:11 nonprofit to develop what works specifically for that

09:16:13 individual nonprofit.

09:16:15 What has changed since the draft that was circulated is




09:16:18 that we have put a threshold of $5,000, to apply to any

09:16:25 financial assistance from the city and a form to assist

09:16:28 the nonprofit in providing the information required in

09:16:30 the ordinance.

09:16:33 An additional -- two other things that are added to

09:16:39 address issues that we had with the zoo were requiring

09:16:42 that meetings be memorialized in some form and

09:16:48 maintained as part of the nonprofit's records, and that

09:16:51 the compensation for the executives of the nonprofits

09:16:54 be disclosed.

09:16:56 And that information is provided in the certification

09:16:59 form that's in your package.

09:17:01 The recommendation is for approval.

09:17:03 We think that this is a way of providing accountability

09:17:06 without being overbearing or micromanaging the

09:17:09 nonprofits that accept information -- financial support

09:17:14 from the city, and we have circulated this to, I

09:17:17 believe, all the nonprofits that receive money from the

09:17:20 city.

09:17:21 And I'm not aware at this point of any objections from

09:17:24 those organizations.

09:17:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And this covers all nonprofits that




09:17:28 receive a threshold of $5,000 or more?

09:17:36 >> That's correct.

09:17:37 Or if they receive, say, federal dollars and there's

09:17:40 more stringent requirements we don't make them double

09:17:43 account.

09:17:43 They have to follow the more stringent federal

09:17:46 accounting requirements.

09:17:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.

09:17:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

09:17:50 Before I read it --

09:17:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

09:17:53 This is a good thing.

09:17:54 It's ab surprise.

09:17:56 It's been about a year since we asked for this.

09:17:58 I just wanted to make a couple comments.

09:18:01 One is that there's really no substitute for vigilant

09:18:09 oversight of the board of these not-for-profits, and

09:18:14 since this is to apply to not for profits that we are

09:18:20 giving public money to, our tax dollars, our tax

09:18:24 revenue is going towards supporting these.

09:18:28 I think it great that you are creating the guidelines.

09:18:32 But I also feel like the important thing is for the




09:18:37 city's representatives on these boards to be very, very

09:18:42 vigilant, and the more money we give to them, the more

09:18:45 vigilant you need to be, and I think if there was any

09:18:49 worry about the nonprofits, it would be the smaller

09:18:52 ones that really aren't getting that much and probably

09:18:55 have a hard time even filling aboard.

09:18:58 But I think it's a great thing.

09:18:59 I am going to support it.

09:19:00 I am going to look at the specifics, because I have a

09:19:04 long professional history of working for a

09:19:06 not-for-profit, and was surprised that with the zoo

09:19:13 especially that there was this lack of proper

09:19:21 professional best practices.

09:19:22 And the other thing I wanted to say is -- and this will

09:19:28 be something for next year, the next mayor, the next

09:19:31 council, the next budget, hopefully budget advisory

09:19:34 committee.

09:19:35 The money that we give to these not for profits is

09:19:39 given without a lot of process in who gets it, who gets

09:19:43 the awards, and how much they get.

09:19:47 And I'm in favor of more transparency and more of a

09:19:52 process where there's an application for those funds,




09:19:54 and more transparency in general.

09:19:56 So those are just things I want us to think about going

09:19:59 forward.

09:20:00 I think the ethics ordinance is very good, and look at

09:20:07 the details between first and second reading.

09:20:09 Thanks for doing this.

09:20:10 >> If I may, just for clarification, Mr. Chairman,

09:20:14 since the issues were raised with the zoo and in

09:20:17 assistance with putting this document together, the

09:20:19 zoo, just so everybody within earshot knows, has come

09:20:25 well forward and implementing very good, very sound

09:20:28 conflict of interest and other types of policies and

09:20:32 procedures, and I do want to commend them for that.

09:20:35 I didn't want to leave the hanging impression that

09:20:37 there was still a problem there.

09:20:39 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to commend them, too, and

09:20:41 especially the director who took over has done a very,

09:20:47 very good job.

09:20:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, we have to keep in mind, though,

09:20:50 that this is not just for the zoo.

09:20:52 Beyond that, this includes all nonprofit that receive

09:20:56 dollars from the city.




09:20:57 So that's not just the zoo, because it includes

09:21:03 everybody who gets $5,000 upwards that will be governed

09:21:09 by this process.

09:21:16 She said this whole process.

09:21:17 We always have a process, an application, that was a

09:21:21 screening.

09:21:23 They had to present to us an audit report and all that.

09:21:27 And I don't know if that's the case with the city, but

09:21:29 I know the county.

09:21:31 Would get money and that was it.

09:21:34 There was a process in order to receive these funds.

09:21:37 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I can't speak directly to that,

09:21:40 Mr. Chairman.

09:21:41 My understanding is since I have been here we have not

09:21:44 expanded the pool of folks that have received money

09:21:46 because of the budget constraints.

09:21:47 So I believe that the folks on reduced but continued

09:21:53 funding for the existing organizations that have been

09:21:55 funded.

09:21:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I say one thing to that?

09:22:01 Because I'm the one that said that.

09:22:04 I should refine what I said.




09:22:06 There isn't a consistent problem sees that is given,

09:22:10 and I think that's probably correct, that the mayor

09:22:16 continues, but whatever the process the administration

09:22:18 has, council doesn't really have a part in it.

09:22:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm not sure that's quite accurate

09:22:27 because all of them had to come over here and part of

09:22:30 the budget process for our approval.

09:22:32 So I wouldn't exactly say we are not a part.

09:22:36 We may not be apart in the screening process but we do

09:22:39 give final okay on anyone that's receiving dollars from

09:22:43 the city.

09:22:44 So, you know, that's our role according to the charter.

09:22:51 Unless I'm mistaken, unless I'm way off.

09:22:54 I have 14 years of legislative experience again on

09:22:57 these kind of issues.

09:22:58 I know when you are dealing with taxpayer dollars in

09:23:00 the process that you go through, and secondly, it is

09:23:03 approved by council, and council has a right to vote it

09:23:06 up or down.

09:23:07 >> The application process.

09:23:15 I wanted to add, I am a board member on one of those

09:23:19 that receives funds from the city, and, yes, there is a




09:23:24 process, there is an application that is very true, and

09:23:27 since being on council, it does come before us for

09:23:32 approval.

09:23:33 I agree with that.

09:23:34 Thank you.

09:23:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.

09:23:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Before I read it, if I may, this

09:23:39 also gives the city the right to send their auditors

09:23:41 in, if I remember reading what I read last night, to

09:23:45 audit the books of that organization.

09:23:48 I think it's all a great step in the right direction.

09:23:51 There's one part that I think needs to be added on

09:23:54 sometime in the future.

09:23:55 What happens if the auditor goes in and finds

09:24:00 deficiencies and the mechanism of spending the money

09:24:04 and the public didn't get their fair share of the fund?

09:24:06 Who is responsible when there is no money left and the

09:24:11 Board of Directors and the Executive Director have made

09:24:13 mistakes?

09:24:15 Who is responsible to collect that money?

09:24:17 And is that money collectible?

09:24:21 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: If I may, Mr. Chairman.




09:24:23 The only penalty in this ordinance, the way it's set

09:24:27 up, is that they have to -- they are not available to

09:24:29 receive funding until they come into compliance, and

09:24:34 they can be required to refund the money during the

09:24:37 period in which they are out of compliance.

09:24:39 We did not put a fine or another provision in there.

09:24:42 Now, if there was improper dealings, we would have

09:24:48 other remedies to go after funds.

09:24:50 But we could look at a more significant remuneration or

09:24:57 reimbursement process, if you would, if you would like,

09:25:01 or additional penalties.

09:25:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I remember reading the article,

09:25:05 one of the penalties was that you can't participate for

09:25:08 one year.

09:25:09 Am I correct?

09:25:10 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Well, one year or until you are in

09:25:13 compliance.

09:25:14 So it's possible -- be? Right.

09:25:18 But no one directly responsible for the collection of

09:25:20 those moneys unless there's -- you know, there's two

09:25:23 ways you can mess up.

09:25:25 Mess up and go to jail because you did it with intent,




09:25:27 or mess up because you weren't too smart in your

09:25:30 dealings.

09:25:32 And part of the jail is somebody else's prerogative to

09:25:36 prosecute but the part of spending public money and not

09:25:40 being able to collect, I think, has got to being

09:25:42 addressed somewhere, where you make somebody

09:25:44 responsible for those funds.

09:25:47 And I understand their good deeds and I understand what

09:25:52 they do.

09:25:52 But at the end of the day, this city and other cities

09:25:55 and other governments throughout this great country

09:25:59 have spent millions and millions of dollars and have

09:26:01 been unable to collect because there is no rules that

09:26:05 says you have to give it back and who is responsible.

09:26:07 That's what bothers me.

09:26:11 But it is in the right direction.

09:26:13 But I think it needs to be tied up.

09:26:16 A year penalty, you can get for a drug test.

09:26:23 And this is much greater in my book than failing a drug

09:26:26 test.

09:26:27 This is the public's money being thrown away.

09:26:29 >> Santiago Corrada.




09:26:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: A new haircut.

09:26:38 New tie.

09:26:38 Nothing going on at the convention center.

09:26:41 >> I always wonder what I am going to get when I step

09:26:45 up to this podium.

09:26:47 On that point I think the administration would make a

09:26:49 conscious decision if thereby was that incident to

09:26:52 happen that you just described to not fund or continue

09:26:55 to fund an organization that's had that kind of a

09:26:58 problem, because that's a process we look at every

09:27:00 year.

09:27:01 And again going back to one of the prior points, you

09:27:03 know, some of the organizations that we fund, although

09:27:06 they are not competitively selected, I think that's the

09:27:09 distinction where there's a competitive process, have

09:27:12 come to our attention through council members.

09:27:13 We have had some organizations that have joined that

09:27:15 funding list through request of council members,

09:27:18 through requests directly to the mayor, through

09:27:20 requests directly to the to the city.

09:27:22 Mr. Fletcher mentioned we have not expanded that list

09:27:25 and we have not.




09:27:26 But again some of the organizations that we fund, we

09:27:30 are either directly owed, or they sit on city lands so

09:27:34 it's our best interest to provide subsidies and support

09:27:37 them.

09:27:38 Most of them have complied with our requirements even

09:27:40 before they have been enacted.

09:27:41 And they have acted in good faith to put in the

09:27:43 anti-nepotism, the whistle blower and conflict of

09:27:46 interest policy.

09:27:47 We really are on the right path with this.

09:27:49 So thank you very much.

09:27:52 Be? With that I'll read it.

09:27:53 I think in the future until something happens, whatever

09:27:57 happens comes up and we'll deal with it accordingly.

09:28:00 I move an ordinance on first reading, an ordinance.

09:28:02 City of Tampa, Florida amending City of Tampa code

09:28:05 chapter 2 article 8 City of Tampa code division 2,

09:28:09 subdivision V, by adding sections 2-525, standards of

09:28:14 conduct and accountability requirements for nonprofits

09:28:17 provided financial support by the city, providing for

09:28:20 severability, repealing conflict, providing an

09:28:22 effective date.




09:28:24 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Second.

09:28:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

09:28:29 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Stokes being absent.

09:28:31 Second reading of the ordinance will be held October

09:28:33 7th at 9:30 a.m.

09:28:35 >> we move to our committee reports.

09:28:38 Public Safety Committee.

09:28:39 Councilwoman Miller.

09:28:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Move resolutions 3 through 10.

09:28:48 >> second.

09:28:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:28:52 Opposes?

09:28:52 Okay.

09:28:55 Councilwoman Mulhern.

09:28:56 >>MARY MULHERN: I move items 11 through 20.

09:29:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

09:29:02 All in favor?

09:29:03 Opposes?

09:29:05 Public Works Committee, councilman Miranda.

09:29:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move I move them all, let me just

09:29:09 say in reading all these things, when the agenda is put

09:29:12 together, and you see awards being awarded to a




09:29:18 company, they should tell us on the agenda itself if it

09:29:20 was the first bidder, second bidder, third lowest

09:29:24 bidder, because it's not on the agenda for the public

09:29:28 sense.

09:29:28 You have to have read all the document material inside

09:29:31 and it is quite lengthy.

09:29:32 Not that I am opposed to reading.

09:29:34 I'm very bored and that's the only thing I do now.

09:29:39 It would lend a speedier operation if we were to put

09:29:42 first, second and third, why, and why it happened.

09:29:47 For instance, an engine was water cooled and one wasn't

09:29:51 water cooled, and a live had to be a certain amount of

09:29:55 weight and wasn't a certain amount of weight in the

09:29:57 bidding process.

09:29:58 They should explain that on a one sentence, the third

09:30:01 bidder and why.

09:30:02 Just a one sentence deal on the agenda so the public

09:30:06 and the media especially doesn't have to go do all the

09:30:09 running around to find out.

09:30:10 But I move items 21 through 39.

09:30:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.

09:30:16 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Number 22 pertaining to grant




09:30:19 Hampton.

09:30:20 When a developer comes in and gets approval to build a

09:30:23 community, he specifically puts down the size of pipes

09:30:28 and whatever he's going to do to develop that

09:30:32 community.

09:30:33 Evidently there was an agreement made in 2000 that the

09:30:36 city was going to pay for oversized pipes, or a

09:30:39 facility.

09:30:40 And I don't understand why the need for that.

09:30:43 That should have been the developer's problem from the

09:30:47 beginning.

09:30:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may, try to explain to me, I

09:30:53 can only envision in looking years ahead, and a pipe,

09:30:59 it takes 18 inches for your development alone, that you

09:31:01 know that further down the road in history you are

09:31:03 going to have additional development going into that

09:31:05 same pipe, and the 18-inch pipe -- and I'm just using

09:31:09 that as an example -- will not carry that total flow,

09:31:12 then I think it will be smart to make an agreement with

09:31:16 the developer, whoever that developer, he or she is, to

09:31:19 oversize the pipe, because then you have to redig and

09:31:23 repipe, and the cost of doing that is much greater than




09:31:27 doing it the first time around.

09:31:29 So that's why I read these things, and I thought there

09:31:34 was a reimbursement.

09:31:36 This in fact, this year is the one that is in court,

09:31:41 because one company started, they sold the assets to

09:31:46 another company and now they are bickering between each

09:31:48 other.

09:31:49 So instead of us getting involved we are putting that

09:31:51 $300,000-some into the court's coffers so we can don't

09:31:58 lose taxpayers money fighting this in court.

09:32:01 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: The problem is this community is

09:32:03 built out.

09:32:04 They had no more land.

09:32:05 Unless they go out and buy more land down the road, but

09:32:08 there is no -- they are turning the community over to

09:32:11 the citizens of that community right now.

09:32:15 And that's the way the agreements are written.

09:32:17 And I don't think we should be paying for future

09:32:20 development.

09:32:22 That's their problem of getting bonds to pay for that.

09:32:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I would note councilman Miranda is

09:32:30 right, this is an issue related to the court.




09:32:32 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I understand that H.but we should

09:32:34 have never gotten into an agreement like that.

09:32:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

09:32:38 Is there a second?

09:32:39 >> I second.

09:32:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.

09:32:43 All in favor?

09:32:44 Opposes?

09:32:48 We move to the Finance Committee.

09:32:49 >>YVONNE CAPIN: (Off microphone) I move items 40

09:32:58 through 50.

09:33:00 >> Second.

09:33:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

09:33:04 All in favor?

09:33:05 Opposes?

09:33:06 Building and zoning.

09:33:06 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I would like to move 51 through

09:33:09 78.

09:33:16 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I need to abstain from number 76.

09:33:22 I am on the board of the spring of Tampa Bay.

09:33:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council member Capin, you are filing

09:33:30 a form of notice of conflict with the clerk at this




09:33:32 time?

09:33:33 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

09:33:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 76.

09:33:39 Okay.

09:33:40 All in favor?

09:33:40 Opposes?

09:33:41 With councilman Capin abstaining on item 76.

09:33:48 Transportation committee, Councilwoman --

09:33:53 >>MARY MULHERN: I'll second.

09:33:54 I think we needed a second on the agenda item so I

09:33:57 second it, that we just passed.

09:33:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.

09:34:01 Transportation committee.

09:34:02 Councilwoman Capin.

09:34:04 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I move to adopt the following

09:34:06 ordinance.

09:34:08 No, no, I'm sorry.

09:34:09 Move items 79 through 93.

09:34:14 Transportation.

09:34:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you seconded by Councilwoman

09:34:19 Mulhern.

09:34:20 All in favor signify by saying Aye.




09:34:22 Opposes?

09:34:28 Items set for second hearing.

09:34:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Move 94 and 95.

09:34:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

09:34:36 All in favor?

09:34:37 Opposes?

09:34:39 We move to 9:30 items.

09:34:40 Public hearings, second readings on proposed ordinances

09:34:50 --

09:34:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Items 96 and 97 do not require

09:34:56 witnesses be sworn.

09:35:00 >> Move to open.

09:35:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:35:04 Opposes?

09:35:04 Anyone wish to address council on item 96?

09:35:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.

09:35:15 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.

09:35:20 >>CHAIRMAN: Move to adopt the following ordinance upon

09:35:21 second reading, an ordinance amending ordinance

09:35:24 2008-202, city of Tampa which amended the city code of

09:35:32 ordinances chapter 15, section 15-104, residential

09:35:35 parking permit only area, to provide for residential




09:35:37 parking permit only area located at the courier city

09:35:40 Oscawana neighborhood, amending said ordinance to

09:35:44 include the 100 block of south Packwood Avenue,

09:35:47 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,

09:35:49 providing for an effective date for severability,

09:35:51 providing an effective date.

09:35:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:35:53 All in favor -- record your vote.

09:35:57 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Stokes being absent.

09:36:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, just to bring to

09:36:10 council's attention there's an item on the staff

09:36:12 reports item 110, a resolution but a fee resolution

09:36:15 that actually implements this item so there's really

09:36:17 not a need for staff report but for council's policy

09:36:20 because it involves fees it's been placed under staff

09:36:22 reports.

09:36:22 >> okay.

09:36:25 Item 97.

09:36:27 Anyone wish to address council on item 97?

09:36:29 Anyone from the public wish to address council on item

09:36:32 97?

09:36:33 >> Move to close.




09:36:33 >> Second.

09:36:38 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I move to adopt the following ordinance

09:36:40 upon second reading.

09:36:42 An ordinance of the City of Tampa, Florida, amending

09:36:45 the city Tampa code section 25-7486 to reinstate and

09:36:52 authorize the no transportation impact fee exempt fund

09:36:54 for the portion of West Tampa and East Tampa as more

09:36:57 particularly described in the City of Tampa code

09:37:00 section 25-74 A-6 providing for a period of five years

09:37:07 commencing October 21, 2010, providing for repeal of

09:37:11 all ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,

09:37:15 providing an effective date.

09:37:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

09:37:21 All in favor -- record your vote.

09:37:27 And in the past, they set these no impact zones for

09:37:33 three years, extended out to five years, for East Tampa

09:37:36 and West Tampa.

09:37:37 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.

09:37:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: No impact fee zone.

09:37:42 Okay.

09:37:43 We'll take up now our second reading for 9:30.

09:37:46 Those who are going to be speaking to council please




09:37:48 stand.

09:37:49 If you are a witness, if you are going to be speaking,

09:37:51 if you are an applicant, if you are going to say

09:37:53 anything, stand up.

09:37:55 [ Laughter ]

09:38:02 (Oath administered by Clerk).

09:38:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, I ask that all written

09:38:08 communications which have been available for public

09:38:09 inspection in City Council's office be received and

09:38:11 filed by motion at this time.

09:38:13 >> So moved.

09:38:16 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.

09:38:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:38:19 Opposed?

09:38:19 >> Finally a reminder, there's a sign-up sheet outside,

09:38:23 and for the clerk will you please make sure that you

09:38:25 have signed in, if in fact you are going to speak

09:38:29 before you leave today.

09:38:31 Thank you.

09:38:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We need to open the items.

09:38:35 >> So moved.

09:38:37 >> Second.




09:38:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Capin.

09:38:41 Anyone here wish to address council on item 98?

09:38:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.

09:38:46 >> Second.

09:38:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:38:49 All in favor?

09:38:50 Opposes?

09:38:51 Okay, 98.

09:38:53 Councilman Caetano.

09:38:54 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: An ordinance being presented for

09:38:57 second reading and adoption.

09:38:59 An ordinance vacates enclosing abandoning a certain

09:39:05 right-of-way alleyway lying south of north A street,

09:39:08 east of Howard Avenue, west of Westland Avenue and

09:39:11 north of Kennedy Boulevard, in the Westland

09:39:14 subdivision, a subdivision in the City of Tampa,

09:39:16 Hillsborough County, Florida, the same being more fully

09:39:18 described in section 2 hereof, subject to certain

09:39:22 covenants, conditions and restrictions, and more

09:39:25 particularly described herein, providing an effective

09:39:26 date.

09:39:26 >> Second.




09:39:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:39:32 Record your vote.

09:39:33 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.

09:39:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 99.

09:39:46 Item 99.

09:39:48 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.

09:39:49 Item 99 through 103 have been certified by myself as

09:39:55 zoning administrator for approval for you.

09:39:57 Also, item 104, there was a notice issue with that

09:40:01 particular one.

09:40:01 It does need to go back to first reading, and I believe

09:40:04 you have a substitute ordinance to read for first

09:40:06 reading of the 2(COP-R) as opposed to the original

09:40:09 2(COP).

09:40:12 You definitely can approve 99 through 103.

09:40:16 They have been certified and 104 has that change.

09:40:19 Thank you.

09:40:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 99.

09:40:25 Anyone wish to address council?

09:40:26 Motion to close be?

09:40:28 >> So moved.

09:40:29 >> Second.




09:40:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Stokes, item 99, please.

09:40:39 >>CURTIS STOKES: An ordinance for second reading and

09:40:41 adoption, an ordinance approving a special use permit

09:40:43 S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales, small venue, and

09:40:46 making lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol

09:40:48 of more than 1% by weight and not more than 14% by

09:40:51 weight, and wines regardless of alcoholic content, beer

09:40:54 and wine, 2(COP-R), for consumption on the premises

09:40:58 only in connection with a restaurant business

09:41:00 establishment on that certain lot, plot or tract of

09:41:03 land located at 2038 North Dale Mabry highway, Tampa,

09:41:06 Florida as more particularly described in section 2

09:41:09 hereof, providing for repeal of all ordinances in

09:41:14 conflict, providing an effective date.

09:41:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?

09:41:19 >> Second.

09:41:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Caetano.

09:41:23 Record your vote.

09:41:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, if I may, before that,

09:41:27 on all these alcoholic beverage zonings, anyone that

09:41:30 has an R that is open after midnight, I would

09:41:33 appreciate if the staff would let me know that they are




09:41:35 open after midnight because my vote would be no.

09:41:38 And it's not a reflection of any one party or

09:41:41 individual.

09:41:42 I just feel that after midnight, if you are going to

09:41:50 sell alcohol.

09:41:58 I didn't get a chance to vote.

09:42:00 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.

09:42:01 Was that a question?

09:42:02 Were you asking?

09:42:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No, that was an ask.

09:42:07 It was asking for you folks good people there to put on

09:42:09 the doc agenda at the time what hours they have so that

09:42:16 I could at least guide myself.

09:42:18 I want to be consistent.

09:42:20 Cole Coyle okay.

09:42:21 So we are sending them through the doc agenda.

09:42:23 We put that in as a note.

09:42:25 Okay, we can do that.

09:42:26 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Miranda made two good suggestions

09:42:31 already on the agenda.

09:42:32 So maybe we could take that up in new business.

09:42:36 Because there's a few other things that would be really




09:42:38 helpful to us, and maybe we could just put it on the

09:42:41 record.

09:42:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Vote again, please, on that item.

09:42:53 Just so Mr. Miranda knows, we had to revote.

09:42:57 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda voting no.

09:42:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 100.

09:43:00 Anyone wish to address council on item 100?

09:43:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.

09:43:05 >> Second.

09:43:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:43:07 Opposes?

09:43:08 Item 100.

09:43:09 Councilwoman Mulhern.

09:43:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I movie an ordinance being presented

09:43:16 for second reading and adoption, an ordinance providing

09:43:19 a special use permit S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales

09:43:21 small venue and making lawful the sale of beverages

09:43:24 containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight and not

09:43:26 more than 14% by weight and wines regardless of

09:43:29 alcoholic content, beer and wine, 2(APS), in sealed

09:43:33 containers for consumption off premises only at or from

09:43:36 that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 1860




09:43:40 east Fowler Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more

09:43:43 particularly described in section 2 hereof, providing

09:43:46 for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an

09:43:48 effective date.

09:43:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Second?

09:43:52 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Can I get the name of the actual

09:43:54 business on that one, please?

09:43:56 I have got an address.

09:44:05 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.

09:44:06 Walgreen's.

09:44:07 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Oh, another one?

09:44:09 Okay.

09:44:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Stokes.

09:44:11 Record your vote.

09:44:12 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda voting no.

09:44:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 101.

09:44:25 Anyone wish to address council from the public?

09:44:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.

09:44:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded it.

09:44:33 All in favor?

09:44:34 Opposes?

09:44:35 Councilman.




09:44:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:

09:44:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I voted no on that one.

09:44:39 >>GWEN MILLER: I move to adopt the following ordinance

09:44:42 upon second reading, an ordinance approving a special

09:44:45 using permit S-2 alcoholic beverage sales, small venue,

09:44:49 making lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol

09:44:52 of more than 1% by weight and not more than 14% by

09:44:57 weight and wines regardless of alcoholic content, beer

09:45:00 and wine, 2(APS), in sealed containers for consumption

09:45:04 off premises only from that certain lot plot or tract

09:45:09 of land located at 315 West Platt street, Tampa,

09:45:13 Florida and more particularly described in section 2

09:45:15 hereof providing for repeal of all ordinances in

09:45:17 conflict providing an effective date.

09:45:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:45:24 Record your vote, please.

09:45:35 >>> Motion carried with Miranda voting no.

09:45:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 102.

09:45:40 Anyone from the public wish to address council?

09:45:42 Motion to close, please.

09:45:46 Moved and seconded.

09:45:48 All in favor?




09:45:50 Councilwoman Capin, 102.

09:45:54 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I move for adoption of the of a second

09:45:56 ordinance -- an ordinance on second reading.

09:46:00 An ordinance approving a special use permit S-2 for

09:46:03 alcoholic beverages large venue and making lawful the

09:46:05 sale of beverages containing alcohol regardless of

09:46:08 alcoholic content, beer, wine and liquor, 4(COP-R) for

09:46:11 consumption on the premises only in connection with a

09:46:14 restaurant business establishment at or from that

09:46:17 certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 1241 east

09:46:20 Fowler Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more particularly

09:46:24 described in section 2 hereof, providing for repeal of

09:46:26 all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective

09:46:29 date.

09:46:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.

09:46:39 Record your vote

09:46:39 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda voting no.

09:46:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 103.

09:47:01 Anyone wish to address council on item 103?

09:47:04 Motion to close.

09:47:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.

09:47:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?




09:47:09 Councilman?

09:47:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am going to need a direction here

09:47:12 on 4(COP-X).

09:47:13 Where is this?

09:47:14 I know it's 1601.

09:47:18 That's about -- Dale Mabry is the 3800 block.

09:47:21 So that's 22 blocks.

09:47:27 >>CATHERINE COYLE: That was 1601 West Swann.

09:47:29 That was the old wine exchange in Old Hyde Park

09:47:31 Village.

09:47:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.

09:47:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano.

09:47:39 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: 103.

09:47:42 An ordinance for second reading and adoption, an

09:47:45 ordinance approving a special use permit S-2 for

09:47:47 alcoholic beverage sales small venue and making lawful

09:47:49 the sale of beverages containing alcohol regardless of

09:47:52 alcohol content beer, wine and liquor 4(COP-X) for

09:47:55 consumption on the premises only at or from that

09:47:58 certain plot, plot or tract of land located at 1601

09:48:02 West Swann Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more particularly

09:48:05 described in section 2 hereof, providing for repeal of




09:48:09 all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective

09:48:11 date.

09:48:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.

09:48:17 Record your vote, please.

09:48:18 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried Pa unanimously.

09:48:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: On 104, back to first reading, is that

09:48:31 right? And there's a substitute, as I understand?

09:48:34 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.

09:48:35 We do have a substitute ordinance for first reading,

09:48:42 from 2(COP) to 2(COP-R) and the applicant needs to

09:48:46 amend the request on record.

09:48:47 >> Susan counts, 130-9309 south Willow on behalf of

09:48:51 petitioner for this application, and we are in

09:48:53 agreement due to the notice issue with this case, and

09:48:56 in the interest of trying to move it forward we would

09:48:59 like to amend the application to a 2(COP)R.

09:49:04 Thank you.

09:49:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we need to take public testimony

09:49:14 again?

09:49:17 >>YVONNE CAPIN: That is the BT restaurant.

09:49:21 That's what that is.

09:49:23 That we have the parking -- we gave the waiver on the




09:49:30 parking.

09:49:32 And close at 10:30.

09:49:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's good to know.

09:49:37 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I remember that.

09:49:38 They close at 10:30.

09:49:39 >> One of the best new council members.

09:49:43 I had to get out of it somehow.

09:49:46 [ Laughter ]

09:49:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone from the public wish to address

09:49:48 council on this item?

09:49:50 Item 104.

09:49:51 Anyone from the public?

09:49:55 >> Move to close.

09:49:56 >> Second.

09:49:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:49:59 Councilman Stokes.

09:49:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again this is for first reading.

09:50:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, that's fine.

09:50:04 Go ahead, Councilwoman Capin.

09:50:10 >>YVONNE CAPIN: An ordinance for first reading.

09:50:16 An ordinance repealing ordinance number 2007-169

09:50:20 approving a special use permit S-2 for alcoholic




09:50:24 beverage sales, small venue and making lawful the sale

09:50:27 of beverages containing alcohol of more than 1% by

09:50:32 weight and not more than 14% by weight and wines

09:50:35 regardless of alcoholic content, beer and wine,

09:50:39 2(COP-R) for the consumption on premises only in

09:50:44 connection where a restaurant business establishment on

09:50:45 that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 2507

09:50:51 South MacDill Avenue and 310 a 5 west Palmira Avenue,

09:50:56 Tampa, Florida as more particularly described in

09:50:58 section 3 hereof, providing for repeal of all

09:51:00 ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.

09:51:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?

09:51:05 Moved and seconded.

09:51:06 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

09:51:08 Opposes?

09:51:08 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.

09:51:11 Second reading of the ordinance will be held October

09:51:14 7th at 9:30 a.m.

09:51:16 >> We'll take up item 105.

09:51:29 >>MARK BENTLEY: 201 North Franklin Street, Tampa

09:51:31 33602.

09:51:32 I represent St. John's church.




09:51:38 A lot of people took the time out today.

09:51:40 Would they please stand?

09:51:44 In support?

09:51:45 Thank you very much.

09:51:45 Just a kind of thumbnail sketch as to where we are.

09:51:48 Initially, we received staff's recommendation, positive

09:51:52 from the Planning Commission, unanimous recommendation

09:51:54 of approval from Planning Commission.

09:51:56 At our last hearing, positive recommendation,

09:51:59 subsequent to a recommendation from ARC.

09:52:01 September 10th there was a public hearing, ARC, and

09:52:05 there was a unanimous recommend recommendation to

09:52:07 approve the plan amendment to the Tampa City Council,

09:52:10 and Dennis Fernandez is here as you are aware, the

09:52:12 Executive Director of the ARC.

09:52:15 So if you have any questions, let me know.

09:52:17 And if there's any opposition, I'll reserve the

09:52:19 opportunity to rebut.

09:52:21 Thank you very much.

09:52:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me say that I have spoken to

09:52:27 both sides here, and I would like to be ask for the

09:52:29 legal department.




09:52:37 Is there any way to resolve something like this without

09:52:39 changing from where they are to where they want to be

09:52:42 so that everybody can have some peace of mind?

09:52:46 And that's what mainly this is about.

09:52:48 This is about not them, and what they want to do, but

09:52:56 leave it in a mannerism to where something was to

09:52:58 happen.

09:52:59 And if there's one iota of chance, that means it can

09:53:02 happen.

09:53:06 And the church can have what they want and the

09:53:08 neighborhood can have been the same peace of and

09:53:11 tranquil, that it's not going to be a high-rise or

09:53:13 something of that nature.

09:53:14 Is there some agreement that they could work out among

09:53:17 themselves to do this?

09:53:20 As I voted for this the first time -- and I did check

09:53:24 the traffic pattern and I did ask the city.

09:53:27 Unfortunately, I don't think I have that result yet, or

09:53:29 if I get any result for a traffic study so that I can

09:53:34 compare the traffic study that the city did today, and

09:53:36 in case this passed, web it came back, and the

09:53:39 petitioner did a traffic study to have a comparison of




09:53:43 two traffic studies, so that I can understand where I

09:53:46 am at.

09:53:50 I understand, if I remember -- and I have got to put my

09:53:59 they go cap on -- they were talking about the

09:54:02 enrollment of 240 at this site and moving one class or

09:54:05 two classes to another location, and then the total

09:54:11 enrollment, I believe, was 580 or 585 at the two

09:54:15 campuses that this good operation has.

09:54:17 And I want to try to -- I mean, this is just yes or no,

09:54:23 as far as the seven of us are concerned.

09:54:25 But in reality, I know sometimes you have to apply the

09:54:29 law, and the law says this is what you want to do, if

09:54:32 you have to do, what you need to do, this is what's

09:54:34 needed.

09:54:36 Is there any way that something of this nature --

09:54:42 because a plan amendment doesn't mean it's going to

09:54:45 pass on a zoning change.

09:54:47 Am I correct?

09:54:49 >>JULIA COLE: City of Tampa legal department.

09:54:51 Yes, you are correct.

09:54:53 Simply granting the comprehensive plan designation

09:54:57 doesn't obligate you to grant a rezoning.




09:55:00 It presents the range of uses, the range of densities

09:55:07 and intensities that should be considered through the

09:55:11 rezoning process.

09:55:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's the second part of the first

09:55:15 part.

09:55:15 The first part was, is there any way that something

09:55:18 like this can ever be resolved on a mutual consent

09:55:25 between two parties?

09:55:27 >>JULIA COLE: Certainly the property owner and the

09:55:30 neighbors can venture into some type of property

09:55:33 agreement.

09:55:36 Through the comprehensive plan problem sees, there is

09:55:39 no opportunity to condition that approval.

09:55:43 And as I have previously stated, we actually had in the

09:55:47 past made an attempt to figure out a way to make that

09:55:49 happen, and that concept created some problems which

09:55:56 resulted in mitigation with the department of community

09:56:01 a fairs.

09:56:02 So I would be very reluctant to doing that again given

09:56:05 where we have been in the past.

09:56:06 So you have a designate in front of you for your

09:56:11 consideration.




09:56:14 I think you also had a question as to whether or not

09:56:17 there was some kind of designation to go to which would

09:56:19 resolve the issue.

09:56:20 The problem is, from what I understand in the Planning

09:56:23 Commission folks may need to weigh in on this, in order

09:56:26 to have a planning category which would recognize the

09:56:30 existing condition on this property in terms of the

09:56:33 intensity, the number of categories they can request,

09:56:41 they can request to certain categories.

09:56:43 For example, I understand CMU 35 would be an available

09:56:46 category, which would recognize the intensity on this

09:56:49 property, but would allow a much broader range of

09:56:53 private uses than the public would be allow.

09:56:59 If you want further information I recommend we have the

09:57:04 commission give some additional parameters.

09:57:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me ask you why, or let me tell

09:57:09 you why I say that.

09:57:10 Years ago there was something similar to this at one of

09:57:14 the high schools in Tampa, private school, and they

09:57:17 came to an agreement, when it was a girls school, that

09:57:21 they would never do certain things.

09:57:22 Well, the school grew and became much more amenable to




09:57:27 the society and much more affluent, much more capacity

09:57:33 and greater and more sports and more athletics, which

09:57:36 is needed.

09:57:37 Don't get me wrong.

09:57:38 The original agreement was then altered, and it came

09:57:44 before council years ago.

09:57:46 I think that agreement dated back 50, 60 years, as long

09:57:50 as that school was there.

09:57:51 And then it was the councils back in the 90s that had

09:57:55 to decide whether to put lights up in a field so forth

09:58:03 and so on, and I remember the council had to struggle

09:58:05 with those things because the individuals who did that

09:58:08 at that time were no longer here on both sides.

09:58:11 So sometimes law is law, but I think more important is

09:58:16 what was in the peoples mind at the time they made the

09:58:20 agreement that came to that conclusion.

09:58:22 I'm not a lawyer, but the fact is, I don't know what

09:58:26 these minds are saying.

09:58:28 It's hard, very difficult for one member -- talking

09:58:32 about myself -- to come here and say, okay, this is it,

09:58:35 and then 30, 40 years from now, I don't plan to be

09:58:39 here.




09:58:40 I don't know about the rest of you.

09:58:42 But then I'm saying what happens after I leave?

09:58:46 That's the questions in my mind.

09:58:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern, then

09:58:56 Councilwoman Capin.

09:58:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Julia, one quick question for you,

09:59:01 kind of following up on councilman Miranda.

09:59:08 Clearly if they are asking for a land use, it does just

09:59:12 open up the possibility of asking for more intensive

09:59:17 rezoning, right?

09:59:20 >>JULIA COLE: It is around the opportunity to request

09:59:22 for rezoning.

09:59:24 >>MARY MULHERN: We talked about this be in other cases

09:59:26 where we were trying to reach an agreement between

09:59:28 neighborhoods and developers of development agreements.

09:59:34 Is there a possibility for that?

09:59:36 That would be a rezoning thing.

09:59:38 Is that right?

09:59:39 Or is that something you could talk about during land

09:59:42 use change?

09:59:47 >>> Florida statute does provide a process for what we

09:59:50 call a development agreement, but unlike a rezoning




09:59:55 where you have a property owner coming forward making a

09:59:58 request to council with conditions where we have that

10:00:00 opportunity to negotiate on a basis, the 163

10:00:03 development agreement has to be a mutual interest to

10:00:06 enter into that agreement, and I think it would be --

10:00:11 it would be problematic if you can require that to

10:00:15 happen as a result of this change in land use

10:00:20 classification.

10:00:21 So there is a mechanism, if those parties are willing,

10:00:27 but you can't force that on a property owner going

10:00:31 forward with a comprehensive --

10:00:33 >> If both parties would be willing, would that be at

10:00:37 this juncture?

10:00:38 Or would that be at a rezoning?

10:00:40 >> Could be at this juncture.

10:00:41 Could be prior to rezoning.

10:00:43 In fact it could be after rezoning.

10:00:45 That is an opportunity that exists under Florida

10:00:47 statute at any time during the development process.

10:00:49 >> Okay.

10:00:51 Then the other question I think I have, it might be for

10:00:54 you but it might also be for Dennis.




10:00:57 I was very surprised to hear that this went to the ARC

10:01:03 between first and second reading.

10:01:06 I have never seen that happen since I have been on

10:01:08 council.

10:01:10 I never would have expected that to happen.

10:01:12 So I would kind of like to hear why that happened, as

10:01:16 opposed to that happening before the first reading,

10:01:18 or -- before the vote or whatever.

10:01:27 >>> We have had very few plan amendments and I can

10:01:31 think of maybe one or it would be since I have been

10:01:33 here within historic areas, historic district, where

10:01:35 the code does have some -- the historic preservation

10:01:41 code does provide an opportunity for ARC or BLC review.

10:01:45 And those instances we had as a matter of fact has

10:01:47 taken them between first and second reading to the

10:01:51 board.

10:01:52 It's just been the practice.

10:01:53 There's nothing in the code that requires you to for

10:01:57 first reading.

10:01:58 Part of it has been wanting to come to City Council

10:02:00 first because the rule of ARC is extremely limited to

10:02:05 not set a public hearing in front of BLC prior to this




10:02:08 board deciding to move forward.

10:02:09 But it really has been more of a matter of practice

10:02:12 just to take between first and second reading.

10:02:16 Legally, either way, we can do it.

10:02:18 >>MARY MULHERN: But that is now they are coming to us

10:02:23 with this recommendation which has some weight.

10:02:28 And it doesn't make sense.

10:02:31 So I don't know.

10:02:32 We could talk about changing --

10:02:36 >>JULIA COLE: The practice is not something that City

10:02:39 Council would --

10:02:42 >>MARY MULHERN: So is this a practice that's happened

10:02:43 before?

10:02:44 >>JULIA COLE: There's been very few comprehensive plan

10:02:49 amendments in historic district, just because over

10:02:51 time, since I have been -- let me say a couple things.

10:02:55 First of all we recently changed the code to provide

10:02:58 that the BLC had the right to review land use,

10:03:04 comprehensive plan designation changes.

10:03:06 I think it's only been in the last year and a half or

10:03:09 two years.

10:03:10 There has only been since that change was made, I can




10:03:12 only recall one other comprehensive plan amendment that

10:03:17 occurred within the jurisdictional boundaries of the

10:03:19 ARC.

10:03:20 I think we actually did take that to the BLC between

10:03:27 first and second reading.

10:03:29 So the code change is relatively new.

10:03:31 It's just been the practice.

10:03:32 And I think there's value in making sure staff ensures

10:03:36 that that actually happens before first reading.

10:03:39 I don't know if legally -- it's problematic either way.

10:03:42 But if that's the will, have staff change that process.

10:03:47 >> I think we need to talk about it and also wondering

10:03:51 if at the first reading where council was told that

10:03:55 this was next going to go?

10:03:56 >> Yes.

10:03:57 >> We were told that?

10:03:59 Thank you.

10:03:59 Okay.

10:03:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Capin.

10:04:03 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, Chairman Scott.

10:04:05 I also agreed with my colleagues here in reaching

10:04:13 consensus between the neighborhood and the church would




10:04:20 be the best possible outcome, and I believe that those

10:04:26 are trying for that.

10:04:29 And along that line, I would like to suggest, if

10:04:37 everyone is in agreement, to continue the application

10:04:43 until a new comprehensive planned land use

10:04:45 classification is developed and approved that would

10:04:47 permit more limited public facility use, and would be a

10:04:55 comprehensive land use classification for what is

10:05:02 happening here today.

10:05:07 It would have to have consent of property owners.

10:05:11 And the land use category would need to be developed

10:05:14 during the next cycle and reviewed by the department of

10:05:18 community affairs and approved by the Planning

10:05:19 Commission prior to adoption to City Council.

10:05:25 So that's what I'm suggesting we could do.

10:05:37 It's a new category, a new classification.

10:05:40 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, at this time, I

10:05:46 don't think we would have the right to do that.

10:05:49 We would have to vote this down, and then put the new

10:05:53 plan into effect.

10:05:54 I don't think it's fair for the petitioner to do this

10:05:58 extreme.




10:05:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's no second to the motion, so

10:06:04 the motion fails.

10:06:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, as was stated today and in

10:06:22 the past, when a petitioner does come to council, the

10:06:25 council is asked to take action.

10:06:29 In this case, unless the petitioner would want this

10:06:31 continuance and agrees to it, the petitioner does have

10:06:35 the right for council to have a decision today either

10:06:37 up or down.

10:06:41 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I understand that.

10:06:43 I did ask for a continuance, and I also said consent of

10:06:47 the property owners.

10:06:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, let me --

10:06:53 >> Ask the petitioner if they would agree.

10:06:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just raise a question here.

10:06:59 With legal.

10:06:59 Because you do know amendment 4 is on the ballot.

10:07:02 If it passes in November, that has serious

10:07:06 ramifications.

10:07:07 Am I not correct?

10:07:11 >> That's correct, Mr. Chairman.

10:07:13 Amendment 4 as pending would require any comprehensive




10:07:15 change to go to the voters for approval.

10:07:17 So I suppose we could be in a posture where we are

10:07:20 waiting for that approval process even after this new

10:07:23 category is developed, and this city would not be able

10:07:27 to act on that.

10:07:28 So that is a counter argument to this approach that

10:07:35 council should be aware of, I suppose.

10:07:36 >> And I recognize that the attempt is to make sure

10:07:44 that there is a mutual understanding or compromise.

10:07:49 What we have to recognize is that this particular

10:07:52 property of the church did not put themselves in this

10:07:55 position.

10:07:55 This is not their fault.

10:08:00 If we put the blame on anybody it has to be the city.

10:08:02 So from that standpoint, we got to be very careful

10:08:06 here.

10:08:07 That's number one.

10:08:08 Number two is, I think we all met with the

10:08:13 neighborhood.

10:08:13 We all want to try to help the best we can.

10:08:15 I met with Julia yesterday again to see how this could

10:08:18 be resolved, and according to Julia, if you can come




10:08:23 back to the mike, it's my understanding there are other

10:08:25 categories but it would be more intense than what the

10:08:28 neighborhood would want, that this is a better category

10:08:31 to be in rather than be the other categories.

10:08:34 Is that pretty much accurate what you stated?

10:08:37 >>JULIA COLE: As I stated previously, and I stated at

10:08:39 the other hearing, in order to recognize the intensity

10:08:43 that currently exists on this property, and make that

10:08:48 comply with the comprehensive plan, there are a limited

10:08:50 number of categories that are available, and it's the

10:08:54 position of the Planning Commission that the public

10:08:58 semi-public while allowing the intensity limits the use

10:09:01 and is a more appropriate category within this area.

10:09:04 >> And secondly, even with granting this comprehensive

10:09:10 land change, it does not guarantee anything other than

10:09:13 change, because whatever happens in the future still

10:09:15 has to come back.

10:09:18 Is that accurate?

10:09:20 >> What this change would do is make this property

10:09:26 comply with the comprehensive plan.

10:09:28 It still place it is property in the position of being

10:09:30 nonconform to their zoning.




10:09:32 In order to be conforming to their zoning, they are

10:09:35 going to have to process some kind of zoning change.

10:09:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So I think to all of us, we heard from

10:09:47 everybody, and we really want to try to reach a

10:09:51 compromise, want to try to help, and in terms of the

10:09:54 legal ramifications, our hands are somewhat limited in

10:09:57 what we can do.

10:09:59 As I have been informed by our attorneys.

10:10:01 And so we are charged -- we are charged by the charter

10:10:07 and the Constitution to uphold the law, and we have

10:10:12 attorneys guide us through this process and help

10:10:14 protect us as we go through this process.

10:10:17 Julia has already told you that this attempt to try to

10:10:22 place certain, I guess, restrictions ended up in us

10:10:25 being sued by community affairs.

10:10:27 So, I mean, you can go that route, but we are going to

10:10:30 be spending taxpayer dollars trying to defend our

10:10:35 actions.

10:10:36 And I don't think you want to do that when we have

10:10:38 budgetary constraints.

10:10:39 And so, again, believe me, I'm sensitive to the needs

10:10:45 of the community.




10:10:45 I'm sensitive to what is happening here.

10:10:48 But we are limited at this point as to what we can do

10:10:52 based under the law, based under our own code.

10:10:55 Okay?

10:10:58 Councilwoman Mulhern.

10:11:00 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't think this is before us

10:11:04 because of the Department of Community Affairs.

10:11:06 This is before us because the petitioner asked for it.

10:11:09 And I think I don't personally feel like my hands are

10:11:15 tied.

10:11:15 I feel this is before us to make a decision whether we

10:11:18 should make a land use change.

10:11:25 And I disagree with that characterization.

10:11:29 I think we are here to make that decision.

10:11:30 But we need to hear from petitioner and the public one

10:11:35 more.

10:11:36 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I understand that.

10:11:40 I also understand that changing this land use zoning,

10:11:44 it could be done now.

10:11:47 And my thinking is preservation of historic.

10:11:51 And that's what I want to see happen here.

10:11:55 Secondly, I also understand that this land use, should




10:12:02 the church burn down, could be changed at that time to

10:12:06 rebuild the church.

10:12:13 So it could be changed now or it could be changed when

10:12:17 it is damaged, or if that's the case hopefully never.

10:12:21 But I also understand that if that happens, the people

10:12:26 that are here, will be here at that time, may not grant

10:12:30 it.

10:12:37 As far as the -- I would like to hear from the

10:12:43 petitioner, if I may.

10:12:49 I have a question in reference to the continuance of

10:12:51 the application.

10:12:55 What's your feeling on that?

10:12:58 >>> First of all, we are here because of the city's

10:13:00 action or inaction, just trying to resolve actually a

10:13:04 legal issue that we are technically not in compliance

10:13:08 with the comp plan, or our use is illegal, an illegal

10:13:12 standpoint.

10:13:13 With respect to your suggestion, I think the reverend

10:13:16 mentioned amendment 4 is on the horizon.

10:13:19 Sewage it passes, the effective date will be November

10:13:21 2nd of this year.

10:13:23 So any change to the amendment are actually a change to




10:13:26 the overall comp plan subject to referendum.

10:13:29 And the problem with that is this.

10:13:37 It will be changed by referendum, and I can't envision

10:13:40 the city spending -- I have looked at statistics for a

10:13:44 medium city, about 500,000 to a special referendum.

10:13:48 They are going to wait till the general election which

10:13:50 will be at a minimum of two years, and assuming it

10:13:52 passes, okay, so you are looking, assume everything

10:13:56 goes positive, a few years out before this is resolved,

10:14:02 okay?

10:14:02 So it's just pure speculation as to what may happen.

10:14:06 And we are entitled to have City Council act on this

10:14:10 right now.

10:14:12 With respect to the development agreement, I think Chip

10:14:14 and Julia will agree it's illegal to condition a plan

10:14:19 amendment on the development agreement, and actually

10:14:21 the development agreement wouldn't even involve the

10:14:23 neighbors under the laws, agreeing between the city and

10:14:28 my client, and the development agreement would be

10:14:31 essentially a PD rezoning which would be the next step

10:14:34 in the process, when everybody can weigh in and impose

10:14:37 conditions, et cetera, et cetera.




10:14:39 So in terms of any expansion, that might never happen.

10:14:43 We are trying to get the property into compliance.

10:14:46 If we don't do it now, it might never happen, okay.

10:14:50 This amendment you are suggesting may never happen.

10:14:53 So that's where we stand on that.

10:14:55 So our hands are tied.

10:14:57 If we could condition the plan amendment, we suggested

10:14:59 that early on.

10:15:01 But we don't have any plans.

10:15:02 We don't know number one, it's going to happen, and

10:15:09 it's all speculation.

10:15:10 So when we go to the PD process we are going to lay

10:15:13 everything on the table.

10:15:14 You mentioned historic preservation and integrity and

10:15:19 character.

10:15:20 District.

10:15:21 ARC after lengthy discussion, it was unanimous

10:15:23 recommendation, and that's a tough crowd, okay.

10:15:26 And Dennis is here if you want.

10:15:29 Obviously he can explain the thought process and the

10:15:32 discussion built ARC.

10:15:33 So we would like an up or down vote today.




10:15:38 And I appreciate what you are saying.

10:15:40 And ultimately the PD stays before we file, we are

10:15:44 going to engage the neighborhood.

10:15:46 Definitely.

10:15:47 There's been a long relationship.

10:15:49 The church has been there a hundred years next year,

10:15:51 and it's been a pretty positive relationship, and these

10:15:54 people will be the first to get involved in the

10:15:57 process, assuming there is even any kind of expansion.

10:16:01 So I really appreciate your consideration.

10:16:03 Hopefully you will move forward on this.

10:16:06 And this is the only category we can proceed.

10:16:09 Our hands are tied.

10:16:10 The next category under consideration would have an

10:16:13 F.A.R. 3.25 which would allow the school in theory to

10:16:17 triple in size plus it allows 60 units per acre.

10:16:22 I don't think that's something the neighbors want to

10:16:25 deal with either.

10:16:25 So this category limits any use to school, orb

10:16:30 quasi-governmental facilities, and there ain't going to

10:16:33 be a sewer plant or airport in the middle of Hyde Park.

10:16:36 Those are two of the other uses.




10:16:39 Thank you.

10:16:41 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

10:16:45 I am going to follow up with that.

10:16:47 Just for the record, I knew that would be problematic.

10:16:57 And I agree with the preservation.

10:17:03 And I will say that I will vote for this because of the

10:17:10 preservation.

10:17:11 So thank you.

10:17:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Bentley, I have a question.

10:17:16 You say the church has been there a hundred years?

10:17:18 >> And the school has been there 60.

10:17:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Were there are any homes or anything

10:17:22 around that 100 years ago?

10:17:24 >>MARK BENTLEY: I'm not that old.

10:17:25 >>GWEN MILLER: What I was getting at --

10:17:29 >>MARK BENTLEY: Well, Hyde Park -- I'm not in a

10:17:32 position.

10:17:32 >>GWEN MILLER: But 100 years.

10:17:33 I don't think.

10:17:35 So they are putting you in this predicament because you

10:17:37 were there first.

10:17:38 And if there have been homes built around you --




10:17:43 >> Well, I don't know whether we were the first guy on

10:17:47 the block or not there.

10:17:49 Used to be a church and it burned out.

10:17:50 The bottom line is 1989 we didn't get designated.

10:17:56 Now we are illegal with Sam Hallenbeck to the plan.

10:17:58 As Julie says not only noncompliance to the comp plan.

10:18:02 If we do get this changed today we are not conforming

10:18:06 with respect to the zoning so we can't add one brick to

10:18:08 that building without going through the ARC and coming

10:18:10 back to see you all.

10:18:11 >>GWEN MILLER: That's what I'm saying, that's why you

10:18:15 all are here now because 100 years ago they never had

10:18:18 homes around you.

10:18:19 You wouldn't be in front of us.

10:18:23 I'm just saying, you wouldn't be here.

10:18:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Bentley, don't sit down yet.

10:18:30 I didn't hear Julia say that a development agreement

10:18:34 would be illegal.

10:18:36 And I think you pointed out that there can be -- and

10:18:40 she did, too -- thereby can be a development agreement

10:18:43 between the city and your client.

10:18:46 And I think the city, because of the historic district,




10:18:51 and because of the concerns of the neighbor, would

10:18:55 certainly be able to do that.

10:18:57 So it sound like you are not interested in pursuing

10:19:00 that, and that's fine.

10:19:01 But I did not hear our attorney say that that

10:19:05 development agreement at this point would be illegal.

10:19:07 >>MARK BENTLEY: What I'm saying, council, is you can't

10:19:11 condition a plan amendment on anything, then assuming

10:19:14 you went the development route just like a PD zoning.

10:19:16 We don't have any plans.

10:19:17 But what you put in the agreement.

10:19:21 There's really nothing to agree on at this point.

10:19:25 >>MARY MULHERN: That brings up my next question.

10:19:29 You keep saying it might never happen.

10:19:32 Expansion might never happen.

10:19:33 >>MARK BENTLEY: That's correct.

10:19:35 >>MARY MULHERN: So is it likely to happen?

10:19:41 >>MARK BENTLEY: We looked at the potential for

10:19:44 expansion, okay.

10:19:44 And then this issue arose that -- forget the expansion,

10:19:49 we are in noncompliance with the comp plan, and I think

10:19:52 your attorneys will say we can't do a darned thing.




10:19:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.

10:19:58 So --

10:19:59 >>MARK BENTLEY: Pardon me?

10:20:02 >>MARY MULHERN: You need to be in compliance with the

10:20:04 comp plan in order to expand and that's why you are

10:20:05 here, right?

10:20:07 >> We need to be in compliance with the comp plan to be

10:20:09 recognized, number one is legal, and number two, for

10:20:12 the potential opportunity to expand, which might never

10:20:16 happen, you know, in this neighborhood.

10:20:18 >> Right.

10:20:20 But I'm just trying to point this out to council.

10:20:23 And I understand this.

10:20:24 But the reality is, in order for you to keep that

10:20:27 option open, that's why you're here before November to

10:20:30 get this land use changed, so you would be able to come

10:20:34 back and do that.

10:20:35 So to characterize this as not being -- as being for

10:20:41 you to be in compliance --

10:20:44 >>MARK BENTLEY: I always said there was two issues.

10:20:46 One was compliance.

10:20:47 Number two, the opportunity to expand.




10:20:49 And with all due respect, you all put us in this boat

10:20:52 and I think you are obligated to get this straightened

10:20:55 out, okay?

10:20:56 >>MARY MULHERN: The church and the school are not

10:20:58 going anywhere.

10:21:07 >>CURTIS STOKES: I think the serious part about this is

10:21:09 amendment 4, not to make a political statement, but ...

10:21:22 very sensitive to the needs of neighborhoods and

10:21:29 operating the church, and come into compliance with the

10:21:34 comp plan.

10:21:35 When I look at the primary use of the zoning,

10:21:37 government buildings, schools, colleges, community

10:21:41 centers, I don't think we can change it to a public

10:21:46 airport or public parking structure, utility facility

10:21:50 or any other thing.

10:21:51 So I think we have to make that decision, being very

10:21:55 sensitive to the needs of the community, that we bring

10:21:57 the church into compliance.

10:22:00 And again we should still have to come before council

10:22:03 for rezoning.

10:22:04 But I just think with the amendment, not knowing how

10:22:10 the voters vote on that -- I'm hoping they do vote no




10:22:12 on it -- that we at least allow this to go forward

10:22:15 today.

10:22:15 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I agree, because of Amendment 4, I

10:22:25 would not want to continue this because of the jeopardy

10:22:32 that is possible, and I wouldn't want to jeopardize the

10:22:35 historic in that way.

10:22:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I think all of us in council

10:22:41 have sought legal remedy for this.

10:22:43 At least I know I met with Julia yesterday, and talk

10:22:47 about how can we assist, how can we bring some resolve

10:22:51 to this issue, and legal basically pretty much told us

10:22:58 what the options were.

10:22:59 So that's why we hire them, to advise us, because again

10:23:05 we were trying to assist and trying to find some way

10:23:07 how to bring a mutual compromise.

10:23:12 So as a result of that, you know, I will hear from the

10:23:15 public, and then we can move forward on our decision.

10:23:18 But I just want to be clear.

10:23:19 I just want everybody to understand that council has

10:23:23 sought legal advice, talked to our staff, and talked to

10:23:28 folks we can talk to, and the community, for that

10:23:31 matter; to hear from them.




10:23:35 So I think it needs to be said that this council has a

10:23:41 very open to listen to both sides of each party on the

10:23:51 particular issue.

10:23:52 Okay?

10:23:53 Mr. Fernandez, do you want to add something to the

10:23:55 record?

10:23:59 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: Historic preservation design

10:24:00 manager.

10:24:01 I would like for the record to read the recommendation

10:24:03 of the architecture review commission.

10:24:05 Did hold a public hearing on September 13th of 2010

10:24:10 between the first and second, today's second reading,

10:24:12 and did recommend approval as presented.

10:24:16 The future land use map change, based on the following,

10:24:19 that the recommendation would not undermine the

10:24:21 historical integrity of the neighborhood by its

10:24:24 designation alone, and that there are appropriate

10:24:27 checks and balances in place to preserve the

10:24:29 neighborhood, and that motion was approved in a vote of

10:24:33 7-0.

10:24:34 And just to inform the council that conversation is

10:24:39 much like a discussion that's happening today.




10:24:41 There was a great deal of discussion, and a great deal

10:24:44 of public input as well.

10:24:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like just one question, sir.

10:24:51 Regarding -- I know you did everything you could to get

10:24:55 everything on the record, and you did an excellent job

10:24:57 and so forth.

10:24:59 When you said the integrity of the structure, does that

10:25:01 mean that the structure remains the same or it changes

10:25:04 to something else?

10:25:06 What does that mean?

10:25:07 >> Well, the integrity is of the district itself, and

10:25:13 the commission felt that by the designation, by the

10:25:15 change in the land use classification itself, that

10:25:18 would not result in an adverse effect to the historic

10:25:22 district, because there was still the issue of the

10:25:26 property being nonconforming, and having to go through

10:25:29 a rezoning to make any substantial changes.

10:25:31 >> So I assumed then that the building was not going to

10:25:38 change, that it would be there forever.

10:25:41 >> Well, the historic sanctuary portion of the building

10:25:44 and the former single-family residence that's also on

10:25:47 the side are contributing historic structures.




10:25:49 So those structures in and of themselves are under the

10:25:53 historic preservation ordinances and protected under

10:25:57 the jurisdiction of those.

10:26:01 >> To be go one step forward that means those

10:26:04 historical structures can never be moved or modified,

10:26:07 they are historical, have to remain the way they are,

10:26:10 is that what you are saying to us on the record?

10:26:12 >> That's correct, unless there was an economic

10:26:14 hardship, usually dealing with their structural

10:26:18 integrity or safety.

10:26:19 Those are usually issues that would result in

10:26:21 demolition.

10:26:23 There's a very high likelihood that's not going to --

10:26:26 >> So whatever property we are talking about here, the

10:26:28 property known as the church and other buildings, that

10:26:32 was considered by your division and found to be that

10:26:35 those structures would never be torn down?

10:26:38 That's what I'm reading into it, unless it was by an

10:26:41 act of God?

10:26:42 >> Generally, yes.

10:26:44 I mean, there's a process for them to be demolished but

10:26:47 that would be highly unlikely and would ultimately come




10:26:50 to the council, or if it was appealed.

10:26:51 The school itself, the school portion of the property

10:26:54 is not a contributing structure.

10:26:57 That could be demolished if the appropriate zoning was

10:27:00 in place, to be reconstructed.

10:27:03 However, that would go both through the rezoning

10:27:06 through a PD process and then through the certificate

10:27:08 of appropriate problem sees required for by the

10:27:11 Architectural Review Commission.

10:27:16 There's various appeals processes in place for both

10:27:17 parties, the owners and the neighborhood.

10:27:24 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, Chairman Scott.

10:27:28 So then the ARC is in agreement, it feels that the

10:27:33 checks and balances are in place to deal with this, to

10:27:42 keep it in the historic structure that it is, and the

10:27:46 surrounding area, in compliance, or to conform to the

10:27:52 historic area that it is in, that checks and balances

10:28:00 is what is happening here today.

10:28:02 >> DENNIS FERNANDEZ: That is one part of this process.

10:28:04 >> When it comes to rezoning. If it were to come to

10:28:06 rezoning, the checks and balances that you are

10:28:09 referring to.




10:28:09 >> Correct.

10:28:10 It would come to a rezoning.

10:28:12 Would go before the Architectural Review Commission for

10:28:15 a recommendation much like today, would be forwarded to

10:28:17 the council, and that the council would vote that up or

10:28:21 down.

10:28:22 If there was an affirmative, if the rezoning was

10:28:25 granted, when the church did come back to construct or

10:28:27 make modifications, that would first go to the

10:28:30 Architectural Review Commission for certificate of

10:28:32 appropriateness prior to any type of construction

10:28:34 activity being approved.

10:28:36 >> I agree those checks and balances are in place, and

10:28:40 I have every confidence in this council that we will

10:28:48 follow them.

10:28:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: This is a public hearing.

10:28:50 Anyone that wishes to address council may come forward.

10:28:53 State your name and address.

10:28:55 You have three minutes.

10:28:56 Those wishing to speak to council may come forward.

10:28:57 >> My name is Patrick Cimino, South Delaware Avenue.

10:29:05 I came up first because I have to get off to work, and




10:29:07 I do appreciate the ability to meet with the council,

10:29:11 with their staff, and with some of the city

10:29:14 departments.

10:29:14 I think it's important for to us try to flesh out what

10:29:19 clearly appears to be a difficult obtuse issue at least

10:29:23 for the City of Tampa.

10:29:24 I think that just for contextual reasons, a lot has

10:29:30 been said.

10:29:31 I am going to try to be brief.

10:29:33 This is a small church and school.

10:29:34 It's valued by the neighborhood, in spite of their

10:29:36 being some drawbacks to it which are mainly traffic and

10:29:39 congestion.

10:29:42 While we did give a number of rationale for seeking

10:29:45 this land use change, I guess I will make a comment

10:29:47 where that further but initially it's to try to protect

10:29:50 the structure in the event of catastrophe.

10:29:53 I think based upon the comments both here and in the

10:29:55 Planning Commission and ARC, I am going to be ask you a

10:29:59 question.

10:29:59 Should we really have confidence this system is going

10:30:02 to work?




10:30:02 Because I am not standing here saying it will.

10:30:06 Will zoning in fact not allow intensification that's

10:30:09 out of proportion with the residential street and a

10:30:12 residential neighborhood, and will the ARC stand by its

10:30:16 guidelines of the historic district, the character of

10:30:20 height, mass and density as well as protecting the

10:30:22 contributing structures?

10:30:23 That's supposed to be their mission.

10:30:25 If I am wrong I would like to know about it but that's

10:30:27 what I understand the roles of these departments to be.

10:30:31 I think the concern -- and it came up today, PSPN, the

10:30:36 presumed PD zoning, had no specific density limits.

10:30:40 They just don't have any.

10:30:42 You can talk all about the checks and balances but that

10:30:44 is a blank check.

10:30:45 We all talked about it.

10:30:47 And that's really a planning problem.

10:30:48 I think amendment 4 for contextual issues, in fact,

10:30:53 is -- and I'm not advocating for it -- but to put it in

10:30:58 context, it's a response of communities like us and

10:31:01 neighborhoods like us have to deal with legislative

10:31:04 bodies like you and feeling that frequently the




10:31:08 community and public interest, neighborhood interest,

10:31:11 is not watched out for.

10:31:14 So that's the context.

10:31:15 And I'm not making that up.

10:31:17 That's what the advocate would say.

10:31:18 So that's why there's this amendment 4 out there.

10:31:21 And that's why we are concerned.

10:31:23 And just for clarification, it's not our fault either

10:31:26 that there's all these shortcomings on the city

10:31:28 planning process.

10:31:30 So where do we stand as a historic district in our

10:31:34 protection?

10:31:38 I did note some change in the rationale today.

10:31:42 I would like to think this is a disingenuous effort of

10:31:47 trying to create intensification by the petitioner.

10:31:52 The PSP is binding that comes out of here but what

10:31:55 people say at least on an integrity basis should hold

10:32:00 water, and of course we want to trust people.

10:32:02 We want to take them for their word.

10:32:04 So that is really important.

10:32:05 Finally, with regard to bringing the comp plan legality

10:32:11 into order, whatever you want to call it, this was a




10:32:14 quotation.

10:32:15 This has to be done by 2025.

10:32:17 As far as I can count that's 15 years from now so I am

10:32:19 not sure what the urgency of that is.

10:32:21 I'm not quite sure what it means.

10:32:23 But just as a point -- and I don't know where that even

10:32:26 came from.

10:32:26 I didn't investigate it.

10:32:28 It didn't seem to pop up everywhere in the city.

10:32:31 (Bell sounds)

10:32:32 I appreciate your at least trying to investigate this

10:32:35 issue and take our perspective into consideration.

10:32:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker.

10:32:40 Thank you.

10:32:40 >> My name is Dana Glaser, and I live at 810 south

10:32:49 Newport and I have for 26 years.

10:32:52 And I oppose the land use change to BLC.

10:32:57 It is said that it needs to be done to right a wrong.

10:33:04 But I feel that the wrong is to the neighborhood.

10:33:06 I'm glad we are writing that wrong to the church.

10:33:10 But if they go out here today with a BLC

10:33:13 classification, the value of their property will have




10:33:16 gone up, and the value of the neighboring properties

10:33:20 will most assuredly be gone down because they have got

10:33:25 a bigger land use designation.

10:33:34 The current impact of the petitioner's property is

10:33:36 already at the limit to which the neighborhood can

10:33:39 bear.

10:33:40 I like the way it is now.

10:33:42 Any more impact would be a real harm on the

10:33:46 neighborhood.

10:33:49 I think we have been better neighbors than most.

10:33:53 When I walk down Orleans, because it's a church and

10:33:57 school, and it's not even an-acre parcel and they have

10:34:00 quite a few students, cars are parked along both sides

10:34:04 of the road from 8:00 in the morning to 8:00 at night

10:34:09 because there is no parking.

10:34:11 And I don't see that changing.

10:34:15 And please don't harm this historic neighborhood that

10:34:18 we fought so long and hard for.

10:34:22 We want to protect us.

10:34:24 We are good neighbors, hard working and passionate and

10:34:26 only want to protect what we have.

10:34:28 Thank you.




10:34:28 >> I'm Gordon Knapp, 915 South Orleans which is

10:34:43 essentially across the street from the church and

10:34:48 Parrish school.

10:34:50 Been a resident there for about 30-some years, have to

10:34:53 go back and check the record exactly, but long before

10:34:56 all the resurrection that you are well aware of has

10:34:59 taken place in the area.

10:35:03 Some of the neighbors have had a chance to meet with

10:35:07 you individually.

10:35:07 We appreciate your time and effort, and very generous

10:35:10 in that as we express our concerns, as we have done in

10:35:13 the public meetings before in the ARC and the Planning

10:35:16 Commission.

10:35:17 I don't want to reiterate -- you heard them all and

10:35:22 probably got them memorized by now.

10:35:24 I think what we are looking at here is an error was

10:35:28 committed many, many years ago, and trying to rectify

10:35:31 that, trying to remedy that.

10:35:34 That's good for all parties.

10:35:35 The neighbors are happy with St. John's church and

10:35:38 Parrish school.

10:35:39 We have a good relationship with them.




10:35:41 We worked with them over the years.

10:35:42 They have worked with us.

10:35:45 Been open to our concerns.

10:35:46 But, frankly, as you heard before, the property is

10:35:49 small, and it's pretty well maxed out.

10:35:52 So our main concern is that we would like to have

10:35:58 assurances that this will be the situation going

10:36:02 forward.

10:36:03 So, therefore, when we get to something like PSP with

10:36:08 potentially, theoretically, expansion allowed on height

10:36:13 and density and F.A.R.s and all these things we have

10:36:15 had to come to grips with understanding, it gives us

10:36:19 great reason to worry.

10:36:22 This morning we talked about possibly a third way to

10:36:27 put some restrictions that have gone on the property.

10:36:32 Should there be a terrible storm, a hurricane, should

10:36:34 there be a fire, that destroys the property, the

10:36:36 neighborhood doesn't want to see it go away.

10:36:38 That would be totally unfair to St. John's church and

10:36:42 school.

10:36:42 We are happy with it the way it is.

10:36:44 We are supportive of it the way it is.




10:36:47 We are just very concerned about the open endedness of

10:36:50 the mechanism as we understand it.

10:36:52 So we ask you to keep that in mind.

10:36:56 We are basically changing the rules of the game in the

10:36:58 8th inning now.

10:37:00 After years and years of the way it has been.

10:37:04 Perhaps there's legalistic reasons for doing that.

10:37:07 But we are concerned about the open-endedness of it.

10:37:10 And we hear St. Johns saying, well, we have no plans to

10:37:14 really do anything.

10:37:15 On the other hand, we have a letter saying they would

10:37:17 be willing to keep the height restrictions at 50 feet.

10:37:20 Well, that's five stories.

10:37:22 That's pretty massive change on a small piece of land

10:37:25 right now.

10:37:26 So there are lots of cloudy issues.

10:37:29 It appears to us to use kind of -- we are kicking the

10:37:34 can down the road and hoping that this commission and

10:37:37 that agency and that city department an so forth will

10:37:39 be watching out in the future.

10:37:42 They probably will.

10:37:43 But given the magnitude of this change that's being




10:37:46 requested, we would feel far more comfortable with

10:37:50 greater controls.

10:37:51 Thank you very much.

10:38:02 >> I'm Cindy Webb at 901 south Orlean, and I have not

10:38:06 been sworn in.

10:38:06 I apologize.

10:38:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else that hasn't been sworn

10:38:09 that's going to be speaking, please stand.

10:38:11 (Oath administered by Clerk)

10:38:12 >> I live at 901 South Orleans across the street from

10:38:23 the church.

10:38:24 Point of reference.

10:38:28 The house is 100 years old and I love doing research.

10:38:31 I enjoy looking -- the 1822 map of Tampa does not

10:38:37 reflect the church as it now stands.

10:38:40 On the map.

10:38:41 So it's not 100 years old.

10:38:43 And was not there prior to the other houses.

10:38:46 Our house wags there and the houses surrounding it was

10:38:49 there prior to the church coming.

10:38:51 To make that point.

10:38:53 But the real reason here is Hyde Park is a




10:38:57 neighborhood.

10:38:57 It's been a wonderful neighborhood, historic.

10:39:00 It good for the city.

10:39:01 It's good for a lot of things in the city.

10:39:05 And the neighborhood has been very active in protecting

10:39:09 it, preserving and protecting it.

10:39:13 Kate Jackson park put up historic signs.

10:39:17 The city uses it many times to promote as businesses

10:39:23 come in, we have this wonderful historic area as it

10:39:26 brings attractions in.

10:39:28 We want to maintain that.

10:39:30 And by changing this classification, it's taking a

10:39:35 little bit of our protection

10:39:41 The ARC does not work for us and we are concerned about

10:39:48 that.

10:39:49 Do not want to hold back St. John's as far as being

10:39:52 able to protect and maintain their property.

10:39:54 I agree with that.

10:39:55 But I think that there has to be a way that we can all

10:39:58 work together, that we can -- and I apologize if I

10:40:02 missed the part where you were discussing all of the

10:40:04 ways that you have looked into other ways, but I just




10:40:07 feel as though going forward, because we are afraid of

10:40:10 amendment 4, it's not fair to our neighborhood, and

10:40:15 could also run into more problems down the road as we

10:40:19 have to go back and protect the neighborhood against

10:40:22 this land use.

10:40:23 There's a possibility that there's more properties out

10:40:25 there that might want to change to a different land

10:40:29 use, and it could change the complexity of this

10:40:34 neighborhood.

10:40:34 We can't allow that to happen.

10:40:38 So I urge you to -- oh, one other thing I was going to

10:40:42 say.

10:40:42 If there is anyway to maintain that they stay within

10:40:45 the box, the framework of what they are right now.

10:40:51 If we want to do anything to our house, we have to stay

10:40:57 within that framework.

10:40:58 And I think it's only fair that the church has to stay

10:41:00 in that framework as well.

10:41:02 So I urge you to continue this, if this is the only

10:41:06 thing you can, so we can do a little more

10:41:08 investigation, find out if there is a way that they can

10:41:16 come into compliance but protect the neighborhood.




10:41:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

10:41:19 Anyone else?

10:41:25 >> Clark Hobby, Hobby and Hobby P.A., Tampa, and I have

10:41:31 been sworn.

10:41:33 I'm a member of St. John's and also happen to be a land

10:41:36 use attorney, and I had about six or seven large-scale

10:41:40 land use amendments, and various jurisdictions that I

10:41:43 have done this year, specifically to deal with the

10:41:45 issues that you are being confronted with today, which

10:41:48 is people are concerned about the looming hometown

10:41:52 democracy deadline.

10:41:54 This one is much more pertinent, though, because as a

10:41:59 member I can assure you that our primary concern is

10:42:01 being able to rebuild our existing facilities in the

10:42:05 event of a casualty.

10:42:07 There's been no discussion at our vestry meetings about

10:42:11 expansion of the school or the church.

10:42:13 I don't believe that we have the funding for anything

10:42:15 like that.

10:42:16 But I can tell you, if the council fails to act today

10:42:20 there will be a period of time in which the church and

10:42:23 the school will be in jeopardy.




10:42:25 And I don't want that to happen.

10:42:27 And that's why I came down here today.

10:42:29 I think it's the council's prerogative, and would be

10:42:33 very wise of the council to ensure that we are

10:42:36 consistent with our comp plan designation, and I just

10:42:39 want to point out to the council one other thing that

10:42:42 hasn't been stated very clearly today.

10:42:44 Maybe it was at the last hearing.

10:42:46 The issue is, under the growth management act, there is

10:42:50 one statement in there that says that no development

10:42:53 order can be issued that is inconsistent with the

10:42:58 comprehensive plan.

10:43:00 This city does not have the right, if we don't comply

10:43:03 with the comprehensive plan, to issue any zoning order,

10:43:07 any site plan approval or anything else that's

10:43:10 inconsistent with the comprehensive plan.

10:43:12 So in essence the way things stand today, the city

10:43:15 could not approve us rebuilding the existing structure

10:43:20 and this land use classification.

10:43:22 And that's the issue, and that's why we need you all to

10:43:24 do that for us today, to change it.

10:43:27 And certainly if there are ever changes in the existing




10:43:31 facilities, there's going to have to be a rezoning.

10:43:34 I think everyone understands that.

10:43:36 If there's a PD zoning that comes down the line later,

10:43:39 it can be conditioned.

10:43:42 However the applicant and however the city agreed to do

10:43:44 so.

10:43:45 And I think that would alleviate the level of concerns

10:43:47 that some of the council members have.

10:43:50 So for today the issue is, are we consistent with the

10:43:53 comprehensive plan?

10:43:55 Because if we are not, we could be in real jeopardy as

10:43:58 a long standing church and school.

10:44:00 That is the sole issue that the vestry is concerned

10:44:04 with.

10:44:05 So thank you.

10:44:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker.

10:44:10 >> My name is Edward Page, reside at 5019 west Dante

10:44:21 Avenue in Tampa.

10:44:22 I'm not a resident of the Hyde Park neighborhood.

10:44:24 I sit on the church's school board and serve in that

10:44:29 capacity as vice chair this year.

10:44:31 I'm here to encourage you to approve our petition.




10:44:37 As the ARC realized, and declared, there are adequate

10:44:42 checks and balances to preserve the historical nature

10:44:45 and character of this neighborhood.

10:44:48 That will occur if and when there's any effort to

10:44:51 comply with the zoning requirements that would be in

10:44:54 place for any changes to the church's structure.

10:45:01 It's not today where that debate takes place.

10:45:04 It's in the future.

10:45:05 And as you can recognize, because you have doing this

10:45:09 awhile, there will be a vigorous debate if it ever

10:45:12 arises but it's for another date and time for those

10:45:14 checks and balances to come in to play.

10:45:17 So, again, we ask for your approval.

10:45:19 Thank you.

10:45:26 >>> Good morning.

10:45:28 Thank you for hearing us on this matter.

10:45:30 My name is David Adams.

10:45:32 I reside at 2501 West -- Boulevard in Parkland Estates.

10:45:36 I have been a member of St. John's church for

10:45:38 approximately 20 years, since 1990.

10:45:40 I served six years on the vestry of the church.

10:45:42 I served six years on the school board.




10:45:44 I served as the president of the school board.

10:45:46 And I also served as a member on the facilities

10:45:49 committee for the school board which is in charge of

10:45:53 figuring out where we are going to keep our children

10:45:55 and trying to allocate the densities between our two

10:45:58 campuses.

10:46:00 This is a technical matter.

10:46:02 There's no way, as council and everyone else has

10:46:06 advised you, that the density or use of this property

10:46:12 can be increase absent a public hearing and a zoning

10:46:16 change.

10:46:16 I think you have heard that, and it's the important

10:46:18 part of it.

10:46:21 A church has been on this property for 100 years

10:46:23 starting next year.

10:46:24 The school has been there approximately 50 years

10:46:28 It's the city, unfortunately, that improperly

10:46:31 designated this as the wrong property designation back

10:46:35 in 1989.

10:46:36 And all we are here today is to ask the city to please

10:46:40 fix this technical issue.

10:46:42 And we ask that you please fix it this morning so we




10:46:44 can right the wrong that was made in 1989.

10:46:47 Thank you for your time.

10:46:54 >>> Good morning.

10:46:55 I'm Robert stone.

10:46:56 And my wife Susan and our family reside at 905 south

10:47:00 Rome Avenue which is right there at the corner of Kate

10:47:02 Jackson park.

10:47:03 And we have been in that house for almost 15 years, and

10:47:07 we love living in the Hyde Park neighborhood.

10:47:09 And I'm here more as a Hyde Park resident to tell you

10:47:12 that we very much support this.

10:47:15 The relationship between this school and this community

10:47:17 is very symbiotic.

10:47:20 We get along perfectly well.

10:47:21 The church is a good and ready neighbor.

10:47:23 The school is a good and ready neighbor.

10:47:25 There has not been a time where they have not been

10:47:28 communicative and open and willing to work together and

10:47:31 has worked together wonderfully well for the past 100

10:47:34 years and will continue to work well together.

10:47:36 I think there may be a misperception that this is an

10:47:39 enlargement and scope and change, and there's going to




10:47:41 be construction.

10:47:42 That's not what this is.

10:47:43 This is a technical comp plan amendment as you all

10:47:46 understand.

10:47:47 I think the community, myself and my neighbors may not

10:47:49 understand that this is a simple righting of a wrong,

10:47:54 and as you know, if there's going to be any changes we

10:47:57 are going to have to come back before you twice, once

10:47:59 for ARC and once for zoning.

10:48:01 Now, if I change my front door in the Hyde Park

10:48:04 historic district, I have to go to ARC and get staff

10:48:09 approval if it's minimal, and so that process is a long

10:48:12 process, a public process, and there's two full public

10:48:15 hearings, and it would be full opportunities.

10:48:17 That's where the city and the county and city and

10:48:21 community and the church are going to get together and

10:48:23 they are going to condition and they are going to build

10:48:25 a consensus and they are going to work together, and

10:48:27 that's where these conversations will be had at that

10:48:29 point in time.

10:48:33 I just want to say that my family loves living in Hyde

10:48:36 Park.




10:48:37 We live on Rome Avenue, six or seven doors down from

10:48:40 the little school.

10:48:41 We love having the church in our neighborhood.

10:48:43 In fact one of my favorite stories is a couple of years

10:48:46 ago where the church had a blessing of the pets, and

10:48:49 they bring, after school, they brought the local

10:48:51 pastor.

10:48:53 Ironically he's behind me, and to come over to the Kate

10:48:56 Jackson park and they will bless your pet.

10:48:58 So my daughter and I take our dog and go over there,

10:49:01 and we do a full blessing and holding of our dog and

10:49:05 our guinea pig with a certificate.

10:49:07 And that's just the kind of neighbors they are.

10:49:09 So I want to let you know that it's a good

10:49:10 relationship.

10:49:11 We appreciate that.

10:49:12 But this is a simple technical amendment.

10:49:14 And we appreciate your support.

10:49:15 Thank you.

10:49:15 >> I'm Charles Connelly, the associate director of the

10:49:25 St. John's church and as such my primary responsibility

10:49:29 is to serve as chaplain to our school.




10:49:32 So what I do there is counsel children who are

10:49:36 experiencing difficulties academically or personally.

10:49:41 I am responsible for our religion curriculum and I'm

10:49:44 responsible for the conduct of worship on our three

10:49:46 campuses each day.

10:49:51 St. John's church has been ministering to Hyde Park,

10:49:54 South Tampa and greater Tampa, not only with a school

10:50:01 in, where we reach out to those in need, for almost 100

10:50:05 years.

10:50:07 2012-2013.

10:50:09 We are not quite sure, to be honest.

10:50:11 The major outreach effort of our church is St. John's

10:50:15 school, which we have been doing for 60 years.

10:50:20 Even priests can't prevent an act of God.

10:50:24 And our concern is that something that could happen,

10:50:28 something could happen that could prevent us from

10:50:31 carrying on that ministry in the future

10:50:34 And what we would like to do is be in a position to

10:50:37 continue to minister to Hyde Park, South Tampa, and

10:50:41 greater Tampa through the church and through the school

10:50:44 for the next 100 years.

10:50:46 And that's why I urge you to vote in approval of this




10:50:52 planned amendment this morning.

10:50:53 Thank you.

10:50:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

10:50:56 Next speaker.

10:50:56 >> Good morning.

10:51:01 Any name is John McAdams.

10:51:04 And I reside at 820 south Delaware Avenue in Hyde Park.

10:51:08 I'm a member of St. John's church, and I have lived in

10:51:13 Hyde Park since around 19390.

10:51:15 I have also been active in the neighborhood association

10:51:19 over the years and had the privilege of serving as its

10:51:23 president.

10:51:25 I'm not going to repeat the many arguments advanced

10:51:28 here today by my friends for support of this amendment.

10:51:32 I simply say that I agree entirely with the points they

10:51:35 have made.

10:51:36 And I do urge the City Council here today to approve

10:51:38 the change, the land use designation as requested by

10:51:44 the petitioner.

10:51:45 Thank you very much.

10:51:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

10:51:48 Next speaker.




10:51:49 >> Mary Britain, 840 South Dakota Avenue and I'm

10:51:57 opposed to this land use -- this plan change.

10:52:00 I want to talk about checks and balances, because

10:52:03 everybody has been mentioning it today.

10:52:04 And I just want to remind you that we are experiencing

10:52:07 one of those checks and balances today right in this

10:52:10 process.

10:52:10 We have heard from a lot of attorneys, land use

10:52:13 attorneys, historic preservation, land development

10:52:17 commented on this change, and they did not support it.

10:52:21 Why are you all making the decision?

10:52:22 Why is it a legislative process?

10:52:24 Because you are elected.

10:52:27 So as a citizen, I have the right to elect people to

10:52:30 City Council who support historic preservation, who

10:52:33 support neighborhoods, and ask yourself right now, you

10:52:36 know, are you an elected official voting in this

10:52:40 process?

10:52:43 Why has St. John's waited?

10:52:47 I have been in the neighborhood 20 years.

10:52:47 Why is it coming up now?

10:52:48 And everybody talked about amendment 4.




10:52:52 That's something that goes back to the voters, too.

10:52:54 So I'm asking myself the question, are we in a unique

10:52:57 point in our city's history where one of those checks

10:52:59 and balances isn't happening?

10:53:02 Because we are at a legislative point.

10:53:05 And do we really have those checks?

10:53:06 Do we have those balances?

10:53:08 Ask yourself that question

10:53:09 If you are not, you know, a land use planner, whatever,

10:53:15 why are you making the one making the decision?

10:53:18 Because we put you up there to do it for us.

10:53:21 So that's one point.

10:53:23 I'm feeling a little disenfranchised.

10:53:25 But I appreciate everybody's helping in meeting with

10:53:29 the neighborhoods, want to invite to you our upcoming

10:53:32 kitchen tour November 6th, happens to be right on

10:53:34 this block on Orleans Avenue so that you can see for

10:53:37 yourself how overinvested people are in their homes.

10:53:42 We are talking about tens of millions of dollars.

10:53:45 Okay.

10:53:45 That's not only property values that are represented in

10:53:49 taxes that go to the city.




10:53:51 I just think that that is an important consideration.

10:53:54 If you are talking about making a change that could

10:53:57 impact those property owners when they go to sell their

10:54:00 home in the future.

10:54:00 So when you ask yourself questions of the homeowner

10:54:03 about how much do I want to invest in my property, you

10:54:07 look around at the surrounding area and you make

10:54:09 decisions based on the risk that you have at the time.

10:54:12 You are changing that risk with this decision.

10:54:14 And that's my concern.

10:54:16 Thank you.

10:54:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

10:54:19 Next speaker.

10:54:19 >> Larry Thornberry. I live at 834 South Willow

10:54:27 Avenue, about 60 yards from the church.

10:54:33 There's nothing historic about a driver's license

10:54:38 bureau, which is land use category would allow.

10:54:43 It's pretty clear, at least to me, what St. John's is

10:54:49 trying to do is maximize the value of its property.

10:54:54 Property which because of developments within the

10:54:55 Episcopal church, they may at some point need to sell.

10:55:01 And I just want you all to keep in mind that if you




10:55:06 grant this land use category, you are not granting it

10:55:09 to St. John's church.

10:55:11 You are granting it to that piece of property, the

10:55:16 value of which would be increased by this land use

10:55:19 category, at the hazard of the value of properties

10:55:22 around it.

10:55:27 St. John's council tells us that the church has no

10:55:31 plans to expand, leading to the obvious question, why

10:55:35 are we here?

10:55:36 Why don't they come forward when they have some plans?

10:55:41 They talked about being illegal since 1989.

10:55:50 They have been able to do what they do for 21 years

10:55:53 being illegal, and I'm sure that they do what they do

10:55:57 being illegal for a few more years until they decide

10:56:00 what it is they want to do.

10:56:08 I have to say the amendment 4 is also red herrings.

10:56:12 This thing is very unlikely to be adopted.

10:56:14 You have to have 60% to pass.

10:56:20 It's economically damaging enough.

10:56:21 It's hard to imagine that Florida voters will adopt it.

10:56:24 But even if they do, if it's a good project, the voters

10:56:30 will say thumbs up.




10:56:34 This is a bad change.

10:56:35 It puts the property around the church at hazard.

10:56:40 I hope you guys don't go along with it.

10:56:42 Thank you very much.

10:56:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.

10:56:46 I guess we need to here now from Dennis or either one

10:56:50 of the attorneys, that granting this change devalues

10:56:54 the property surrounding it.

10:56:55 Secondly, it is destroying historic character and

10:56:59 nature.

10:56:59 So far if you could speak to that, I would appreciate

10:57:01 that for the record.

10:57:02 >>JULIA COLE: City of Tampa legal department.

10:57:05 As it relates to the values to the property.

10:57:08 I want to reemphasis this is classification RM-16.

10:57:13 That would be the uses allowed under this property, not

10:57:16 withstanding this change.

10:57:17 That would be the use that would be allowed in this

10:57:20 property no matter what.

10:57:24 All it would do is allow this property as exist itself

10:57:27 today to be in compliance with the comprehensive plan

10:57:29 for any other use that is available under this land use




10:57:31 classification, or to get out of the nonconforming

10:57:36 status that this property is currently in, there has to

10:57:38 be a rezoning process.

10:57:40 It has to go through a public hearing process in which

10:57:43 either there will be a planned development, and the

10:57:46 specific uses will be planned development or be a

10:57:51 Euclidean which you will then be able to determine

10:57:54 whether or not the range of uses under that zoning or

10:57:57 appropriate.

10:58:00 The historic value to this property, the property does

10:58:03 have a landmark structure on it which would need to be

10:58:07 reviewed, if any changes are made, pursuant to our

10:58:11 process, and if any rezoning happens on this property,

10:58:17 our code does go through the ARC, does go before it

10:58:20 even comes to council for a recommendation.

10:58:23 So in terms of protecting the historic designation in

10:58:27 the district, that's the process under which that would

10:58:30 be --

10:58:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I guess I want you to speak more

10:58:32 specifically, because the statement was made that by

10:58:34 granting this land use change that will be devaluing

10:58:40 the neighborhood of the surrounding properties.




10:58:42 I'm not talking about that.

10:58:43 I'm talking about surrounding properties.

10:58:45 Would this designation change, would it devalue the

10:58:48 surrounding property, one?

10:58:51 Two, would it also change the historic character by

10:58:54 changing this, is what I'm saying by the surrounding.

10:58:57 >>> It's my opinion that it would not.

10:58:59 And I don't think there's any evidence in the record in

10:59:01 terms of the property value issue that that would

10:59:02 occur.

10:59:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Dennis, do you want to speak to that

10:59:07 as well?

10:59:07 >> Dennis Fernandez, historic preservation design

10:59:11 manager.

10:59:11 I think it's really covered in the recommendation

10:59:17 whereby they said they did not feel that the

10:59:19 designation in and of itself would undermine the

10:59:24 historic integrity of the neighborhood, in and of

10:59:26 itself.

10:59:28 And the staff expressed this reservation within its

10:59:30 staff report to both council and to the architecture

10:59:34 review commission.




10:59:36 Left undefined, the designation itself has unlimited

10:59:42 development potential.

10:59:43 However, the architecture review commission -- and I

10:59:46 myself in going through this entire process -- feel

10:59:50 that the rezoning process and the certificate of

10:59:53 appropriateness process will serve well and defining

10:59:58 this project, if it were to ever come forth.

11:00:02 One issue on preservation.

11:00:05 Adaptive reuse of buildings is perhaps one of the most

11:00:08 difficult things to do to maintain historic integrity.

11:00:12 The way to maintain historic integrity is to keep the

11:00:15 original use in a building.

11:00:17 So we don't have a church that turns into some other

11:00:22 use like an office.

11:00:23 You the church remains a church and that ultimately

11:00:26 preserves both its physical integrity and its integrity

11:00:31 of use.

11:00:31 So these are all items that were discussed during the

11:00:35 ARC process, and I think the recommendation is fairly

11:00:39 clear.

11:00:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you for that clarification.

11:00:42 Councilwoman?




11:00:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Cole, I have a question for you.

11:00:48 Your answers to Chairman Scott, it's implicit that

11:00:55 without this land use change, they cannot ask for

11:01:00 zoning that would allow more intense development.

11:01:08 Or more floor area ratio, more uses.

11:01:13 >>JULIA COLE: They can only not ask to intensify.

11:01:16 Florida law says clearly, you cannot issue development

11:01:19 orders that are inconsistent with your plan, so as a

11:01:27 result of this designation we can't even issue permits

11:01:31 on this property for any major renovation, to allow

11:01:34 anything to be done really with this property other

11:01:37 than to allow it to remain in its current condition, to

11:01:41 allow it to sit with no ability to issue any

11:01:46 development orders.

11:01:46 >> Right.

11:01:49 But the point that I'm trying to make is in order for

11:01:52 that to increase the intensity, they can't do that.

11:01:58 They can't ask for a rezoning.

11:01:59 >> No, they cannot.

11:02:00 >> Given what we just heard, being a win-win, what we

11:02:12 just heard from Ms. Cole that ARC, are you all okay

11:02:15 with coming back before the ARC?




11:02:22 Because I want to be very sensitive to the neighborhood

11:02:24 as we go forward.

11:02:25 Are you all okay with that, Mr. Thornburg, Knapp, and

11:02:30 the young lady that has spoken?

11:02:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Come up.

11:02:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Could you come up to the microphone

11:02:38 if you wish to respond to the question?

11:02:47 >> With all due respect, there's no guarantee what's

11:02:50 going to happen if you come back.

11:02:51 We don't think they ought to get the land use change.

11:03:01 We get an opportunity but no guarantee.

11:03:03 It's a risk.

11:03:04 >> I'm Dana Glaser. I'm very uncomfortable with that.

11:03:11 It's chipping away and it's a slippery slope.

11:03:14 And we have seen things happen that shouldn't before.

11:03:18 No, I don't feel confident.

11:03:21 >> Gordon Knapp, 915 South Orleans.

11:03:30 I think I would have to agree with my neighbors that

11:03:32 the concern with this request is it's just too open

11:03:39 ended, and we are not comfortable that despite the

11:03:43 various provisions, they are all rather nebulous.

11:03:47 And not confident that the property will remain in its




11:03:50 present state and present use, which is what the

11:03:55 neighborhood prefers.

11:03:56 Thank you.

11:03:56 >> I just want to say to Mr. Miranda's point earlier,

11:04:03 the very commissioner on the ARC who made the motion

11:04:08 and spoke so enthusiastically in favor of your project,

11:04:11 I read in the paper two days ago is no longer there.

11:04:13 She's been appointed to a position in the state

11:04:15 government.

11:04:15 So that's just the nature of these things.

11:04:19 At the time, people change.

11:04:20 The parties change.

11:04:21 It would be a lot more comfort willing if there were an

11:04:23 actual plan attached to this, or even not attached,

11:04:29 just submitted simultaneously which is something that

11:04:30 Fred Ross of the ARC brought up is posterior of the

11:04:33 process.

11:04:33 You cannot --

11:04:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, ma'am.

11:04:36 We can't allow to you retry it.

11:04:38 So it has to be a yes or no question.

11:04:43 >> Then I'll be brief.




11:04:45 I'm concerned about the fact that the ARC, and we have

11:04:53 seen happen in other instances and it concerns me that

11:04:56 this might happen again.

11:04:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner, rebuttal.

11:05:03 >>MARK BENTLEY: I don't have much to say.

11:05:08 Just one comment briefly.

11:05:09 In terms of this year, the impact on market value, here

11:05:15 again I am not an appraiser, probably unqualified to

11:05:19 testify, but I can tell you the existing designation

11:05:22 which is residential 10 in theory you could put 10

11:05:25 units on there, and the church is kind of shooting

11:05:27 itself in the foot by going to PSP because it's limited

11:05:30 to school, and a church versus either in theory $5

11:05:37 million homes.

11:05:38 Okay.

11:05:38 So if I was a neighbor and knowing I was moving in a

11:05:41 neighborhood that was limited to a school and church, I

11:05:43 can't imagine that there would be any impact or adverse

11:05:47 effect on my property value.

11:05:48 It is what it is.

11:05:49 All we are trying to do is sanction it, okay.

11:05:54 So that's all I have to say.




11:05:55 I really appreciate the time and consideration.

11:05:57 We respectfully request that you approve this

11:05:59 amendment.

11:06:00 Thank you very much.

11:06:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.

11:06:03 >> Second.

11:06:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:06:05 All in favor?

11:06:06 Opposed?

11:06:07 What's the pleasure of council?

11:06:08 >>GWEN MILLER: I'll read it, Mr. Chairman.

11:06:11 I move to adopt the following ordinance for second

11:06:13 reading, an ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive

11:06:15 plan future land use map for the property located in

11:06:18 the general vicinity of South Orleans, west Morrison

11:06:21 Avenue, west Watrous Avenue, and Bayshore Boulevard,

11:06:25 from residential 10 R-10 to major public/semi-public,

11:06:30 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,

11:06:32 providing for severability, providing an effective

11:06:33 date.

11:06:33 >> Moved and seconded by councilman Caetano.

11:06:39 Record your vote, please.




11:06:51 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Mulhern

11:06:57 voting no.

11:07:01 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

11:07:02 I did vote yes for preservation, but I would like to

11:07:07 make a motion that the staff work on refining the

11:07:11 existing public-semi-public category to be able to

11:07:16 address some of the issues by refining the definition

11:07:25 to the land use.

11:07:27 I would like to make that motion.

11:07:28 >> Second.

11:07:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you want them to come back at a

11:07:36 specific time with recommendations?

11:07:38 Or did you want it to be an open-ended motion?

11:07:43 Do you want to give them a period of time to come back

11:07:45 with that recommendation or just put it in the cycle?

11:07:48 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

11:07:50 The next comprehensive plan cycle in which we can make

11:07:52 additional revisions to our comprehensive plan, I

11:07:54 believe, starts in March.

11:07:58 Planning Commission can confirm that for me.

11:07:59 So what we can have done is have that -- if City

11:08:04 Council would like to move forward and looking at that,




11:08:07 have that as one of the changes we put into our march

11:08:10 cycle.

11:08:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is that part of your motion then?

11:08:14 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

11:08:15 Thank you.

11:08:15 >>GWEN MILLER: I feel like in March we will have a new

11:08:22 council and wait and let that council decide which way

11:08:25 they want to go.

11:08:26 >> You would want to make the motion now, if not the

11:08:30 cycle starts in the beginning of March.

11:08:31 So if we wait until March, then you actually wouldn't

11:08:34 be able to have a motion made to put it in that cycle.

11:08:38 So what we would be doing, that is bringing something

11:08:41 forward in the March cycle, and as the council -- if

11:08:44 the council doesn't feel that's appropriate, they can

11:08:46 take action at that time.

11:08:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.

11:08:52 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry, I walked out.

11:08:53 Did you get a second?

11:08:55 >> Yes.

11:08:55 Councilman Caetano. Moved and seconded.

11:08:57 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I respect the historical




11:09:02 districts.

11:09:03 I know there's been a lot of dissension in this area.

11:09:05 But I think it can work out.

11:09:08 I don't think the school is there to harm that

11:09:10 district.

11:09:12 I know everybody's values has gone down.

11:09:15 I have talked to the property appraiser yesterday, and

11:09:18 he told me the trim notices are coming out very

11:09:20 shortly.

11:09:22 There's about a 13% decline in the values.

11:09:26 Everybody's home.

11:09:27 I don't care where you live.

11:09:31 So I do support them and want to see them get along

11:09:34 there.

11:09:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:09:36 All in favor?

11:09:37 Opposes?

11:09:39 Okay.

11:09:40 We'll move to our 10:30 items.

11:09:42 Staff report.

11:09:48 Item 106 is a motion to continue this item.

11:09:52 Pits done already.




11:09:54 Item 107.

11:09:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask

11:10:03 introduce Jodi Ray who is going to tell us about the

11:10:11 coverage challenge and it's an effort on the part of

11:10:14 the state to encourage, and education awareness of the

11:10:20 availability of health care coverage.

11:10:24 >> My name is Jodi Ray, the project director for

11:10:32 Florida covering kids and families, University of South

11:10:38 Florida, trying to focus on trying to connect families

11:10:41 health coverage for children, and our aim is to see in

11:10:46 the City of Tampa the number of uninsured children

11:10:49 greatly reduced.

11:10:50 I think the current estimates are there's about 54,000

11:10:56 kids that could be available for coverage, and while we

11:11:01 work with a government and private entities all over

11:11:04 the state, we haven't in the past created partnerships

11:11:09 with the City of Tampa itself, and looked at

11:11:13 identifying those residents within the city by taking

11:11:17 advantage of some of those partnerships.

11:11:19 Thankfully, thanks to Councilwoman Mulhern, been unable

11:11:24 to engage the human resource department, to identify

11:11:28 those folks who actually worked with the cities that




11:11:30 could potentially be eligible for coverage, birth to

11:11:37 18, who could get coverage through the Florida kid care

11:11:39 program which is Florida's Medicaid and check program.

11:11:43 We are also working with the community department, and

11:11:47 the neighborhood parks and rec department to identify

11:11:50 how we can reach out to the residents in the community.

11:11:53 And they have graciously come up as an active partner.

11:12:00 We have been working with the county itself, but like I

11:12:03 say, we haven't worked at the city before, and we are

11:12:08 partner with both the state and federal government in

11:12:11 reaching out to families who might be eligible for this

11:12:14 program.

11:12:14 And one of the ways that we are doing this is we are

11:12:17 asking private businesses and government entities to

11:12:20 come out as a partner and the secretary Sebelius, which

11:12:29 government entities all over the country are now

11:12:31 getting involved with, and one of the ways we can do

11:12:34 that is creating more opportunities for families to get

11:12:37 the information and be able to apply, and we would like

11:12:40 to establish a formal partnership we've the city and

11:12:44 with the City Council, and I'm asking obviously for

11:12:46 your support in doing so.




11:12:50 And thanking you for allowing us to work with some of

11:12:52 the departments that are already enabling us to

11:12:54 identify ways to reach the families.

11:12:56 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to thank you for come to talk

11:13:06 tock me and Karen Palus, the human relations and Parks

11:13:11 Department, because the city doesn't have a Parks

11:13:14 Department, it's under the county, but we do have a lot

11:13:17 of the most vulnerable population here, so that

11:13:19 connection that our departments, parks and human

11:13:23 resources can provide for parents to get insurance for

11:13:26 their kids, it great.

11:13:29 Thanks a lot.

11:13:30 Thanks for sit through this morning's --

11:13:36 >> And I look forward again to working with the city

11:13:41 and having this, and highlighting on a national level

11:13:46 that the City of Tampa will be a partner in this

11:13:48 effort.

11:13:48 >>MARY MULHERN: That's great.

11:13:52 We prepared a resolution to support this.

11:13:54 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you have a copy?

11:13:58 >>MARY MULHERN: You know what?

11:14:01 >> Do you each have a copy?




11:14:03 >>MARY MULHERN: So everyone has copies.

11:14:04 I would like to move that resolution.

11:14:05 >> Second.

11:14:07 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.

11:14:08 All in favor of the motion say Aye.

11:14:09 Opposed Nay.

11:14:11 >> Thanks, Jodi.

11:14:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 109, Ms. Palus.

11:14:23 >>KAREN PALUS: Parks and recreation director here on

11:14:27 item 109 regarding our 2011 management plan, for

11:14:32 protection of our urban forest.

11:14:34 As last month, thanks to City Council you approved us

11:14:37 moving forward.

11:14:37 We have issued a work order with the University of

11:14:39 South Florida, and we will be working with them in the

11:14:42 and the entire team with university of Florida as well

11:14:46 as Hillsborough County extension office to move forward

11:14:47 with our urban forest management plan.

11:14:49 This is one of the only sites throughout the nation

11:14:54 following up with from a previous plan, so it's very

11:14:57 exciting and will be basically a model for other U.S.

11:15:00 cities.




11:15:00 So we are very excited about getting forward, getting

11:15:03 going, and the team is ready and responsive.

11:15:05 I want to share with you last week we were showcased,

11:15:08 this particular partnership and the efforts we have

11:15:11 been doing in regard our urban forest management plan

11:15:15 in our urban forest canopy by the state extension

11:15:18 offices by what other municipalities can use with their

11:15:22 extension offices, with their local universities.

11:15:24 So we are pleased to be able to do that and share our

11:15:27 successes that we are having there in Tampa with all

11:15:29 the other communities.

11:15:30 So that's where we are headed and we are thrilled and

11:15:34 really appreciate the support.

11:15:35 All of the reports are there.

11:15:36 And if there's any specific questions.

11:15:41 >>MARY MULHERN: It was so fantastic when we had that

11:15:45 presentation from the University of Florida a couple of

11:15:47 years ago, two or three years ago.

11:15:49 The canopy, the trees that we have in this city, it

11:15:52 must be an amazing thing compared to -- I don't not if

11:15:56 there are other cities that have that kind.

11:16:00 They went down to the most incredible detail.




11:16:02 They started with satellite photographs, identified

11:16:04 what kind of green, not just trees, what kind of trees,

11:16:08 downtown to whether there was grass growing under the

11:16:10 trees.

11:16:12 And it was something like a third of the city.

11:16:15 Some huge amount of urban forest that we have.

11:16:20 We are lucky to have them partner with us and it's

11:16:23 great, and I really appreciate all the work.

11:16:26 >> We are thrilled to be able to see the difference on

11:16:31 the initial project in 2006 because it's a five-year

11:16:34 follow-up before we will be able to take the same

11:16:37 parcels that were used and really show what happened to

11:16:39 our canopies over those five years so that will be the

11:16:43 first time we will be able to take the same kind of

11:16:45 technology, improve upon it and really know what's

11:16:47 happening.

11:16:48 One of the advantages that came out of that project as

11:16:50 well as we have been able to focus on the particular

11:16:53 communities where we had sufficient sis in our urban

11:16:56 canopy and used our tree program to use that and be

11:16:59 able to reach our out to our neighborhood, educate them

11:17:01 on trees and the importance of trees in the




11:17:03 neighborhood and the value it brings to their home and

11:17:06 their community as a whole and all of the benefits as

11:17:10 well.

11:17:11 So that's been real successful, our natural resource

11:17:14 staff and tree canopy program so we have been able to

11:17:17 venture out and know Wan we need to target and be able

11:17:21 to bring that information forward.

11:17:22 One of the things that I had shared with you before, we

11:17:24 were moving forward on was the neighborhood and

11:17:27 community leaders in the survey about how they feel

11:17:31 about trees in the community, and we are about 99.9%

11:17:37 cheated without everybody reporting back so that's been

11:17:40 a huge success story.

11:17:42 Getting full participation.

11:17:43 We have been very successful with our neighborhood

11:17:45 leaders.

11:17:46 And I would like to thank them for their participation

11:17:48 and for them helping reach out to their peers and make

11:17:52 sure we had a great survey, great information, feedback

11:17:55 that we can now use as we go forward with our

11:17:57 management plan.

11:17:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much, chairwoman.




11:18:03 Thank you for your work, Ms. Palus.

11:18:07 At last weak's budget hearing there were specific

11:18:09 requests made of us, as a council, to get some

11:18:13 information regarding friendship park by one of the

11:18:16 neighborhood associations, specifically asked us for a

11:18:20 breakdown of the $70,000 spent for the improvements and

11:18:26 how the costs are appreciated.

11:18:28 They ask the -- the bathrooms and other facilities

11:18:32 making them ADA compliant, a time plan to get them

11:18:36 implemented.

11:18:37 Again when the customer service clients, the residents,

11:18:42 of the City of Tampa, can you please make sure that

11:18:44 Spencer Kass and the neighborhood group in that area,

11:18:47 the Virginia park area, get this information they have

11:18:49 requested about a week ago, please?

11:18:54 >>> I spoke with Spencer afterwards, went back over the

11:18:57 project, went back over all of the information about

11:19:00 how we were doing, where we were at and gave just the

11:19:03 generalities.

11:19:04 By this afternoon I'll have the final recap of exactly

11:19:06 where we are at as far as our finances, a couple of

11:19:10 different persons in our shop working on that part of




11:19:14 our plan, the contract administration department.

11:19:18 So I should have all three of those pieces together but

11:19:22 I personally spoke with him, updated with him as well,

11:19:27 so he's well informed, and I'm also going to share that

11:19:30 with council which is a request from council member

11:19:33 Capin.

11:19:33 >> Can you make sure he gets the e-mail as well?

11:19:35 >> I will.

11:19:36 I'll forward that out.

11:19:37 >> Thank you very much, Mrs. Palus.

11:19:39 >> One thing about it, has great tree canopies.

11:19:46 I was going to mention the one thing that came out of

11:19:48 that research is the Brazilian peppers we have in

11:19:54 particular.

11:19:54 So are you working on educating the neighborhoods on

11:19:58 what kind of trees we need to plant and what kind we

11:20:03 need to get rid of?

11:20:06 That was interesting.

11:20:08 Terry Neil from Temple Crest, you know, kind of have

11:20:11 this great idea about get rid of a Peppertree and put

11:20:15 in an oak tree or something more appropriate.

11:20:18 >> We asked our community education.




11:20:24 >> Also been trying to educate them on right tree,

11:20:31 right placement and especially along the right-of-way

11:20:35 areas of putting the proper trees especially when they

11:20:37 conflict with our power lines.

11:20:40 We worked closely with TECO to make sure that what we

11:20:42 are doing, what we are placing in the community and how

11:20:44 we are educating the neighbors on the trees and the

11:20:47 placement and what the benefits are and what types of

11:20:49 trees that benefit them, beneficial within their

11:20:54 portion of the community,it's very effective.

11:20:56 So we are continuing to do that in our education, in

11:20:58 our natural resource division, a labor of love, to be

11:21:03 out there and make sure the community knows what is

11:21:05 available to them, a tremendous resource, we do a lot

11:21:09 of consultations that we'll go out and talk to the

11:21:11 neighborhood, talk to the individuals of the particular

11:21:17 homes to find out what they need and what their

11:21:18 interests are and what specifically type of species are

11:21:21 important.

11:21:24 He has reached out to his neighbors and we have done a

11:21:26 lot of tree replacement and such in the right-of-way.

11:21:29 And those neighbors are responsible for the maintenance




11:21:31 and upkeep of those trees.

11:21:33 And that's been a critical component.

11:21:35 And that's why the education piece is so important.

11:21:38 It not just putting the trees out there and getting the

11:21:40 right tree out there but also managing and caring for

11:21:43 it appropriately.

11:21:43 >> The education and the watering.

11:21:48 Thank you.

11:21:58 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Ms. Palus, the program for the trees on

11:22:01 the right-of-way, how long has that been in effect?

11:22:03 >> We have been doing at least the six years that I

11:22:07 have been here and we tried to increase the number of

11:22:09 trees.

11:22:09 And I believe maybe 25 years or more.

11:22:14 It's just over the last years we have been able to --

11:22:19 we have also grown our tree trust fund which is what

11:22:22 developers are supposed to pay into if they aren't able

11:22:24 to actually plant trees on their property.

11:22:26 So that has allowed us to then be able to plant more

11:22:29 trees out in the community.

11:22:30 And it's been very successful.

11:22:32 We appreciate council's support on that as well.




11:22:35 >>YVONNE CAPIN: It's an excellent program.

11:22:36 I just wanted to commend you.

11:22:40 In my previous residence my neighborhood leader came up

11:22:45 about planting the trees on the right-of-way, and many

11:22:47 of us did, and I sold that house in 2005 and I drive by

11:22:52 there and those trees are beautiful.

11:22:55 Thank you.

11:22:55 >>KAREN PALUS: Thank you.

11:22:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

11:23:01 110 is a resolution to pass.

11:23:02 >> Irvin Lee, public works, here to support what Mr.

11:23:10 Shelby, I think, already mentioned regarding the

11:23:13 connection between.

11:23:15 There are no additional fees.

11:23:18 We are just conveying this new particular portion of

11:23:25 the buffer.

11:23:27 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to move the resolution.

11:23:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.

11:23:32 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.

11:23:35 All in favor?

11:23:36 Opposed?

11:23:37 Item number 111.




11:23:38 >>JULIA COLE: City of Tampa legal department.

11:23:40 I had presented a memorandum to you with some revision

11:23:46 to chapter 22, 103, which was promulgated by council to

11:23:52 have the legal department, the zoning administrator,

11:23:55 and I submitted a memorandum describing those changes.

11:23:58 I don't know if you want me to go through and make a

11:24:01 presentation on it or if you would just like to go

11:24:02 ahead and move this to second reading.

11:24:04 >> Second.

11:24:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

11:24:12 All in favor?

11:24:13 Okay.

11:24:14 Item 112.

11:24:15 >> Is this going to be first reading consideration?

11:24:22 You are here for first reading, correct?

11:24:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: First reading?

11:24:34 I move an ordinance.

11:24:35 City of Tampa, Florida making revisions total city of

11:24:38 Tampa code of ordinances providing for certain

11:24:41 exceptions, sidewalks required in certain exception

11:24:45 when a contribution to the sidewalk trust fund is made

11:24:48 in lieu of construction of the sidewalk as required




11:24:50 providing for severability, providing for repeal of all

11:24:54 ordinances and technical, in conflict herewith.

11:25:02 I want to thank the legal department for diligently

11:25:04 working on this.

11:25:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

11:25:06 All in favor?

11:25:07 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Caetano and Scott

11:25:09 being absent at vote.

11:25:11 Second reading of the ordinance will be held October

11:25:14 7th at 9:30 a.m.

11:25:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 112, a resolution.

11:25:21 We need to pass that resolution.

11:25:22 >> Motion and second.

11:25:29 All in favor of the motion say Aye.

11:25:31 Opposed, Nay.

11:25:32 Okay, 113.

11:25:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 113 is a receive and file.

11:25:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.

11:25:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to receive and file.

11:25:45 He item 114.

11:25:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 114 is the resolution replacing the

11:25:50 rules of procedure with the revisions that I have




11:25:53 provided to you.

11:25:54 When I sent out the revisions at the beginning of the

11:25:58 week, there were some minor changes since you had last

11:26:01 received a revision to the organizational meeting was

11:26:04 corrected to on or after April 1st.

11:26:06 The listing of the departments under the standing

11:26:08 committees were updated to align with the

11:26:10 administration's reorganization.

11:26:11 The staff reports unfinished business were moved up one

11:26:14 half hour to 10 a.m., as is the public hearing on

11:26:17 legislative matters to 9:30.

11:26:18 The public, the time for evening meetings is restored

11:26:21 back to 6 p.m. per council's direction and again for

11:26:24 council's direction, the draft section allowing to

11:26:27 speak for ten minutes without a speaker waiver form was

11:26:29 taken out.

11:26:31 I am going to presenting a substitution to the clerk

11:26:34 today.

11:26:35 And the only minor changes, council, are problems with

11:26:38 the page numbering.

11:26:41 It's going to also amend the name of the Parks,

11:26:43 Recreation and Culture Committee to the parks,




11:26:46 recreation and cultural arts committee.

11:26:48 That was the suggestion that was made.

11:26:49 Finally, with regards to rule 6-H, on page 8, I am

11:26:56 changing the wording very slightly to make it clearer,

11:27:01 but the intention is the same, and that replaces your

11:27:04 rules, rule 4-C for quasi-judicial hearings.

11:27:10 I am willing to go over these changes one by one.

11:27:13 If you have any specific questions I am happy to

11:27:14 answer.

11:27:15 Again, council, per your rules, the way the rules of

11:27:18 procedure are implemented is it gives you two

11:27:22 opportunities, even though it is a resolution, it is

11:27:25 read by title only at the first reading and it is

11:27:27 adopted when it is read at the second regular meeting

11:27:29 again by title only.

11:27:30 With that being said, I present it to you for your

11:27:34 consideration.

11:27:34 >> Somewhere in here, yesterday when I was reading all

11:27:41 of this, it tags four members to put something on the

11:27:43 floor.

11:27:44 But there was something in the absence of the chairman,

11:27:48 council, vice chair, something to that effect, that




11:27:51 takes two vets votes to open the meeting, I know

11:27:56 there's something here that says two votes to open or

11:27:59 something.

11:28:00 I.

11:28:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I don't recall that offhand.

11:28:03 If you like we can hold this till after lunch and have

11:28:06 that addressed or if you want to have it addressed

11:28:08 between first and second.

11:28:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't think it's going to be a

11:28:14 minor change.

11:28:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If it's a concern I would ask that we

11:28:17 have an opportunity to clean up any concerns that you

11:28:19 have.

11:28:20 In the meantime, you will have that opportunity to

11:28:24 address that between first and second reading of the

11:28:29 title.

11:28:31 Normally again, one of the frustrations sometimes for

11:28:34 the public and council, is the city charter requires

11:28:39 four votes for council to take action.

11:28:40 It's not the majority of folks who are present, but the

11:28:45 City of Tampa requires four votes, a majority of the

11:28:49 entire council in order to take any action to approve




11:28:51 or deny.

11:28:52 >> Since we are talking on that subject matter, things

11:28:57 happen that you or I, no one has control of.

11:29:01 That's that doesn't assume it won't happen again.

11:29:05 It doesn't assume that it will happen again.

11:29:07 And you have got to go through a process and there's

11:29:09 some special things that are needed for this government

11:29:11 to continue functioning, and there's only five members.

11:29:14 There's only four members for whatever reason.

11:29:18 Is there any way that we can add this to a charter

11:29:20 revision, where it's certain exceptions happening that

11:29:24 would require only three members of the City Council,

11:29:29 five, the majority of the sitting council members?

11:29:31 There might be something that is needed for grants to

11:29:35 be received or something of that nature and you don't

11:29:36 have the -- for whatever reason, some members don't

11:29:39 want to vote for it, and you are down to losing some

11:29:42 for the city.

11:29:45 I'm just throwing that out.

11:29:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And that is very worthy of discussion

11:29:53 because your charter does allow for emergency meetings,

11:29:55 but then it does that within doesn't within the




11:30:00 provision even allow for that.

11:30:01 >> This is the second or third time I think we have had

11:30:03 to replace council members.

11:30:06 So it does happen.

11:30:07 >> Mr. Miranda, any desire of this City Council to be

11:30:12 revise the charter, with the deadlines, that it cannot

11:30:18 make this ballot, or special election, and that would

11:30:22 be a discussion worthy to be had.

11:30:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I appreciate it very much.

11:30:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.

11:30:30 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to mention when we did

11:30:34 have some discussion about the public, the clause about

11:30:38 the public neighborhood associations getting more time,

11:30:41 and I didn't hear from anyone until very recently, that

11:30:46 they still would like to discuss that.

11:30:48 So I'm not -- I don't even know what to propose.

11:30:51 It would be less time and it was some other specific.

11:30:55 I'm just wondering if I can talk to these neighbors

11:30:59 between first and second reading and let you know if

11:31:03 there might be something-we could do that later, too.

11:31:05 It doesn't have to be in this be.

11:31:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: There's no cycle for these rules.




11:31:10 They are council's rules.

11:31:11 You can take them up at any time.

11:31:15 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to bring it up in case

11:31:17 people are watching.

11:31:19 We have eliminated that as a possibility of people

11:31:21 really want to pursue that, they can talk to me and

11:31:24 certainly any council members.

11:31:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Just make it 30 days.

11:31:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.

11:31:37 But I was surprised to hear after the discussion

11:31:39 because we decided not to because there wasn't a lot of

11:31:42 public support for it.

11:31:44 Just throwing it out there.

11:31:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anything else?

11:31:48 Do we need to vote on this?

11:31:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Per council's rules if you could read

11:31:52 the title which is in your agenda and then it will just

11:31:55 be set for the October 7th when it will be on again

11:31:57 for staff report.

11:31:59 Then it will be adopted.

11:32:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do you want to move it then?

11:32:04 346789 you have to read the title.




11:32:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I move the ordinance.

11:32:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It's a resolution.

11:32:09 >>MARY MULHERN: For first reading consideration, a

11:32:11 resolution replacing the rules of procedural governing

11:32:15 meetings of City Council meetings of the city of Tampa,

11:32:17 Florida, setting forth, providing an effective date,

11:32:21 and this is a substitute resolution.

11:32:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:32:27 Do we need to record a vote?

11:32:32 Seconded by councilman Miranda.

11:32:34 All in favor?

11:32:35 Opposes?

11:32:35 Okay.

11:32:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again, council, just jurat just for

11:32:40 the record it will come back in two weeks time after

11:32:42 City of reports, it will be read again and then take

11:32:45 effect.

11:32:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

11:32:46 Under new business?

11:32:47 >> Okay, council.

11:33:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll take their time.

11:33:04 I asked for a reduction of 99,999.90 for maximum




11:33:11 without bidding process and I believe the legal

11:33:14 department has it and it has not come back so I will

11:33:16 ask that to come back in the next council meeting.

11:33:18 >> Moved and seconded.

11:33:23 All in favor?

11:33:24 Pose?

11:33:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The next item is on the agenda.

11:33:26 When you read the agenda for all of us to understand --

11:33:30 and I am not here to criticize anyone -- I think the

11:33:34 agenda should give award given to bidder number 3, and

11:33:37 then at least tells you to look at the file to see why

11:33:40 bidder number 1 and number 2 were excluded.

11:33:43 It's not clear now to me, anyway, that there's a bid

11:33:46 change unless you read the whole file.

11:33:48 And that takes an enormous amount of time.

11:33:50 So I ask that to be put on the agenda when of a low bid

11:33:53 is not the low bidder, number one, for one of the

11:33:56 reasons they didn't qualify, but put second or third

11:33:58 bidder, fourth bidder, whatever it is.

11:34:01 So you can see that you have got to go back and.

11:34:04 >>MARY MULHERN: I'll second that but I thought we

11:34:08 already did that.




11:34:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Actually in my own commit it's not

11:34:13 there.

11:34:13 Maybe this was done in error, but I forgot what item it

11:34:19 was.

11:34:19 But it was on a Ford truck, I believe, from 146,000 to

11:34:24 151,000 or something to that effect.

11:34:27 And I had to read the difference.

11:34:34 One was thrown out because the engine was not water

11:34:37 cooled, it was something else.

11:34:39 The other one was thrown out because the electrical

11:34:43 apparatus to move in and out wasn't there, also, to

11:34:47 some degree, was not acceptable.

11:34:49 Section 6.6, if I remember.

11:34:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda, you said you were bored,

11:34:57 wanted something to do.

11:35:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm enjoying myself.

11:35:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Miranda, may I inquire for the

11:35:04 purposes of clarification, did you mean that to be on

11:35:07 the front page of the doc agenda cover or did you want

11:35:11 it actually appearing on the physical agenda itself?

11:35:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Whatever committee it was in.

11:35:19 So at least us and the media and the public can say




11:35:21 look at the file.

11:35:23 Maybe they left this one off by error.

11:35:25 I'm not sure.

11:35:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's moved and seconded.

11:35:29 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

11:35:31 Opposes?

11:35:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Third and more importantly, when you

11:35:33 have zoning classifications in a district, I don't know

11:35:35 who started this, I hope it's not one of our rules of

11:35:37 procedure, they only put the council member on who's

11:35:43 district it is.

11:35:44 Four, five, six, seven.

11:35:46 When in essence, the good people elected to the six

11:35:51 districts hold one, two and three should always be

11:35:54 included because they are city-wide.

11:35:55 So what I would like to recommend is if you want to put

11:35:58 the district of which that hearing is set foe, comes

11:36:02 from, then you ought to put one, two and three because

11:36:05 they are always involved.

11:36:06 >> And that would be relative to the staff reports from

11:36:08 land development?

11:36:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Right.




11:36:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.

11:36:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:36:16 All in favor?

11:36:17 Opposes?

11:36:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And I think the other one they

11:36:19 agreed to on alcohol matters when it's an R, provide

11:36:23 the closing hours, on the item.

11:36:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did that by motion as well?

11:36:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: They said they would do it but for

11:36:29 the record let's clarify.

11:36:31 >> Second.

11:36:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:36:33 All in favor?

11:36:34 Opposes? Okay. Councilwoman Miller.

11:36:36 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to make a motion that the

11:36:38 city attorney look into naming 29th street.

11:36:41 >> Second.

11:36:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

11:36:53 Okay. Go ahead.

11:37:03 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Representing the mayor and the

11:37:07 World Trade Center, and I would like to give out two

11:37:10 awards to Mr. William Smith and honorable Betty Castor.




11:37:15 We would like to present these awards at that meeting.

11:37:18 >> Second.

11:37:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you mean a commendation from City

11:37:23 Council?

11:37:25 >> Commendation, yes, plaques.

11:37:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, we have gone down to paper.

11:37:29 >> I think we already have the manufactured paper.

11:37:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:37:36 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

11:37:38 Opposes?

11:37:39 Okay.

11:37:39 Anything else?

11:37:40 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes, one other thing,

11:37:42 Mr. Chairman.

11:37:44 In our -- prayer we forgot to motion the sheriff, and a

11:37:56 veteran of 19 years, and it was a tragic thing.

11:38:03 So if we can have a moment of silence.

11:38:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We'll do that at the end of the

11:38:07 meeting.

11:38:08 Okay?

11:38:09 We'll do that.

11:38:09 So thank you for that observation.




11:38:11 Councilwoman Capin.

11:38:14 >>YVONNE CAPIN: No.

11:38:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to call your attention.

11:38:16 You should have gotten a memorandum, some meetings

11:38:20 that -- information meetings we plan to have, dates and

11:38:23 places.

11:38:23 I would like you to place on the agenda.

11:38:25 We voted on that, and subsequently call attention to

11:38:28 the dates and times been set for that.

11:38:30 And if you are not able to attend please let me know.

11:38:37 The second thing I want to mention that I asked Mr.

11:38:40 Shelby to look at maybe moving us to put everything on

11:38:47 the morning agenda, Mr. Shelby, because we are now

11:38:50 moving pretty rapidly and we are wrapping things up

11:38:52 pretty quickly and we only have now two items for this

11:38:55 afternoon, that we probably could have taken up this

11:38:57 morning.

11:38:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If that is council's pleasure.

11:39:02 That is contained within your rules of procedure.

11:39:04 And obviously that has significant planning process

11:39:07 because when they set these down the road, they look to

11:39:10 see what time you want it set for.




11:39:13 So if that's council's choice, then that would require

11:39:18 changing it to the morning.

11:39:21 It's council's pleasure obviously.

11:39:22 But for us to do that, within the system, the clerk

11:39:27 would have to know and the departments would have to

11:39:29 know what time you want those set for.

11:39:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Maybe that's something you all want to

11:39:35 be think about.

11:39:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Maybe from staff and the clerk about

11:39:43 the possibility.

11:39:45 They could think about it and talk about it.

11:39:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, as a result of not wanting

11:39:49 to have people come back after lunch, because things

11:39:53 went so long, the way council meetings were being

11:39:56 conducted, under those circumstances, it made sense.

11:39:59 But with the pace that council is operating under, you

11:40:03 may want to consider your rules were adopted to make

11:40:06 that accommodation.

11:40:08 They can certainly be changed to accommodate the way

11:40:10 things are now.

11:40:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

11:40:16 >>MARY MULHERN: So I'll make the motion to change the




11:40:21 rules, if you want.

11:40:22 I don't know if we need --

11:40:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I'm open to what you all want to

11:40:26 do.

11:40:27 Remember, the reason we did that is we were --

11:40:33 >>MARY MULHERN: It's all the economy, right?

11:40:36 >> Going way into the afternoon now.

11:40:39 We are finishing up in the morning.

11:40:41 >>MARY MULHERN: We could put them on the agenda at

11:40:45 eleven instead of one or 1:30.

11:40:49 Eleven?

11:40:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I think it's up to the chair.

11:40:54 I'm not opposed to putting it all in the morning.

11:40:56 And then let's be flexible.

11:40:58 I know it says by the majority of council members both

11:41:02 that you can extend the 12:00 deadline.

11:41:04 I think that ought to be the chairman's prerogative,

11:41:08 give the chairman 15 minutes so he can go to 12:15 to

11:41:11 finish the morning session so you don't have to come

11:41:13 back with staff and everyone else.

11:41:15 Not us.

11:41:15 We are paid to do this.




11:41:17 But those individuals that are here on both sides of

11:41:18 the aisle, it saves a lot of money for them.

11:41:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The issue of taking an hour for lunch

11:41:26 was something that was specifically put into the rules

11:41:28 by City Council.

11:41:29 If council wishes to work through lunch in order to

11:41:31 move things along, council can have that rule removed

11:41:34 and direct me --

11:41:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well --

11:41:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to put it in the

11:41:43 morning session.

11:41:44 I think if we do our due diligence two or three days

11:41:47 before, we are pretty well set by the time they come

11:41:49 here for council meetings.

11:41:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:41:55 All in favor say Aye.

11:41:56 Okay.

11:41:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, that's to amend council's

11:41:59 rules for the -- specifically under regular meetings,

11:42:07 it's rule 3-D, letter L, quasi-judicial public hearing

11:42:16 including appeal hearings presently set for 1:30.

11:42:19 Is that what you wish?




11:42:21 Or earlier?

11:42:23 Because right now you have 10:00 for staff reports.

11:42:25 Can I make it 10:30?

11:42:26 >> Make it 10:30 so we can make sure we get out.

11:42:29 >> And if it's your direction I will make those changes

11:42:32 to todays rules that you have adopted and have it

11:42:37 updated for you, and then brought back again for second

11:42:40 reading.

11:42:41 Thank you.

11:42:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The last thing I have, I was at an

11:42:47 ADA, I guess, workshop about a month ago, and they

11:42:50 raised issues about the -- I thought we voted.

11:42:55 Okay.

11:42:56 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

11:42:58 Opposes?

11:43:01 And they were saying that we don't have enough ADA

11:43:04 parking spaces or handicapped parking spaces downtown

11:43:07 so I would like to request the city to bring back a

11:43:09 report of whether we are meeting the federal

11:43:12 guidelines, or if we have enough ADA spaces downtown,

11:43:17 around all of the city buildings and that sort of

11:43:20 thing.




11:43:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.

11:43:24 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.

11:43:26 All in favor?

11:43:27 Opposed?

11:43:28 >> And bring that back at our next -- not the 7th.

11:43:31 The following meeting after that.

11:43:32 What is that?

11:43:33 The 14th?

11:43:34 Next regular meeting?

11:43:37 21st of October.

11:43:40 Okay.

11:43:40 >>MARY MULHERN: I know I passed before but I would

11:43:45 like to add another change to our agenda, if we can,

11:43:50 when we get our draft agenda, it doesn't lift the vote

11:43:57 on there and it would be really helpful, I think, for

11:43:59 us to see who made the motion, who seconded it and how

11:44:02 the vote came out on the draft agenda.

11:44:04 You have to have look it up anyway for the final

11:44:06 agenda.

11:44:08 Contained of like Mr. Miranda wanting to know the

11:44:10 hours.

11:44:11 Can we do that?




11:44:16 This is for second reading of ordinances.

11:44:20 >>MARY MULHERN: For all the second readings so we know

11:44:23 how we voted on the first meeting.

11:44:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So you want whoever made the motion,

11:44:29 is what you are saying?

11:44:30 >>MARY MULHERN: Who made the motion and seconded and

11:44:32 how we voted which is on our final agenda but never on

11:44:34 the draft agenda when we are preparing for the meeting.

11:44:37 So it would be helpful to know that.

11:44:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:44:41 All in favor?

11:44:43 Opposes?

11:44:44 >> And then one other thing I wanted to ask you before

11:44:46 we have a moment of silence.

11:44:47 If somebody has the times for the funeral.

11:44:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.

11:44:55 I have it.

11:44:56 It's 11:00 Monday at Idlewild, I believe it is.

11:44:59 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: 9:30 to 191 a.m. at Idlewild

11:45:07 Baptist church in Lutz.

11:45:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

11:45:13 The wake is 9 to 11 on Monday.




11:45:15 And then the funeral is actually at 11.

11:45:18 So that's Monday at Lutz.

11:45:20 It's 9:30 to 11 for the wake.

11:45:23 And the funeral actually starts at 11 on Monday at

11:45:27 Idlewild.

11:45:29 Okay.

11:45:29 Do we need to vote on anything else?

11:45:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to receive and file.

11:45:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?

11:45:36 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Second.

11:45:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:45:39 All in favor?

11:45:40 Okay.

11:45:41 Anyone from the public wish to address council?

11:45:43 Anyone from the public?

11:45:45 Okay.

11:45:46 Why don't we just stand in a moment of silence before

11:45:49 we adjourn?

11:45:51 Or stand in recess, rather.

11:45:54 (moment of silence)

11:45:57 Amen.

11:46:05 We stand in recess until 1:30.




11:46:07 Thank you.

11:46:12 (The City Council meeting was recessed at 11:47 a.m.)

11:47:21



DISCLAIMER:

This file represents an unedited version of realtime
captioning which should neither be relied upon for
complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.

































TAMPA CITY COUNCIL

Thursday, September 23, 2010

1:30 p.m. session



DISCLAIMER:

The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied upon
for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.





13:34:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council will now come to

13:34:18 order.

13:34:18 Roll call.

13:34:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.

13:34:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

13:34:24 >>CURTIS STOKES: Here.

13:34:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.

13:34:26 Okay, we have two items, I believe, for this afternoon.




13:34:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open all the public hearings

13:34:32 at 1:30, the ones that will be heard.

13:34:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

13:34:37 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

13:34:39 Opposes?

13:34:40 Okay, all right.

13:34:44 We pick up item number 115.

13:34:46 >> Need to swear people?

13:35:05 >> Please stand and be sworn if you are going to be

13:35:08 talking.

13:35:08 (Oath administered by Clerk).

13:35:13 >> Catherine Coyle, zoning administrator for the city.

13:35:18 Case V-10-312, 3501 North Armenia Avenue, bear and wine

13:35:30 sales in connection with a restaurant.

13:35:31 The total request is for 3,673 square feet, inside

13:35:36 2,856 square feet, outside 817 square feet.

13:35:41 There is a wood deck with seating.

13:35:43 You will note in the summary of the staff report on

13:35:44 page 1 that this does lie within the business district

13:35:47 of West Tampa.

13:35:48 We did create an exemption last year.

13:35:51 Council approved that exemption through a code




13:35:53 amendment to give opportunity for these types of uses,

13:35:56 restaurants under 100 feet seat occupancy to do changes

13:36:00 without requiring any additional parking.

13:36:02 The parking is not under consideration today.

13:36:06 Just to show you the site.

13:36:12 Here on Armenia.

13:36:18 To the east.

13:36:19 This is the front and side of the structure.

13:36:22 You can see that it is a barbecue place.

13:36:28 You will note on page 2 of the staff report there are a

13:36:31 few inconsistency findings from staff that are related

13:36:35 to technical issues.

13:36:36 There are some notes that need to be added to the site

13:36:38 plan.

13:36:39 Petitioner has advised me he's willing to add those

13:36:41 notes.

13:36:42 Therefore, once those are added prior to second

13:36:44 reading, if council so wishes to adopt them, first are

13:36:48 objections and inconsistency finding listed.

13:36:52 There are several locations that all serve alcohol

13:36:55 within a thousand feet and a couple of residential

13:36:56 locations within a thousand feet.




13:36:59 Your consideration for small venues and all the general

13:37:02 use criteria, and specific alcohol beverage small venue

13:37:07 regulations are on page 4, 5 and 6 of the staff report

13:37:12 for your view.

13:37:13 This is a restaurant, and they do have a condition on

13:37:15 the site plan as well, that they will be operating from

13:37:18 8 a.m. till 9 p.m. as the hours of operation for

13:37:23 special condition.

13:37:23 I'm available for any questions.

13:37:24 >> Officer Don Miller, City of Tampa police department.

13:37:31 City of Tampa police department has no objections.

13:37:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner?

13:37:36 >> Joseph Diaz, offices at 2522 West Kennedy Boulevard.

13:37:44 This location has existed for many years.

13:37:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone in opposition to this petition?

13:37:49 Anyone here in opposition?

13:37:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.

13:37:54 >> Second.

13:37:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

13:37:56 Opposes?

13:37:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The very famous bakery at one time.

13:38:00 Now they turned it over to a barbecue place.




13:38:04 >> It's the same owners.

13:38:05 They just changed the format.

13:38:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman?

13:38:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

13:38:13 Thank you for giving me the short one.

13:38:15 I move an ordinance approving a special use along with

13:38:17 the permitted documents that were set between first and

13:38:22 second reading to be changed small venue make lawful

13:38:26 the sale of alcoholic beverages not monthly 14% by

13:38:29 weight and wines regardless of content beer and wine

13:38:33 2(COP) with in connection with a restaurant business at

13:38:36 that certain lot plot or tract of land at 3501 and 3503

13:38:41 North Armenia Avenue Tampa, Florida more particularly

13:38:43 described in section 2 therefore providing for repeal

13:38:45 of all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective

13:38:47 date.

13:38:47 >> Second.

13:38:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Stokes.

13:38:51 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

13:38:54 Opposes?

13:38:54 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin and Mulhern

13:38:58 being absent at vote.




13:39:00 Second reading of the ordinance will be held October

13:39:02 7th at 9:30 a.m.

13:39:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

13:39:08 On item 116, that's a continued item.

13:39:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That was opened with the motion

13:39:15 previously and now a request has been made to continue

13:39:17 it to November 4th of 2010.

13:39:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here wishing to speak to this

13:39:21 continuance?

13:39:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Seeing none, I move to continue this

13:39:25 to November 4, 2010.

13:39:37 Turn off the cell phone.

13:39:38 >>GWEN MILLER: $1,000.

13:39:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So as I said, I move this for

13:39:49 continuance.

13:39:50 I believe would that fall under the new guidelines at

13:39:53 11:00?

13:39:54 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Actually, council, it will take

13:39:56 awhile in the pipeline for things to come in.

13:39:58 But if you want to set it for 10:30 there's no reason

13:40:01 why you can't as long as the petitioner is noticed that

13:40:04 it's going to be set for 10:30.




13:40:06 I don't believe they are present.

13:40:09 Is the petitioner here?

13:40:10 So, council, you can set it for 1:30 as you have until

13:40:15 things catch up or set it for 10:30 in the morning.

13:40:18 No problem.

13:40:19 Your choice.

13:40:20 >> Set it for 10:30.

13:40:28 >> we can notify them.

13:40:29 Moved and seconded.

13:40:30 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

13:40:32 Opposes?

13:40:33 Item 117.

13:40:34 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.

13:40:38 This item is a petition from an existing DRI, the

13:40:43 request is to bifurcate the project and keep two

13:40:45 separate development orders, split the RD approved

13:40:50 entitlement with no increase in square footage, medical

13:40:52 office and hotel as permitted uses, approved trade-off

13:40:57 mechanism and to add potential for curb cut subject to

13:41:01 the Department of Transportation approval, and to

13:41:03 prohibit vehicular access to and from MacDill

13:41:06 Avenue.




13:41:07 Your staff has reviewed this and submitted you a staff

13:41:10 report where they recommend approval.

13:41:12 The Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council has submitted

13:41:15 to you that it is that agency that this quarterback add

13:41:22 node regional impacts.

13:41:24 The applicants, if you wish to hear from them.

13:41:27 If you do wish to move forward you will have three

13:41:30 ordinances for first reading.

13:41:31 The first one bifurcates it.

13:41:33 And the second one adopts the two separate development

13:41:35 orders.

13:41:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner?

13:41:41 >> Mr. Chairman, council members, David Mechanik, 305

13:41:44 South Boulevard here on behalf of Jesuit high school.

13:41:47 I have with me this afternoon Father Hermes, who is

13:41:54 president of Jesuit high school.

13:41:55 Also, this property is divided in two ownerships.

13:41:59 I would like to introduce Gina Grimes of Hill, Ward and

13:42:01 Henderson who represents the other property owners,

13:42:05 Jesuit being one of the owners, and Tampa Bay Mall

13:42:08 Limited Partnership and First Allied Development,

13:42:11 partners of the other owners of this property.




13:42:14 We concur with Rebecca's presentation, and don't have

13:42:22 any additional items to add unless the council members

13:42:24 have any questions.

13:42:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone from the public wish to address

13:42:28 council?

13:42:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I see none, Mr. Chairman.

13:42:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do you need to add anything for the

13:42:33 record?

13:42:35 >> No, sir, I don't.

13:42:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.

13:42:39 >> Second.

13:42:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

13:42:47 Mr. Stokes read one, Councilwoman Mulhern two,

13:42:48 then Councilman Miranda three. One, two and three.

13:42:56 >>CURTIS STOKES: Ordinance of the City of Tampa,

13:42:59 Florida, development order for the Tampa basin

13:43:04 development of DRI number 16 a previously approved

13:43:07 development of regional impact rendered pursuant to

13:43:10 chapter 380 Florida statutes providing an effective

13:43:13 date.

13:43:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.

13:43:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and second.




13:43:16 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

13:43:18 Opposes?

13:43:19 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent at

13:43:23 vote.

13:43:23 Second reading of the ordinance will be held October

13:43:25 7th at 9:30 a.m.

13:43:28 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance on first reading,

13:43:33 an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida approving an

13:43:36 amended and restated development order for the Tampa

13:43:39 Bay center limited partnership parcel development of

13:43:42 regional impact DRI number 16-A, a previously approved

13:43:47 development of regional impact rendered pursuant to be

13:43:50 chapter 380, Florida statutes, providing an effective

13:43:52 date hereof.

13:43:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

13:43:58 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

13:44:01 Opposed?

13:44:02 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent at

13:44:04 vote.

13:44:05 Second reading of the ordinance will be held October

13:44:07 7th at 9:30 a.m.

13:44:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move an ordinance of the city of




13:44:13 Tampa, Florida approval amendment and restated

13:44:17 development order for the Tampa Bay center, development

13:44:21 of regional impact DRI number 16-B in previously

13:44:25 approved development of regional impact, rendered

13:44:28 pursuant to chapter 380, Florida statutes, providing an

13:44:33 effective date therefore.

13:44:34 >> Second.

13:44:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.

13:44:37 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

13:44:40 Opposes?

13:44:41 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent at

13:44:43 vote.

13:44:44 Second reading of the ordinance will be held October

13:44:46 7th at 9:30 a.m.

13:44:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: New business?

13:44:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 119 -- 118 cannot be heard?

13:44:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It really needs to be by operation of

13:45:00 the code, it needs to be denied.

13:45:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I move to deny item

13:45:04 number 118 pursuant to the code.

13:45:10 >>CURTIS STOKES: Second.

13:45:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Stokes.




13:45:12 All in favor say Aye.

13:45:14 Opposes?

13:45:15 Okay.

13:45:15 New business?

13:45:17 I have one new item here.

13:45:19 Carol Ferguson, volunteer for Tampa Bay advocacy,

13:45:25 coordinator of the action network, is requesting a

13:45:29 commendation be presented by City Council in October

13:45:32 recognizing November as cancer awareness month.

13:45:39 Commendation will be displayed at the fund-raiser on

13:45:42 November 4th.

13:45:43 It will be presented on October 14th.

13:45:45 >>GWEN MILLER: That's a motion and second.

13:45:48 All in favor?

13:45:50 Opposed?

13:45:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

13:45:53 Then I understand that Tampa TPD wanted to know how

13:45:57 many council persons plan to be at the funeral service

13:46:00 on Monday.

13:46:03 One, two, three, four.

13:46:04 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Are they going to have a car for

13:46:11 us?




13:46:11 >> I think they want to know so they can have special

13:46:13 parking.

13:46:14 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Okay.

13:46:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You will already be up there.

13:46:19 What are you talking about?

13:46:20 New Tampa or close to it.

13:46:22 Not far.

13:46:24 So one, two, three, four, five of us.

13:46:29 Okay.

13:46:31 So I will let the officer know there will be five of us

13:46:35 that plan to attend on Monday at 11:00.

13:46:37 Any other new business?

13:46:38 Anyone from the audience?

13:46:46 >> YVONNE CAPIN: (Off microphone) Domestic violence

13:47:08 awareness and prevention month.

13:47:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

13:47:18 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

13:47:20 Opposes?

13:47:20 >> Second, I would like to make a commendation to the

13:47:24 Sociedad La Union Marti-Maceo, in honor of the 110th

13:47:32 anniversary, the commendation to be presented October

13:47:34 9th at their celebration event.




13:47:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

13:47:39 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

13:47:41 Opposes?

13:47:43 >>YVONNE CAPIN: And commendation to Dr. Susan

13:47:45 Greenbaum, professor of anthropology at the University

13:47:48 of South Florida, a member of the Sociedad La Union

13:47:49 Marti-Maceo for her devotion and leadership that has

13:47:59 enriched the lives of African-Cuban Americans in Tampa,

13:47:59 Florida and beyond.

13:48:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

13:48:03 All in favor say Aye.

13:48:07 >>YVONNE CAPIN: One more.

13:48:09 Posthumous commendation for Mr. Hipolito T. Arenas, Sr,

13:48:24 honoring him for his contribution to the Tampa baseball

13:48:25 teams, leagues and parks.

13:48:27 >> Second.

13:48:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

13:48:28 Opposes?

13:48:29 Okay.

13:48:29 Do we have any new business? Okay.

13:48:33 Motion to receive and file?

13:48:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.




13:48:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

13:48:38 Opposes?

13:48:39 Anything else to come before council?

13:48:40 Then with nothing else, anyone from the audience?

13:48:43 Okay.

13:48:45 Did we say happy birthday today to Shirley, our clerk?

13:48:50 Happy birthday.

13:48:53 We stand adjourned.

13:49:02 Thank you.

13:49:02



DISCLAIMER:

This file represents an unedited version of realtime
captioning which should neither be relied upon for
complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.