Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
February 10, 2005
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 transcript may have been 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.

[Sounding gavel]
>>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
The chair is going to yield to Desiree, the aide of Mary
Alvarez who is not able to be with us this morning but she
will be just as good.
So I yield to Desiree.
>> Desiree Valdez, City Council.
This morning it is indeed a pleasure, and I will have you
know I am not doing an invocation this morning but I will do
it tonight for you.
This morning I would like to introduce on behalf of
councilwoman Mary Alvarez, I would like to take this
opportunity to introduce to you Mr. Rick Caldavia, one of
our outstanding citizens, a life long resident of Tampa, and
the founder of Calacone, and expanded into Eagle Drugs
building on Howard in 2002.
It's a great building if you ever have the opportunity to
visit it.
He is very involved in the community, and he is the
newly-elected president of the west Tampa Chamber of
Commerce, and he is very active in supporting pony baseball
and probably Tino Martinez and Yankees number one fan and
also a member of the Krewe of Santiago, father of two and
has a beautiful wife Patti.
I would like to ask everyone to stand during the invocation
and remain standing for the pledge of allegiance.
>>GWEN MILLER: After the pledge of allegiance remain
standing, please.
>>> Thank you, Lord, for bringing us all together here
today.
Bless our great city.
Bless our City Council.
Give them the guidance in making decisions that affect the
future of this city and our way of life.
Thank you, Lord, for giving us this great country and
democrat you can system that we live under.
And, Lord, bless our troops, law enforcement officers and
firefighters here and around the world, especially the ones
who have died protecting us and our freedom.
Amen.
>>GWEN MILLER: I asked you to remain standing because last
night one of our employees Paul Matthews passed away.
Last week he was recognized as outstanding employee, and I
know he is going to be missed.
Will you bow your heads for a moment of silence?
(Moment of silence.)
Amen.
Roll call.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: (No response)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: (No response)
>>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
>>GWEN MILLER: Here.
Mary Alvarez will not be here for the morning meeting or the
evening meeting.
She is at home with her husband who just came home from the
hospital.
At this time I call on Rose Ferlita for our firefighter of
the quarter.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I understand that our chief is away on city
business.
So it's my pleasure to be up here with Chief Vigil, a friend
of the family and I appreciate the fact that he's going to
do this without any warning, any advance warning.
Typically what Chief Jones and I do, I give the commendation
and say a few words.
But at the same time because it is so difficult for you guys
to pick one individual who stands among others, we have a
little highlight about why Jay Cohen was selected
firefighter of the quarter.
And I think it's appropriate you come up with us, family and
friends.
Come on up.
>>> I'll ad-lib a little bit.
He was my rookie firefighter, first day on the job at fire
station one when I was captain 19 years ago.
Jace is now a 19-year veteran.
He's a 19-year veteran of Tampa Fire Rescue is assigned to
station 8-B, involved with the crew where he spear heads
many projects in the community where Tampa firefighters make
themselves available to assist and lend expertise.
He recently assisted with Tampa Fire Rescue education office
in helping with relocation of this office.
With his leadership and many hours of his own time he
involves several local businesses to donate needed items.
While arguing manpower to help clean and paint and
reorganize old fire station 2 at Columbus and 12th street
into a facility where the public education can work and be
more proficient in teaching the public about fire safety.
Jace also makes himself available every year for MDA summer
camp where he organizes the crew to come to camp, organize
activities for the kids and counselors and then helps serve
lunch to the approximately 125 MDA children and counselors.
There is never a project too small or large and is always
willing to be involved.
His dedication is a fine example to his professionalism that
he displays on a daily basis.
Congratulations.
Firefighter of the quarter.
(Applause)
>>ROSE FERLITA: Imagine how good it would be if he had some
warning?
As always, I know that our chairman is tired of hearing me
say thank you but every month when I have the opportunity to
say thank you to the men and women of police and fire.
I'm very grateful to be public safety chairman, particularly
today when we highlight the leadership and respect that many
individuals on Tampa Fire Rescue have earned and certainly
you are on that highlighted stage.
It's particularly important to say thank you for everything
you do.
We appreciate it more than you know, and sometimes it's
taken for granted.
On behalf of the city that we represent, my colleagues up
here, and obviously your cheerleaders here, thank you for
what you do.
And thanks to everyone in the fire department.
We appreciate it.
On behalf of our colleagues and everyone else allow me to
present this to you, a commendation presented to driver
engineer Jace Kohan, driver engineer Jace Kohan has been
selected as firefighter of the first quarter of 2005.
Driver engine Cohen's participation with community projects,
fire rescue, public education, and MDA summer camp indicates
his strong leadership in this department.
For your efforts the City Council, the City of Tampa,
commends you, and I particularly join Chief Vigil's
wonderful comments about you.
Thanks.
It's my pleasure to present this.
(Applause)
Certainly you are free to say a few words but we have a few
community lead towers come up and say thank you.
>>> Danny Lewis, Bill Currie Ford, pleased to participate in
this.
As a retired military member I'm always impressed with the
decor, and I think it's a great sign of leadership in our
community.
On behalf of the 330 employees of Bill Currie Ford, I would
like to present you this watch.
Also from our friends at Alveon steak house.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I thought he was going to pull a fast one
and give you a gift certificate to Monitors.
>> Steve Stickley representing Stepp's towing service.
And driver engineer Cohen, on behalf of Stepp's towing
service, we would like to present you with this firefighter
statue.
We are excited and happy for you for being selected
firefighter of the quarter.
And we also have a gift certificate for Outback steakhouse.
And we thank you very much.

>>ROSE FERLITA: Actually, before Steve Michelini comes up,
too, I think some of these awards should be given not to
Jays but to his son and wife.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: I think you just got preempted.
So I'm going to give to the them.
Can we do the wave?
(Laughter)
I'm here on behalf of Bern's steakhouse and Liss development
company.
They are going to provide your son with $100 gift
certificate to Bern's.
Thanks.
And Po Boy's creole restaurant.
And the Signature Room Grille.
Your son is going to be eating a lot.
And a $100 gift certificate.
Who should I give that to?
From Bryn Allen studios, I'm going to give that one to her.
And on behalf of the towing association, we are going to let
you go to Carabbas.
You guys have to fight over this.
Congratulations.
(Applause)
>>ROSE FERLITA: Steve, as well as the corporate members,
thank you for doing this.
It's so well deserved.
Never is enough for these guys.
As well, no one could be here from Lowry Park Zoo.
We have some Lowry Park Zoo tickets complimentary.
They send their regards.
Thank you.
And now it's your turn.
And don't look at them.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Okay.
>>> I just want to say thank you.
Approaching 20 years on the job, it has been an honor and a
privilege to work for Tampa Fire Rescue.
I guess it's appropriate that everybody is up here, because
one of the first things we learn in the fire service is
teamwork.
No one fireman puts out a house fire.
No one paramedic delivers for chest pain.
It's a team effort.
I wouldn't be here before you today if it wasn't for my crew
and all these people here.
And my family, too.
So thank you very much.
Thank you.
(Applause)
>>GWEN MILLER: At this time we go to department heads and
city employees.
Mr. Roland Santiago.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I don't believe Mr. Santiago is here yet.
We'll try to find him.
>> What about Ms. Julie Brown?
>> I'm not Julie Brown.
Good morning, council.
We are both signed up and it's on the same item.
We'll start off with just a few descriptions of our project.
This is for the Lake Edna project that's coming up.
>> Your name, please?
>> Item number 58.
>> Your name, please.
>> Chuck Walter, director, stormwater department.
On the Elmo.
Lake Edna is a small lake.
By the figures shown on the Elmo, Hillsborough Avenue on the
north, Rome Avenue to the east of the site.
This is Lake Edna.
It's very weed choked.
Here's a shot.
We have done it with the help of the police department and
the helicopter.
It is heavily vegetated and in need of some major
maintenance work.
We did a similar project like this.
This is what it looked like before the project started.
And this is what it looked like afterwards.
Now, the project at curiosity creek was pretty strayed
forward.
We went on the site, went out with a harvester and cleaned
it out.
This project, however, is quite a bit different.
Everybody owns to the middle of the lake.
And initially Mrs. Eunice Ferris who lived in the
neighborhood tried to get the city oh to come in and do
something for it and we explained we had no rights to go on
that property.
But with the help of Mrs. Ray Cox, president of the
homeowners association, we got a project going and started
to obtain easements so we could go over that area.
It's taken us over a year to get all those easements but as
you can imagine doing legal descriptions and going through
all that process was very time consuming.
So taking a year to get all those easements is actually
pretty expedited.
I really wanted to thank Shannon Edge for her help on this,
too, because this is really the neighborhood's type project
that we all want to move forward with.
But it takes a lot of time.
A lot of staff time to coordinate with all the residents.
And she's just done a great job with her and her staff to
get us to where we are today.
Mrs. Alvarez, unfortunately she's not here to see this come
forward today, but this has been a project near and dear to
her heart as well and we really appreciate the efforts that
she's done.
We'll be going out there in the next couple of weeks with a
machine that looks something like this, and be harvesting
basically all that vegetation using that conveyer and
chipping it out.
We'll be coming to you next week probably with a right of
entry so we can actually get to the lake.
We obtained the easements, and worked within the area.
Now we have to get to it.
So we'll come to you next week with that information.
And with that, I'd like to introduce Julie Brown.
She's really done a lot of the heavy lifting on this to get
these legal easements taken care of.
And she's got a few things to clean up.
>> Julie Brown, assistant city attorney, here to substitute
10 out of the 14 stormwater easement agreements, because
there was a minor flaw in the legal descriptions after the
lake was surveyed.
We are waiting on approval by the remaining four property
owners and will come back to council for approval on those
four after we have obtained their authorization.
However, I'd like to move the ten that we have for approval.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Obviously it's going to be anesthetic
improvement as it was on the prior one that you showed us.
But are we increasing capacity, also?
I mean, are we doing a little bit of dredging?
That sort of thing?
>>> No, this will be primarily for aesthetics.
We'll have some stormwater improvement because we are
removing a large amount of bio-mass.
We don't expect a significant amount of volume.
It will be much nicer for the residents that live there.
This is an aesthetic benefit to the community.
>>GWEN MILLER: Any other questions?
Thank you.
Mr. Santiago.
>>ROLANDO SANTIAGO: Good morning.
I'm here on item A.
Also here on item 62.
I presented to you substitute ordinances.
With regard to unfinished business item A, this is the
vacating of the rights-of-way within the Tampa Palms
subdivision that was very involved matter.
We have resolved the conditions.
However, last week we wanted to go ahead and further
fine-tune some of the responsibilities of maintenance on
those rights-of-way that the homeowners association was
going to assume.
We made some adjustments to that.
Hence, while you have got the substitute ordinance in front
of you.
And with regard to item 63, that is the proposed
encroachment for the new embassy suite with the skywalk to
the new Tampa -- to the Tampa convention center that. Was
also fairly involved encroachment.
We wanted to fine tune some of the maintenance requirements
on that particular ordinance as well, present it to you in
substitute ordinance when we come to terms with the
petitioner.
We ask that you do first reading today.
Second reading will be coming up in about two weeks.
However, we are also working with the petitioner to do a
maintenance agreement, access to sort out some of the
construction matters that are going to be involved once they
build that skywalk connecting with the Tampa convention
center.
We are hoping to get that done in two weeks.
If not, the idea is to run that agreement currently with the
second reading.
So we may ask for second reading to be pushed out later on.
But at this time we'd ask that you proceed with the first
reading today.
And I filed the substitute ordinance.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for the petitioner.
It has been my understanding that this is supposed to be the
Embassy Suites contribution to public art.
But I serve on the public arts committee and I didn't know
it had been reviewed.
I didn't remember it coming before us.
I wonder if petitioner can speak to that.
Because while I'm comfortable with this being pedestrian
skywalk, I just want to make sure that it genuinely is art,
and that it has passed the scrutiny of the Public Art
Committee.
>>DAVID MECHANIK: Here on behalf of the petitioner.
You're right, it has not gone through that process.
This approval is just for the physical air space approval to
go across.
We have to go through all the city processes, including
review by Wilson Stair as well as the public arts committee.
And we will be doing that very shortly.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Santiago, a question for you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Since you're here.
I have a question on the 62.
I'll save the question.
My question is just how the city is protected in this, to
make sure that the proposed affordable multifamily housing
is high quality, that the project is completed in a timely
way, that it's all that petitioner purports it to be.
>>ROLANDO SANTIAGO: This is regarding item 62.
Mr. Steve Campbell is here.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 61 also.
>>ROLANDO SANTIAGO: He's here to answer your question.
>> Stewart Campbell, housing community development.
Commissioner, in answer to your question, these projects
will be going for financing to the Florida housing finance
corporation housing tax projects.
One of the issues that they will use to evaluate and rate
the criteria to see if a project is going to be successfully
funded will be the long-term maintenance and management of
the project.
It's a feature of the housing tax credit program that we
feel very strongly and rely heavily on in terms of making
sure we are making financial commitments to projects that
are going to have long-term stability and we'll continue to
-- will continue to look appropriate in our communities.
I'm here to speak on item 62.
As you may be aware, it's come to our attention that one of
the principals in the development company that that is
proposing the window of the Development Corporation, it's
come to our attention there's an issue related to an
outstanding finding with regards to a different project they
have done in another jurisdiction.
We have a sensitivity in terms of a time frame this morning.
There's an application cycle that has to be filed by the
16th, which is next week.
The suggestion was made earlier to continue it for one week.
Our recommendation is we don't necessarily have the time to
do that.
We have reviewed the project information.
We feel the project is a quality project.
However, we are sensitive to the idea there could be an
issue here with a partner in the deal.
What we would like to do is ask council to consider moving
this resolution along today by taking favorable action with
the caveat that legal staff as well as ACD staff will review
this deal to make sure that there is no issue with regards
to the partnership, prior to the mayor signing the form.
So the issue would be, we are trying to authorize the mayor
to sign the form.
We have several days that we'll be able to research the
issue, and we would like to come back to you next Thursday
and give you a report in terms of the outcome of our


investigation.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Campbell, I read the backup material
for that.
And it looks like that was just a commercial dispute between
two former partners, and they obtained a money judgment.
It's not a fine.
It doesn't appear to have anything to do with this project.
So I think the project is a good one for the City of Tampa.
But we are continuing forward with that today, right?
>> We would like to have legal staff advised me they would
like to have an opportunity to take a look at the issue that
has been brought up at this late hour, and then providing
that there are -- if there are no outstanding problems we
will go forward with the project given the consent of City
Council.
>>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?

Thank you, Mr. Campbell.
At this time is there anyone in the audience that would like
to ask for reconsideration?
We go to our audience portion.
Is there anyone in the audience that would like to come
speak for three minutes on any item that is not set for
public hearing?
>> Good morning.
John Dausman, 4703 river hills drive, Tampa.
I'm here to speak on item 63, the crosswalk you just heard
about between the Embassy Suites and supposedly the
convention center.
This information packet was obtained from the city clerk's
office yesterday.
I hope it is, the substitute resolution and not an old one,
because as of midday yesterday this is what was being
issued.
It's almost 40 pages long.
You would think there would be a lot of information in it.
It doesn't say a thing.
There's not a single drawing, picture, description of what's
going to happen to our public land.
This packet does not describe where and how this crosswalk
is going to connect with the convention center.
In fact, if I would point out in your copy, if you turn to
the middle, page 18 of 35 in the attachment, there's only
one drawing unlabeled, Franklin Street.
It seems to have an aerial 6, which looks like it's the
location for the crosswalk on lot 10.
And there's no drawings in here at all of the layout showing
where the convention center sits.
But if you go to the property appraiser's site, and bring up
lot 10, it appears that the drawing on this plan heads off
into the middle of the planters, in front of the convention
center, being smack dab in the aesthetic front of the
convention center, with no description of how this is going
to benefit the public.
This ordinance is not ready for first hearing.
Some of the things, it does not describe how it will connect

with the convention center.
It does not describe whether access is free to the public.
It does not describe who will control access.
It does not describe whether we are liable as citizens if
the convention center is expanded, and its location needs to
be moved.
I'm not talking about construction expense, I'm talking
about liability, the hotel owners might claim later on.
This proposed easement is in perpetuity.
No convention center lasts in perpetuity.
What happens 40 years from now when the convention center is
torn down, moved, or takes over a block?
How much do we owe to the owners across the street?
None of that is answered.
I think, most of all, I'm most discouraged that this plan is
brought to you by Mr. Mechanik, the chairman of Hartline,
who owns the adjoining property, the adjoining property, 10,
lot 11 is the Hartline property.
It faces it.
And the plan was drawn up by Wilson Miller, and we all know
who works at Wilson Miller, Michael English, the chairman of
the streetcar.
He didn't do this plan.
But if any two organizations should have known, Mr.
Mechanik's firm and Wilson Miller, the disclosure to the
public is essential at this point, even to the point that
councilwoman Saul-Sena doesn't know what's planned for the
public art portion, which is not mentioned at all in any of
these documents.
(Bell sounds)
We need to go back to the drawing board.
Your staff needs to ask very difficult questions before they
come to you.
This isn't your fault.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
>>> This is pulling wool over your eyes and the public.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> 14496-125th Avenue north.
I brought some photographs of the St. Louis Art Museum for
you to look at.
Last year, its 100th anniversary was celebrated with the
1904 world's fair.
This museum is a work of art.
And it is also a museum that people don't have to pay to go
in and see art.
Now, what's planned for Tampa is something that's best
described as hideous.
I want to thank Councilman White for his comments in the
paper about it not being energy efficient.
He obviously took to heart the article written fine home
building.
If it's not efficient it's not beautiful.
Solar today, from last fall, new installations help quench
power demand in New York City.
There are all kinds of science and technology that can be
demonstrated in this building.
It means the taxpayers are going to be on the hook for
generations to come, with the stupid design like what is
planned by Vinoly.
This is a crime.
Commissioner Saul-Sena in the past has said not good to be
ground coupled.
Well, that was your statement.
The houses need to be up off the ground as in days past.
This is wrong.
Ground coupling allows buildings to be energy efficient.
Here is an article written by professor, aren't we on the
eve of self-destruction?
History is a cascade of collapsing societies.
We could be next.
The U.S. is less than 5% of the world's population.
And we are using 25% of the world's energy.
Hence, we have to spend a half trillion dollars a year on
defense.
We are crumbling.
And then recently, remembering Philip Johnson, another in
the fold of the mindless architects like Vinoly, that give
us these monuments to ignorance.
And then, I couldn't get through all of this in time here.
Time for a new leader at the art museum.
History shedders, Tampa needs new museum, just not this
design.
Tampa's art project.
This is not artful.
Museum project has picture perfect plan for downtown.
What I say to this is simple minds are easily amused.
And financial guides may kill Tampa's museum.
You don't know how badly this community will be strapped if
this building is constructed.
And I suggest you go to the history society, historical
society of Jacksonville, look at the book by Henry Klutho,
first person of the State of Florida to be a member of the
American institute of architects this is now the

Jacksonville City Hall.
There is a whole chapter in this book of the art that you
will find on he's his buildings.
(Bell sounds)
>>GWEN MILLER: Time is up.
Thank you, sir.
Next.
>>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
My name is Moses Knott, Jr..
I reside at 2902 East Ellicott street, the cornerstone for
my business Knott Salvage and hauling for about 40 years.
And I thank God for his grace and his mercy.
You know, I have a problem with this prayer thing you all
done come up with.
You know about the only person in this world that comes to
this City Council, anything in this world you are supposed
to pray first, give God the honor.
But you all got this thing, you write this paper on a piece
of paper and tell people what to say.
This morning, said God bless you all and the troops.
Thank you very much, walk away.
Now God covers this whole wide world.
You know me.
God blessed me, the whole wide world and especially the poor
peoples.
And speaking of poor peoples, this article 62, 61, 62, and
61 -- I mean 63 here.
61, 63, 62.
And I want to speak about SHIP.
I wish you all would explain to me.
But I'm speaking for SHIP only.
This architecture, about Salvation Army, you hear about a
lot of things but you don't hear about Ship.
All women's -- these womens can do anything but I told
anybody who help in this town, I'm telling you, please call
Ship.
And when you call me you don't have to worry about waking up
from your house and taking it from you.
But I want to say about this SHIP. In my church and
everywhere I go, people say to me, Mr. Knott, my house needs
to be fixed and I don't know who to call.
I say call Ship.
They compute a roof on your house, put in a hot water
heater, about 15 people.
But anybody in this world want to donate money to a good
cause, this is nonprofit.
But I watched these people for years and years come in my
neighborhood, come in with trucks, and say Ship.
But these womens are Carpenters, everything, put a roof on
your house.
It's a big organization.
Now I don't know what this all about.
But I know these people are good cause.
But I'm crying out this morning for help.
I believe in poor peoples.
You know, say bless you all and the troops.
All through the Bible, God said bless the poor.
Told many rich men, take what you got, give it to the poor.
All over the world.
And when you say God bless America, he don't just cover
America.
All countries, all over the world.
We are all under one God.
I got a problem with reading different kind of Bibles and
what gets you into heaven.
It's from the heart.
All the different kind of things, ain't going to get you
nowhere.
But I would say, though, people, please, if you got any
money, I'm crying to the rich folks, give to the Ship.
But other peoples coming in here over in my heart of town
building these $100,000 houses, charging all kind of money,
it don't help the poor.
(Bell sounds)
It for the rich, for the big pockets.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>> Good morning.
Frederick Coughlin, north Willow Avenue.
54 years this May 245 25thth.
The convention center that project is over with. I'm not
familiar with number 60, but I can only say that if
government in the Sunshine Laws have been violated or
there's been any kind of anything that was not put on the
table in front of the whole city, maybe we need to study
that.
The gentleman ahead that Mr. Knott was talking about.
Other than that, I have some things I want to donate to the
museum, pictures of my father, 1921, Hillsborough high
school, and some things that I want to donate to the City of
Tampa that I found in my mother's and father's stuff.
My father and I were born in Ybor City.
My mother was born in Georgia.
But I have some things I want to donate to the city, because
I think the city deserves to have these things on the wall
from the history of Tampa, the Scottish rite, Hillsborough
arts 25 and things that go before the turn of the last
century.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Anyone else from the public that would like to speak?
At this time we move to our committee reports.
Rose Ferlita.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Move resolutions 17 through 26 inclusive,
please.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>> Parks, recreation, Mr. Kevin White, vice chair.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move resolutions 27 through 29.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Public works, Mr. John Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'd like to move items 30 through 39.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Finance Committee, Mr. Kevin White.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I'd like to move 40 through 48.
Also 48, waiving the 15-day notice requirement.
>> Second.
>> Building and zoning committee, Linda Saul-Sena.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to move 49 through 63 with a
substitute for 58.
Move resolutions through 62.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Clerk, do you have a substitute ordinance?
>> Move an ordinance authorizing a certain encroachment, a
pedestrian skywalk, over a portion of the public
right-of-way known as Franklin Street, a skywalk between the
Tampa convention center and the Embassy Suites hotel located

at Franklin Street and Channelside Drive, as more
particularly described herein, subject to certain terms,
covenants, conditions and agreements, as more particularly
described herein, providing an effective date.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>> Transportation, Shawn Harrison.
>> Move 64, 65.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>> Move the new business items 66 through 75.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: At this time we go to our public hearings
for second reading.
Anyone in the audience that's going to speak on these items
2 through 9, would you please stand and raise your right
hand?
(Oath administered by Clerk.).
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item number 2.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>> Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
item number 2?
We need to close.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder, would you read number 2?
>> Move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida approving
an amendment to a development order rendered pursuant to
chapter 380 Florida statutes filed by Crescent Resources,
Inc., for Hidden River Corporate Park, a previously approved
development of regional impact, providing an effective date.
Move to adopt that ordinance upon second reading.
>>GWEN MILLER: Roll call vote.
Vote and record.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm sorry.
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to vote again.
Vote and record.
>>GWEN MILLER: Did you want to vote, Kevin?
We can vote again.
>>KEVIN WHITE: That's okay.
>>GWEN MILLER: We go to item 3.
Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on
item 3?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: As you step up everybody who speaks,
please, when you give your name, reaffirm that you have in
fact been sworn.
Thank you.
>>> Good morning, Marty.
My name is Marilyn Smith.
And you all saw me stand up there, short as I am, in the
back of the room and swear in.
Is that good enough?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: No.
Because for the purposes of the record, for each individual
-- it's very hard for the camera or the record to reflect
who stood up and was sworn.
That's why I ask people to do that.
>> What do you want me do to do?
>> Just if you have sworn.
>> Yes, I did.
>> Okay.
>>> Okay, Martin.
I have a question for you.
Did you really fix that 3 minutes?
We had trouble with that clock.
If you weren't a favored person you were asked to leave and
there was a 30 minute law where a lot of people didn't
finish their speaking.
Now item 3.
Deterioration should be part of your lexicon by now.
It's been used here.
The deficiency to transportation will be colliding
significantly with the number 3 that you want to waive.
It's actually being renewed and expanded.
Curiously enough it's being expanded to include a CRA where
favorite son Randolph Tilla practices in the Drew Park area.
Isn't that interesting?
When do you want to pay for these repairs that are going to
be needed?
You have a traffic train barreling down on you through your
thoroughfares that you say, oh, we need this for growth.
Do you know what's going to happen when you start the
growth?
Because you don't have enough revenue then, to take care of
these things, people are going to say, oh, let's don't
bother going there, it's too hard to get through traffic.
It's a mess.
You have needed repairs on all these corners now.
You have flooding.
You have a need for upgrade in just your visual ability.
And people who maybe want to walk around and bicycle through
these facilities.
Okay?
They are in danger already.
And you defer this by giving this away.
It's ridiculous.
The anticipated care, you haven't even gone there yet.
I would suggest to you that you have not used the proper
logic nor the fiscal responsibility to allow this to go
forward at this time.
You have waived so much.
I talked about this at the Planning Commission.
You cannot continue to waive.
Who is going to pay this?
You have got to spread the risk.
Somebody is going to pay it.
A favorite here.
A favorite there.
It's just like insurance.
Everybody gets to participate.
Somebody is going to have to pay for this.
And unfortunately it will be people who probably don't even
care that it exists or wouldn't even go there.
But it's being done in a very favored manner and the part
about the TRA being added is very telling, very telling.
You have got it stay right there but now we have another
waiver for the CRA.
Don't you think we are getting tired of that?
We have CRA here, CRA there.
And then this body of government over to the county
commissioners and gripe because they won't just reroute and
let you all do whatever you want.
They are a little more logical and certainly more fiscally
responsible than this body, or the whole city government.
Don't expect it to get better very quickly.
(Bell sounds)
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Anyone else from the public that's going to speak?
We need to close.
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to adopt the following ordinance
upon second reading.
An ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida amending the city
of toad code 25 transportation article 1, administrative
provisions, permits inspections, amending section 25-74-A-6
to identity if I and authorize no impact fee zone for a
portion of East Tampa and west Tampa, Hillsborough County,
Florida, the no transportation impact fee previously
described in section 4 herein and effective for a period of
three years commencing October 18, 2004, nunc pro tunc,
providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
providing for severability, providing an effective date, as
of October 18, 2004.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
Question on the motion.
Mr. Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't know if there's staff here on
this or legal.
But just for clarification, because Ms. Smith raises some
interesting points.
But as I look at these two impact fee maps, west Tampa and
East Tampa, and they seem to be very limited to west Tampa
impact fee exempt zone from I-275 north to about Columbus,
and then East Tampa is a little bit larger but it's the area
of the CRA.
So I'm comfortable with it.
I don't know what she was referring to in terms of saying
that it was, you know, other areas.
But this is a very limited area, west Tampa.
So obviously it's an area north of the interstate that needs
redevelopment.
So I'm comfortable with it.
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
Roll call vote.
Vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the audience that would
like to speak on item 4?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I move to adopt the following ordinance
upon second reading, an ordinance approving an S-2 special
use permit approving 80% lot development in an RS-60 zoning
district in the general vicinity of 2307 and 2309 Ridgewood
Avenue, Tampa, Florida, and as more particularly described
in section 1 hereof, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
Roll call.
Vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried.
>>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone in the audience like to speak
on item 6?
>> Number 5.
>>GWEN MILLER: They want to come next.
Mr. Massey is asking that we do 6 before 5.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Item 2 and item 6 are joined together.
The amendment and the -- that's why we asked.
>> Move to open number 6.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the audience that would
like to be speak on item 6?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I move to adopt the following ordinance
upon second reading, an ordinance rezoning property in the
general vicinity of northwest corner of Fletcher Avenue and
I-75 in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
described in section 1 from zoning district classifications
PD-A, office, research, retail, hotel, to PD-A, office,
research, retail, hotel, residential, providing an effective
date.
>> We have a motion and second.
Roll call vote.
Vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried.
>>GWEN MILLER: Now we need to open 5.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would
like to speak on item 5?
If you want to speak, please come up and line up.
Don't sit and wait till everybody finishes.
Let's all get up at one time.
Come up and speak.
If you are going to speak, please come on up.
>> I was sworn in.
My name is John V. Simon, Jr., I live at 2614 Parkland
Boulevard, approximately ten houses from Minor's Market.
I'm also the chairman of St. John's Greek orthodox day
school.
I am totally against granting any type of alcohol license in
this area.
The school, the church, as well as the neighborhood, are all
against this.
I'm asking each City Council member to consider if you would
grant this if this was next to your mother's house, your
sister's house, your children's house.
This is next to the school that your family went to, this
was your church, this was next to your church, and would you
grant this?

And I read and come up here three times, Minors are such
nice people.
I don't believe that.
I don't believe that you come in after the church, the
school and the neighborhood has asked you not to ask for a
liquor license, and you continue on.
The only people to gain from this are the Minors.
And the only reason they are doing this is for the money.
They are not considering the whole neighborhood.
They are not considering the school and the church.
Not that they are going to do something wrong.

But all it takes is one time, one thing to happen, one
accident, one problem.
And this can all be prevented.
There's numerous places in the City of Tampa Minors could
operate.
Hundreds.
They could move two blocks away.
There's all kinds of businesses that are for rent, buildings
are vacant.
And again, I just ask you to consider that if this was your
family, your friends, your church, your school, would you
allow this to happen in the neighborhood?
Really, legally it shouldn't be allowed.
They shouldn't be able to ask.
This is like asking, can you go 80 miles an hour in the
school zone?
I don't see how that you can even accept this application.
And I would just hope you consider what I say.
And think of your family.

Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>> Yes, I was sworn in.
My name is Jim Larkin, 4612 South Ferdinand, 33611.
I am at St. John Greek Orthodox and have been and anything
that might impact on the safety of a child is a concern of
mine, I think is something that needs to be addressed.
I'm not saying that somebody would get drunk necessarily.
I'm saying if the potential is there, then we need to take
that away. The safety of the children should always be
primary in our consideration of anything.
I also question the terms of having a legal system that
every time the law bothers somebody we have to go in and
change it or give an exception to it.
I think that's very difficult for me to teach my children
about the legal system when there's exceptions to every

single thing.
Thirdly, I also am concerned that obviously the Minors knew
the proximity of the school and the church when they bought
the property.
I only hope that somebody did not tell them go ahead, you
can go there, we'll take care of it, we know people.
That also concerns me about the system.
But the children, the children should be our primary
concern, and any potential for anything to happen to them
should be considered above anything else.
Thank you.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Just for the record, you have been sworn?
>>> Yes, sir.
>>GWEN MILLER: Next, please.
>>> My name is Jeanie McLane, Parkland Boulevard, and I have
been sworn in.
I have three children ages 15, 13, and 11.
And from the beginning, I and most of my neighbors, if not
all, have been strongly opposed to any sale of alcohol on
these premises.
That has never been questioned.
It's been consistent from the very beginning.
The Minors were aware when they bought this property that
there was opposition from the neighborhood, and that it was
within 1,000 feet of a school and a church, and that the
ordinance prohibits the sale of alcohol within that
proximity.
There's no question about that.
There are no special circumstances other than pity in giving
them this liquor license.
It is not the job of the government to rescue people from
unfortunate decisions with bad financial consequences.
I hope you will consider that, and do your job right.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> Good morning.
I'm Andy Pilofis.
I have been sworn in.
I live at 637 Ontario Avenue, Davis Islands.
I have to state that the newspaper article was very
misleading.
It gave the impression that it was already done, and that
was it.
The rule governing the granting of liquor license is very
clear.
We are within 1,000 feet, and it should be applicable.
I believe there was a sound reason supporting this rule.
We did not have an opportunity to respond to Mr. Minor's
allegations, that people from our festival came to his
market with drinks that they supposedly had obtained at the
festival.
Since these remarks were made during the final statement to
the City Council, we did not have an opportunity to respond.
During the festival, we hire off-duty police from Tampa.
Their responsibility is to make sure that things are moving
well, they help with the traffic.
They are also there to help us.
I can't confirm nor deny the allegations Mr. Minor made.
But if it did occur, it didn't occur because we were not
exercising due diligence.
That we have always done.
I don't deny that the Minors are a nice family.
They are intent on operating a high-class market.
I have no antagonism or antagonistic feelings towards this
group.
Public relations action that they have taken over the last
three our inform weeks.
My main concern is what happens within five to ten years.
If the Minors decide to sell, the liquor license stays with
the building, not with the Minors.
I think that is a big, big mistake.
I do not believe that we have been hypocritical in our
request.
First of all, school children are not there during the
festival.
We have just a three-day.
We have police that are there.
We notify the police to be very cautious and aware of people
walking off with drinks.
We simply request again that the variance not be granted.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> I have been sworn in.
My name is James Flynn.
I live at 4813 Longwater Way, 33615.
And I am the treasurer and vice-president of the memorial
office condo association at 2605 West Swann, which is less
than 100 steps from the parking lot of the Minor's Market.
We have just made a significant investment in this
neighborhood, in excess of $3 million for this building,
plus additional equipment which is going into the building,
which will be part of the tax basis here.
We don't want anything to hurt our investment.
But we do support a license for the Minors.
It is not a dangerous precedent that is being set here.
These are high standards that are being set.
We have looked at the mitigating factors here.
We know that the Minors are a entrepreneurial couple.
It's not a clerk with a J.O.B. who doesn't care who they
sell alcohol to.
Convenience stores, that's a problem.
An owner-operated market where the people are there who own
it, 80 hours a week, that's not a problem.
Additionally, they don't target kids.
You go into their store.
There are no magazine racks.
You can't get a cheeseburger, fries, milk shake.
And the music that they play is kid repellent.
There is no reason for kids being in there.
It's not about the children.
They are not going to be targeting children.
Children won't want to be there in that market.
Additionally, they know who their customer is.
And the customer is me.
I'm a middle aged man.
My wife is a physician.
There are other physicians in our building.
We purchase gift baskets for Christmas.
We could not get wine put in the gift baskets.
We had holiday dinners prepared.
We could not get wine to go with that.
Even though it was taken off-site.
When we have an open house for our medical practice, if they
cater, we can't serve any alcohol.
They can't provide it.
Now, knowing who their target is, it is not logical to say
that there is a risk to the neighborhood, that somehow
teenage kids will go and buy a $20 bottle of mileau, and get
liquored up and throw empty bottles in the yard.
That's not the question here.
In this neighborhood, is Tampa open for business?
Are you ready to allow people to make a living and
revitalize this neighborhood?
Thank you for your time.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>> My name is Christy Simon.
I have been sworn in.
I'm not sure how to do this but I would like to give my
minutes to Karen Dent.
I understand I can do that.
Isn't it true that I can give my minutes to someone else to
speak on my behalf?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
One minute.
Did you sign a sheet?
They have the sheets outside.
While you are waiting let's have the next person come up.
>> I have been sworn in.
My name is Chip Mozetta, I live right down the street from
the market.
I want to establish that Parkland Estates is just part of
the neighborhood.
We represent another part of the neighborhood.
It's actually a bigger neighborhood than what's being
presented.
I don't know the Minors very well.
I have only known them since they opened the business a few
months ago.
I think they have established that they are good people,
that they offer a good product and a good variety that has
frankly in the neighborhood become more of a chain oriented
environment.
So I think we have established that.
There seems to be some precedence already with the waiver of
Eckerd's being able to sell alcohol alongside the prescrip
drugs.
It doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
But nonetheless it's been set and we should do a little due
diligence to figure out why they were granted the waiver and
give the same opportunity to the Minors.
I think the fact that the church has a 1,000-foot
protection, yet they waive it for themselves, or ask for it
to be waived for themselves, allows them to lose credibility
when asking to oppose it for someone else.
And finally, the only argument that I understand from the
opposition is the slippery slope or the what-if scenarios.
We can what-if it to death.
We can say they are going to go out of business, say CVS is
going to go out of business and all these liquor licenses
are going to stay in place.
I think what that does, though, it says we don't trust the
City Council to make a decision later on, at the end of the
day, it's a one-year provision ally sense, conditional
license, that with the statistics the way they are, small
businesses, 80% of them go out of business within the first
two years, that's going to run right in line with what the
Minors are doing.
This is a one-year conditional license.
Let them prove that they are worthy of a license.
Thanks for your time.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> Karen Dent, 2822 West Parkland Boulevard.

I have been sworn.
Thank you for listening to our concerns.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Christy Simon signed the form.
>>GWEN MILLER: You have four minutes.
>>> Thank you.
My husband and I have been residents of Parkland Estates
since 1999.
From the beginning, I have been active in the neighborhood,
a member of the Parkland Estates Garden Club and take a
leadership role as president of that club and its
representative on the citizens club board.
As this issue surfaced again and the neighbors expressed


their frustration to me that our concerns and the law were
being overshadowed by emotion I decided belatedly, I admit,
to see if I could help put another voice to our concerns so
I did two things.
First, I brought the issue to the attention of the garden
club at our meeting on the evening of January 25th.
The result of our discussion is the 15-members present, all
members, are all residents of Parkland voted unanimously to
support our civic club's resolution and opposition to this
wet zoning and we respectfully request Tampa City Council to
withhold the requirements that protect our neighborhood and
maintain alcohol-free corridors, Swann Avenue, bordering our
neighborhood.
I was asked to present a written statement to you, and I
have that here today to be entered into the record, please.
Secondly, people wanted to sign a petition.
So in a relatively short period of time on a Sunday
afternoon I collected nearly 100 signatures of residents in
opposition to the wet zoning.
The majority of them folks who lived in Parkland Estates
much longer than I have.
By no means is this a complete survey of the neighborhood.
I'm not making that claim.
I did some talking and a lot of listening and I learned a
lot.
So the "we" in my following comments refer to me, my husband
and all the folks today.
I heard two main recurring themes. The one thing I did not
hear was a theme of ill will toward the Minors.
So we ask that you not let this be about the Minors or
subjective or emotional things but that you consider
dispassionately what is in the best interest of the majority
and uphold the standards, the larger community has long ago
set to protect neighborhoods, churches and schools.
So what the people in Parkland say to me, they said two
things principally.
Neighbors expressed over and over their desire to see the
character of the north side of Swann Avenue remain as it is,
and has long been a collection of professional, mostly
medical related offices consistent with the hospital's
presence there.
These kinds of offices typically operate weekday hours and
are quieter, low-key types of businesses, compatible with
the residences located just across the street.
People mentioned doctors, lawyers, accountants, insurance,
those kinds of things as being appropriate for the area.
It was felt the traffic patterns of such businesses were
also more appropriate and compatible considering the
increased uses that Swann has seen from the new housing
coming in on the north side of the road.
Neighbors see Howard Avenue, which, by the way, CVS, not
Eckerd's now, fronts on as an appropriate place for wet
zoning.
No one complains it's granted there and it fits there where
they don't see it fitting on Swann.
The second concern was that of setting precedent, the
slippery slope argument referred to a minute ago.
We all still remember the attempt to relocate Max Sports
Pub, a bar open until 2 a.m., to this very same location,
and we will not soon forget that.
Many of us recognize that the big change which arouse add
lot of opposition as that one did becomes politically and
legally more feasible if it's made through many small steps.
In politics and law, what can seem like a harmless decision
today can lead to bad decisions tomorrow.
The mechanism of the slippery slope is well documented.
By granting the waivers of three distance requirements, we
feel you are undoubtedly setting a precedent for Swann
Avenue, if people can get past these laws protecting
churches and schools, that doesn't leave our neighborhood
feeling very protected.
Please don't accept this first step.
In conclusion, we love our neighbors St. Johns and the
festival.
I do not see them as hypocrites.
I do not understand the council's eagerness to protect a
church in Seminole Heights and not in our neighborhood.
And we thank Mrs. Ferlita for recognizing the stake of a few
doctors who work in this area is hardly comparable to that
of a school, a church, and neighbors who lived in harm my
and whose permanent and personal investment is 24 hours a
day, 365 days a year.
We also understand the Minors to be lessees, not the owners
of the property, and if they go away, our understanding is
that the wet zoning stays at the property, and is equivalent
of wet zoning that is required by a convenience store, and
that there is nothing in the law which prevents the owner of
the property from trying to increase the scope of his
license in the future.
(Bell sounds)
These are our concerns.
Thank you very much.
And I have the petitions to enter into the record, also.
>>GWEN MILLER: Bring those to the clerk, please.
Next.
>>> Jonathan Harrah, 2503 West Parkland Boulevard.
I have been sworn in. I am here representing Parkland
Estates civic association.
And I'm just here to reiterate the fact that we wish you to
not accept the petition to waiver the distance separation
requirement for selling alcohol.
And based on these following issues, increased vehicle
traffic, increased foot traffic, increased noise, any
alcohol, increased proximity to the neighborhood, proximity
to a school, proximity to a church, increased potential for
crime, insufficient parking, and potential for alcohol
purchased.
Also, taking my civic association hat off, I live -- I'm
with the Adams.
I'm the closest person to Minor's Market.
If you will look at this photograph, the corner of the
building is my house -- I'm sorry.
The corner of the building is my home and Minor's Market is
directly behind it.
You can also see, there's a "for lease" sign that says
medical, restaurant, office, and the final shot, which you
may or may not be aware of, is that Minor's Market -- my
house is to the left of this shot, is right across the
street from a park.
So for those reasons, we are, as a civic association, are
opposed to granting even a one-year temporary waiver of this
for Minor's Market.
And we sent you a letter stating this.
I'd like to give this to you to reiterate our position.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> Good morning.
I'm William E. Curtis.
I live at 2818 Parkland Boulevard in Parkland Estates.
I'm sworn in.
I'm the vice-president of the Parkland Estates civic club.
Mr. Harrah, who just spoke, is the president.
I reiterate everything that Mr. Harrah has said representing
this on the club.
I would like to speak personally about this petition for
variance on wet zoning as a resident of Parkland Estates.
I first met the Minors when they came to our civic club and
spoke to us seven or eight months ago, I believe.
We talked to them a good while about the proposed business.
They are very pleasant, very courteous, polite people.
I wish them every success.
I expressed that to them when they spoke to us.
They invite your compassion and your sympathy.
And I hope they have business success in what they want to
pursue in a different location.
After the portion of the meeting where it became apparent
that we weren't going to give our support for their wet
zoning, I spoke to them as a real estate investor.
I own a commercial real estate in Hillsborough County,
nothing near this location, and I advised them that there
was not enough exposure for a convenience store.
This is friend to friend.
Parking was across the street from their location.
And the traffic at the intersection is backed up sometimes
five blocks east of Howard.
It's already a traffic nightmare during many hours of the
day.
I told them experienced real estate persons who lease space
to people in the past and seen them fail painfully, I said,
you shouldn't go in this location.
After the meeting was over, I heard that they were going to
pursue with their plans.
And I thought, oh, I told my wife, I ought to go talk to
them.
They are nice people.
My wife said, no, don't get involved, you have already
talked to them.
Now I'm telling you and I'm telling you the same story
again.
They have selected a location that was a business error.
They are imposing their plight on the City of Tampa, and the
residents of the neighborhood, to fix their unwise business
decision.
For many reasons that were explained here today, I don't
believe it is your burden to rescue them.
We wish them well.
We hope they have a successful business.
But they don't need exceptions to wise judgment by the City
of Tampa.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>> My name is Sarah Hidig.
I have been sworn in.
I live on Standbridge Drive in Riverview.
The reason I decided to come today is I understand that you
have upheld this law with the zoning for many years.
And never questioned it.
And I think it's a shame if the City Council or anyone in
the city would change a law basically because someone says
we are not going to make any money unless you do this.
They had a better way to make money.
They could have partnered with the church and partnered with
the community.
They could have offered to the church to have car washes for
the kids, to raise money for the band, or raise money for
the sports teams.
That would drive business to their business.
And they would make money that way.
Instead they are making enemies.
Now as far as being able to buy a bottle of wine as a
convenience, people go to Publix to buy their groceries or
whatever grocery store they go to and they buy that item
there when they are there.
There's no reason for them to do this other than to make
money.
And I think it's a shame if this council allows them to do
that by giving them an exception.
And keep in mind if you give them this exception, what
business will you next give an exception to?
Will it be an adult book store because they want to generate
money?
We have seen that in Pinellas County.
Pinellas County, that same thing happened right near a
church.
And I don't want this neighborhood to turn into that.
Because I may be a future resident there.
But I won't be if there's going to be allowed to be
exceptions like this made.
I won't invest my money there. I'll go to north Tampa.
I appreciate your time.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>> My name is David Adams.
I live at 2501 West Fountain Boulevard.
I have been sworn in.
Mr. Shelby.
>> Mr. Adams, those props are unfair.
>> These are my daughters.
Most of you have seen her unfortunately during the waiting
time.
It's the fifth time that I have been here to ask this City
Council to please deny this wet zoning.
Bottom line is I think you have heard this before.
John and Jane Myer just made a mistake.
And they made a bad choice and decided to put their business
in this location when they knew they couldn't sell alcohol
here.
It's going to be to the detriment of Parkland Estates, the
St. John's Greek church, St. John's school and the children
associated with that.
They could have built this business on Howard.
They could have put it in Hyde Park, put it on MacDill,
Kennedy.
But they made a bad choice and they put in the a place where
they knew they couldn't sell alcohol.
Now they ask this council to overrule their bad judgment and
essentially fix their situation.


Now you guys make decisions every day.
We all make good choices and we all make bad choices.
I suggest to you that most of us have to live with the
results of our bad choices.
I would suggest to you that the Minors need to come up with
three waivers: Church, school, neighborhood.
They can't do that.
You have heard from the people today.
And I think each of you received a substantial amount of
opposition in your e-mail on this.
It's just not the right thing to do.
And you shouldn't allow these people's bad choice to have
the rest of the people bear the brunt of their bad choice
being the school, the church and the neighborhood.
Second of all, I would like to show you some pictures.
Everyone says that the Minors are good neighbors.
But this is their dumpster that I see from my second story
window.
I took this picture last week.
This is another shot of it actually from the view of my
window.
The other one is facing their property.
There's a mattress out here, for Pete's sake.
This is not way call good neighbors.
If they can't keep their property clean and tidy, you know,
at this time, then how are we going to know they are going
to do it in the future?
Next thing, the Minors made another bad choice.
I asked them to compromise this thing to withdraw our
objection.
I would like to approach and ask to pass this around City
Council.
One for the record, please.
I ask them to pass those eight things.
One was to keep it personal to them, and a few other things.
Now this council may not be able to impose that but they
could agree with Dave Adams and contract with us about those
items.
They chose not to do that. I approached them on Monday.
I waited till Wednesday afternoon when they finally told me,
no, they are not doing this.
But rather expect you guys to override the concerns of the
neighborhood.
Normally the petitioner comes to the opposition and asks for
a compromise.
I found it unusual that I had to go to them.
As a matter of fact, Mr. Minor recognized me as soon as I
walked in the door.
Mr. Adams, hello.
I went to them, and they still won't compromise.
Next, I stood out in the rain this morning, at the school,
and I gathered 53 signatures from parents of the school.
>>> Teachers, too.
>> Who also do not support. This it's about ten people
against about a thousand.
There's 350 homes in Parkland Estates.
There's 200 parents at the school.
And I would speculate that there's probably 2 to 300
parishioners in this thing.
What I'm asking you is please don't substitute your own
judgment for that of the constituents you have heard here
today.
And I ask you to please do the right thing and deny this wet
zoning.
So I don't have to come back here the sixth time.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Adams, just so I can clear the record.
I don't want you to think I picked on your family.
I'm very sorry that I knocked your little baby's candy all
over the floor outside.
That's all.
>>> My name is Mike Chevaria.
I have been sworn.
My take is a little different.
I want to focus on the council on the burden that you have
to meet, in granting these waivers.
The law is clear that this council must do three important
things.
They could pick one of the three.
They have to do all three of those things to be able to find
a waiver in this particular case.
The first one is the petition will not be contrary to the
public health, safety and general welfare of the residents,
and establishment of the neighborhood and surrounding
property.
Secondly, that the requesting zoning for the sale of
beverages is appropriate and compatible to the existing uses
of the contiguous and surrounding property.
And, three, that the granting of the zoning for the sale of
alcoholic beverages requested by the petitioner will not
establish a precedent of or encourage more incompatible uses
of the surrounding area.
Everybody has talked about number one.
I want to talk about 2 and 3.
There are no other alcohol-selling businesses on Swann
Avenue.
The staff report talks about Howard Avenue.
We all know Howard Avenue.
And the three businesses within a thousand feet are all on
Howard Avenue.
There is not one on Swann Avenue.
And this there is no compatible use in there of the
surrounding businesses.
It is a medical, it is insurance, other retail businesses.
But definitely not a business that sells alcohol.
And the last one is the biggest concern that I know that
council cannot -- cannot get over, and that is, there is no
way you can grant this petition and insure this neighborhood
that this won't be the beginning of second and third and
fourth businesses coming in here, citing the Minors.
The slippery slope we have talked about, as a matter of
fact, proponents for the Minors, want to argue that CVS is
the reason they should have it.
It's a slippery slope and I'm telling this council and I'm
asking this council to find, if you can, how you are
protecting the neighborhood, which is your duty here, in
this particular cause, because you are granting a waiver of
what conditions there are.
There can't be.
This condition struggles now with the fact you can't put
conditions.
You have a workshop in May on this very same issue.
So the conditions, qualify it, leads us to the fact that
it's insecure about the future, not a year, but five or ten
years down the road we don't want this area to change. The
last thing that's very important, case law requires this
council findings of fact of the reasons you need to grant or
deny this petition, reminding council that -- you can ask
Mr. Shelby how to do that, but there should be written
findings of fact for the record.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> My name is Linda Fernandez and I have been sworn.
My husband Henry and I own property at 606 south Tampania
and we are developing a townhouse project there currently.
And we are in support of the market.
Since the market has moved in, it's been a calming effect in
the area.
There's not as much vehicular traffic.

And if you haven't gone to visit the market, I strongly
suggest you do, they have excellent food, wonderful gourmet
products, and they are a very family oriented place.
We are in support of the application.
And hope that you will grant them this.
Thank you.
I have a letter for you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> 6715 ... 33604.
Speaking as a citizen, {OOPS} lifetime resident of the City
of Tampa, I'll leave the law to Mr. Dingfelder and
Mr. Harrison.
I don't have a law degree or Ph.D..
Let's go to my neighborhood.
Lowry Park Zoo.
I was eight years old the termites were holding hands.
As we said, the south side of Sligh it's a park.
Go south on Kennedy where the Linebaugh family was at 832
south Willow. It still looks beautiful as it did in 1902,
when Mr. Linebaugh was one of the City of Tampa employees.
My neighborhood, the most beautiful thing you will ever see.
But alcohol is the number one problem in this country except
credit cards and trust. The last time I said I do in public
cost me a judgment so I'm careful when I say that.
Most of you know me.
In less than two weeks I'll be single.
The third time I'll stay single.
The point of the story is that alcohol in my neighborhood,
which is Rome, Sligh, North Boulevard, down the river where
cousin Joel lives, has taken a quiet neighborhood and turned
Sligh Avenue into a racetrack and Rome Avenue into a parking
lot seven days a week.
On Sunday mornings I get up and mow the yard.
And wake up all the neighbors that are hung over from the
night before.
Because I didn't get to St. James Episcopal church next to
me.
I was there last night.
I told the father I wish I had the church next door.
I have got 28 houses over there now.
We voted in 1995.
I would rather have the church than 28 houses.
Thank you.
And have a nice Santiago parade.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Petitioner.
>>> Thank you, council, for this opportunity.
You heard a lot of information today, although none of it
knew.
>> Name for the record.
>> John Minor, 204 South Audubon Avenue.
Yes, I have been sworn in.
A couple of things I want to address real quick.
Mr. Adams, wonderful pictures of my dumpster.
Yes, that's the way it looks right now.
But also there's a dentist that just finished his

build-outside me and I happen to be the only guy on my
property with a dumpster who is paying a bill at the moment.
So magically, his garbage went to my dumpster.
If there's an aide available they can call the rubbish
department and they can find out that I made a call about
getting extra pickups made.
That has been done.
Also, along with the photos that Mr. Harrah had brought up,
none of those photos even show the front of my business @ at
all.
They show the front of the building where it is against
Swann.
But we actually face Tampania on the back side of the
building.
You can't even see the front of my building from his photos.
There's no new information here.
Also, Mr. Adams did contact me with suggested voluntary
restrictions.
And as we have been through before, council can only enforce
certain things.
First off.
Secondly, why am I going to tell him yes, I'll do all these
things if I have no guarantee of him backing off?
I asked him, what's the guarantee I have that I'm going to

show up and you're not going to thereby?
Oh, you have no guarantee, I'm not going to do that, first
off.
Secondly, whether or not council can enforce those, why
would we go through this?
I don't understand what the gain is.
I'm on top of the fact most of those things on that list
have nothing to do with my business concept, my market
concept.
And we will be doing them anyway.
Carding people that look under 30, of course we are going to
do that.
Do we want to be a liquor store that sells hard booze?
No, that is not our concept.
It never will be our concept.
On top of the fact that he has a thing on there about
roaming Swann and picking up garbage, and picking up garbage
in their park.
I'm not the neighborhood garbage man.
I'm sorry.
It's just crazy.
And as far as he contacted us.
I actually contacted Mr. Harrah, and he should be able to
vouch, wherever he is sitting at the moment, about meeting
with him at a meeting to talk with them.
Because many people that live in that community shop in my
store and approached us about carrying wine.
That is why I'm here.
A good majority of the products we sell in my store are by
request from customers.
Wine being the biggest one.
And we have a tremendous amount of people from Parkland
Estates that support us.
I turned in a stack of petitions the last time I was here.
Also, another thing I want to make.
In the eleventh hour, I believe using scare tactics, and
misleading information, is just below the belt.
This is a form that went around the neighborhood.
Apparently the last day or two.
Nowhere on the form does it mention how I came to you to
alleviate attention.
I said I would be willing to do this on a one-year
conditional basis.
If we are bad people, do not give it to us again.
If we misuse this thing, don't allow us to have it again.
We'll be back here in a year.
They can monitor us.
They can see, you know, hey, if we are doing the things that
-- or not doing the things that we say, don't give it to us.
But by going around and not filling people in with the fact,
they are saying if we leave, it stays with the building.
Yes, it does.
But it stays with the 4,000 square feet that we occupy.
The zoning is for only the 4,000 square feet in this
building that we occupy, not the full 12,000.
It's not the full information.
I welcome anyone from Parkland Estates out there, any
community out there, if you have questions about this and
you want to know the truth, and you want to know the facts,
please come into my store, call me.
872-9565.
I will tell you what the facts are.
I will tell what you the truth is.
Because it is not being told to people.
The one-year conditional was to alleviate tension.
And some people still insist on stirring the pot for
whatever reason.
Quite honestly, with the one-year conditional, if we did for
some unforeseen reason close up shop, what kind of bar or
restaurant would want to come into a space that knows it's
going to expire, and they are going to have to come back and
go through this?
Who would come in?
First off, it wouldn't be a convenience store because they
are not going to want to pay that kind of rent.
And the slip -- slippery slope about a bar and whatever else
is going to come in behind us, you know, those people would
have to come before council.
They would have to go through the same things that I am
right now.
I think these people are not giving you enough credit to
make the appropriate decisions.
I don't want a bar in that building.
I have too much to lose to have a bar go in that building.
And I've told them that.
When I contacted Mr. Harrah, did he not want me to come to
the meeting and speak.
So, you know, what can I say?
And quite frankly, when I get phone calls about various
things, and --.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
>>> Sure.
I'm sorry.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
Could you clarify your request?
What specifically are you requesting before council today?
>>> Absolutely.
I am requesting the package sale of beer and wine for the
4,000 square feet that we occupy.
>> What are the hours of your market?
>>> Hours of my market are 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through
Friday.
Saturday we are open 8 in the morning till 7 at night.
And we are closed on Sundays.
Again, by the time Howard Avenue is cranking up, we are
closed and we have gone home.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: How long is your lease?
>>> Five years.
I've got one year down.
>> So it's a straight five years that your obligation is?
>>> For five years.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
>>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?
Need to close the public hearing.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Before we close the public hearing, I have
a request.
I would ask Ms. O'Dowd, because there was some discussion of
the law, just for the sake of clarification, for some
parameters for the council's decision.
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Thank you.
Cathleen O'Dowd, assistant city attorney.
The guidelines that apply to council's consideration of wet
zoning applications may be found in section 3-70 of the
code.
And generally we first have to establish that the property
has the appropriate zoning.
The property in question is commercial intensive.
So wet zoning on that property is permitted under our code.
There is the distance separation requirements in the code.
Wet zoning applications are required to be 1,000 feet away
from churches and other institutions such as schools,
government buildings, 1,000 feet away from other
establishments selling alcoholic beverages, and 1,000 feet
away from any properties zoned residential.
There is a mechanism in the code whereby council may waive
those distance separation requirements if it is found
through the public hearing process that the sale of alcohol
is going to be incidental, and in relation to a bona fide
hotel, motel, or retail or business establishment.
In the case at hand, the petitioners have indicated that the
sell of alcohol will be incidental and that was part of the
application.
And the use of the property is for a market, which is the
retail business establishment.
So the code does authorize council to waive those distance
separation requirements.
I have advised council in the past is in looking at the
request for the waiver, there are two questions council must
essentially answer.
These are: Is the proposed wet zoning compatible with the
general vicinity of the subject property?
And will there be an adverse impact on the general vicinity
of subject property by waiving the distance separation
requirements?
The T three standards that were referred to are in the code
with relation to alcoholic beverage sales in the
entertainment district.
Although that same language doesn't show up with regard to
these types of petitions, those same general principles
apply here as well, because in any land use decision you're
looking at compatibility, and what is in the interest of the
public health, safety and welfare.
So that is generally the issues before council.
And there was discussion on that during the last public
hearing.
There was discussion as to what council may impose in the
way of conditions.
And under the state beverage code, council has the ability
to impose conditions relating to the hours of the business,
the location of the business, and the sanitary regulations
associated with that business.
And as council also approved, what was approved two weeks
ago was a one-year conditional, as requested by petitioner.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Saul-Sena, then Mr. Harrison.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Go ahead.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Ms. O'Dowd, the waiver can be granted if
we find that it is incidental to the main purpose of the
business.
Correct?
>>> That's correct.
>> But do we also have to find that it is compatible and
that there will be no adverse impact?
In other words, is there testimony at a public hearing, we
become the trier of fact on whether or not it's compatible
or there's an adverse impact.
And then we have to make a specific finding of, A,
compatibility, and, B, no adverse impact, before we can go
back and waive the distance requirement?
>>> I would submit to council that those findings are
appropriate during the public hearing process.
>> I don't know that answers my question.
Does that mean we have to specifically find, based on
testimony in the record, that it is compatible and that
there is no adverse impact?
>>> Generally, when the sale of alcohol is going to be
incidental and it's in association with a hotel, motel, or
other retail business establishment, I think the presumes in
the code is that there will not be an adverse impact on the
neighborhood.
In this situation where there has been testimony otherwise,
council certainly should take that into consideration as to
whether the proposed wet zoning is compatible with the
subject neighborhood, with the general vicinity of this
property, as well as the impact.
Is there going to be an adverse impact?
And issues that council has looked at in the past are the
hours of operation, the sanitary regulations, and also
parking.
There have been times where properties have come in, do not
meet the parking requirements, and the concern is how is
this going to bleed out into the neighborhood and impact it.
So definitely where council is looking at or is being
requested to waive the distance separation requirements, I
would urge council to look at how that's going to effect or
have an adverse impact on the neighborhood.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Shelby, do you have anything to add
to that, Mr. Shelby?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Council at this point is being asked to
grant a waiver.
The code is what it is, and the petitioner has requested a
waiver.
The findings, in order to grant a waiver, have to be
substantial competent evidence based on the testimony that's
been adduced at this quasi-judicial hearing, and council
makes the determination of whether that has testimony on the
way the evidence has been met by the way of the waiver and
by the statements of council.
Council will be making in effect findings of fact regardless
of the decision it makes.
Whether it finds that there will be an adverse impact it
votes one way, if it finds there will not be an adverse
impact council will vote another way.
So you asked for specific -- Mr. Harrison, are you asking
should council make specific findings of fact, or should
council enunciate specific findings of fact prior to making
its motion?
>> What I'm asking is, we have to find, in order to waive
the 1,000 foot requirement, that it is incidental.
I don't think there's any question about whether or not it's
incidental.
The question becomes, do we also have to -- is that the only
requirement incident, whatever the word, incidenciality, in
making that finding do we also have to make a specific
finding of compatibility and no adverse impact?
Or are those implied?
>> No.
They are actually explicit, if I can.
Just to confirm, this is a conditional C zoning
classification.
That's section 3.6 of the code of ordinances.
And it states under 3.76 subsection B, only the following
property may be considered for a C-zoning classification.
One, property which has a structural improvement located
thereon, which structural improvement will house a facility
selling alcoholic beverages;
Two, property located in an area which, in the City
Council's determination, will not substantially impact
surrounding property owners, particularly if the surrounding
property owners are residential in character.
And that's C.
So that's the whole subsection.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Mr. Shelby, for the
clarification.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, let me weigh in on this and
give some of my comments and feelings on it.
As always I'm happy that we do have the opportunity to have
a second reading.
Because sometimes we look at something and then the second
time it comes around we have the opportunity to look at it
more comprehensively and perhaps change our minds, and if
anybody can figure that out, my colleagues who supported
this last time.
Basically we have an issue here.
And regardless if we have a big audience or small audience
and some people come up with some things that are emotional,
some things that are fact.
The responsibility of council is the same, regardless.

We are asked to waive at least three distance requirements:
School, church, and residence.
We have got to have good reasons for that.
I think Mr. Chevaria's points of concern point right to that
and I think this demonstration is the burden of the
petitioner, not our burden.
And I haven't seen where Mr. Minor has demonstrated to me
strongly enough, factually enough, effectively enough, that
the granting of the petition will not be contrary to the
public health, safety and general welfare of the residents
and establishments of the neighborhood and the surrounding
property.
Two, that the granting of the requesting zoning for the sale
of alcohol beverages is appropriate and compatible to the
existing uses of the contiguous and surrounding properties.
And third and last that the granting of the zoning for the
sale of alcoholic beverages requested by the petitioner will
not establish a precedent of or encourage more incompatible
uses in the surrounding area.
As I said, we have talked about many things, some germane to
what we need to decide as a council and some are emotional.
Certainly the neighborhood wants to be protective.
Certainly the businessman wants to succeed.
And we want them to both be able to accomplish that, in some
harmonious fashion.
Looking at the notes that I jotted down from Mr. Simon to
Mr. Larkin to Mr. Flynn to Mr. Harrah to Mr. Adams, this is
not about the kind of food selected in the inventory, not
about the -- and I'm sure they are very nice and very good,
this is not about good intent or bad intent, it not about
the music he selects in his establishment, certainly not
about the character of the owners, or of the neighborhood.
It not about anything but showing me sufficient hardship so
that this council is comfortable to waive those three
distance requirements that we have talked about: School,
church, neighborhood.
I know that many times we look at issues that are the same
in different neighborhoods.
I think when the speaker talked about the southeast Seminole
Heights issue that came forward and I believe was denied,
and I know that a petition stands on its own face.
However, the comparisons are so similar, that neighborhood
or those neighborhoods have said loud and clear many times
in the past they don't want something that's not compatible
with their neighborhood.
They have not discouraged business.
I think I can use that same analogy to here, to Parkland
Estates.
Parkland Estates to me is establishing and requesting
something that's reasonable.
A line of demarcation.
You have all kind of entertainment, bars, restaurant type
facilities right at Howard Avenue, not very far.
It would not be unlikely that Swann estates, Parkland
Boulevard, Parkland Estates, Hyde Park, citizens like me,
would go buy gourmet foods someplace and then pick up the
wine someplace else.
I mean, there are many wine availabilities on Howard Avenue.
So I still am struggling with finding any kind of a
hardship.
I haven't found it.
And one of the gentlemen said, you're right, when you go
into business, you're the one that has to make the
decisions.
I know.
I'm a small business owner.
I was surprised to hear that Mr. Minor say he has a straight
five-year lease.
And I think Mr. Dingfelder brought that up.
To me the opportunity to negotiate a lease that says
two-year lease with the opportunity to renew if I want for
another three, with the expectation that my business is
doing well.
That wasn't done.
That is not the fault of the neighborhood.
That is not the fault of this council.
Yes, the petitioner has come to us for conditional.
I still don't see a reason to approve this even on a
conditional.
It doesn't fit where it is.
It just does not fit.
And the criteria is not there.
Mr. Flynn said, is the city open for business?
You're right, Mr. Flynn, it is.
And I think Howard will point right to that.
But the city is also very sensitive to the needs of the
neighborhood.
We are trying to balance both.
We have to have criteria based on the statute that says what
we have to do.
Nothing today in terms of hardship from this petitioner
tells me that it's any different.
When I remember looking at some of his entries last time, he
has an impressive support team.
Particularly there's someone who is a very good -- good,
good, community citizen, good neighbor, and I would say a
good friend, and that's Norma Jean Lykes Burt.
And that's impressive to the owner.
But that still doesn't tell me that he has the right to
impose his hardships on the neighborhood, on us, because he
made perhaps what's not too terrific a business decision.
And ultimately, you know, this is not like the devil of
doom.
Perhaps, for instance, if some of my colleagues rescinded
their opinion and did not support it, that does not
necessarily mean that it's all or none.
I think if he does a good marketing project, and I think he
does, seems like a smart young businessman, he can sell the
products he has.
He can still be successful.
Some of the people that don't want him to have wine and
liquor still will not, I don't think -- this is speculative
on my part -- oppose frequenting my business because I
understand he has good gourmet products.
He's a nice neighborhood business.
Except for the fact that he's too close in proximity to the
three things we have to waiver.
And the fact that some people continue to refer to the
church.
The church is doing things that churches have to do.
They have to rent the facilities out from time to time for
parishioners to do family functions, et cetera.
But nowhere in the past do I ever see that St. Johns came to
us to apply for a wet zoning petition.
That's all the difference in the world.
And that's Greek orthodox, Catholic churches, everybody.
That's not a fair comparison.
Ultimately it's not by anybody on either side.
It's because of the fact this is in the wrong place, an
those should have been business decisions that the
petitioner makes.
So I'm certainly again going to hold strong to my position
not to support it.
And I hope by the testimony we have heard some of the

colleagues that were for this conditional or otherwise would
reconsider for the sake of the statutes and for the sake of
the neighborhood.
And thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Any other councilman like to speak?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
>> Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: Do you want top speak?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a reminder.
If you choose to close it, the request would be that if you
have any questions of witnesses or staff members that you do
that before you close the public hearing.
So if council wishes to close, then that would close the
door to that.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I have one question to staff, and that's
Mr. Peter Cowell.
How many of those waivers have been granted within the 1,000
feet of the church/school?
Not CVS.
Are there numerous?
>>PETE COWELL: I have only had one petition in the five
years I have been doing it that came up that didn't request
a waiver.
So every other one that you have approved has had a waiver.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Specifically by the church.
>>KEVIN WHITE: How many wet zonings did we have within that
1,000 foot radius?
>>PETE COWELL: Lots.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Cowell, for the sake of the record,
have you been sworn?
>>PETE COWELL: Oh, no, I haven't.
Got here late.
I'm sorry.
(Oath administered by Clerk.).
>>ROSE FERLITA: Do you want to change your testimony now,
Mr. Cowell?
(Laughter)
>>PETE COWELL: Doesn't change anything.
Thank you.
>> Move to close the public hearing.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll be very brief.
Schools, churches, and neighborhoods, those are three
institutions that deserve protection.
And I'm going to move to deny.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Second.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I do believe they have not met the
criteria for waiver.
>> We have to A motion to deny.
We are going to read the ordinance to see how it goes.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to make a speech, too, after that
previous filibuster.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: There was a second but I'm very
interested in hearing what she has to say.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I seconded the motion.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There has been a lot of passion in the
room today on all sides and I think it's appropriate to
speak passionately about things that you care about.
And we all care about our homes and our neighborhoods.
I have been a supporter of neighborhoods for -- as long as
I've served on council, which is 18 years.
And I respect the concerns of the neighborhood and church
members.
And I'm certainly committed to protecting Tampa's children.
However, the proposed beer and wine license today is not to
open a bar.
It's to sell beer and wine of 2(APS) in conjunction with a
neighborhood market.
I have visited Minor's Market, and the food is very good,
and the atmosphere is very positive.
And the parking is adequate.
And the gift to the neighborhood is of a high quality
neighborhood market.
We have heard many people speak in opposition to the
proposed request.
We have also heard people speak in support of it.
And at our first public hearing, we had a petition with over
100 signatures of people who support this request for
2(APS).
I specifically want to address the issues raised.
The first one is, is this compatible with the market use?
And the answer is definitely yes.
The second question is, will this proposed 2(APS) have an
adverse effect on the neighborhood?
It is my strong belief that it will not have an adverse
effect on the neighborhood, because what is being requested
is beer and wine sells incidental to a neighborhood market.
The development trends in Parkland Estates and in Hyde Park
are those of an urban neighborhood.
You have residential uses to the south of Swann.
You have a variety of commercial and institutional retail
and professional uses to the north of Swann.
This request is on Tampania, which is on the north of Swann.
I really sincerely believe that this request will allow a
market to continue, which will be a gift to the
neighborhood.
And for that reason I will oppose the petition -- I mean the
motion before us for denial.
And if that's defeated offer a motion for approval of this
as a one-year conditional use.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: At the risk of falling back on the other
profession, which I am not often eager to do, but I think I
have to in this particular instance, I am very much moved by
the fact that the burden of proof rests with the petitioner,
and the burden of proof means a preponderance of evidence
put into the public record at two public hearings.
The preponderance of evidence at the first public hearing
was, I thought, quite frankly, in favor of compatibility.
The preponderance of evidence today is clearly in favor of
incompatibility.
I wish there were some way around this conundrum.
I wish there were some way to get this neighborhood to reach
out in a leap of faith with the Minors and meet them halfway
and say that we are willing to give you a chance on a
one-year conditional.
But this neighborhood is not willing to do that.
At least not the neighbors who come here and speak at the
public hearing.
Based on that, and I think from a purely legal standpoint --
and we have had about as many lawyers here today as
non-lawyers -- I think we need to make sure all of our Is
are dotted and all of our Ts are crossed.
And as much as I would like to be able to support this
fledgling young business, and help them out based on the
testimony at today's public hearing, it doesn't appear that
they have met their burden of proof.
So I will support the motion for denial.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion on the floor for denial.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Before you vote, I ask that you read the
ordinance prior to the vote.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: The motion is to deny it.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe it would be appropriate on
second reading to have it read.
Mr. Massey, I believe that would be appropriate.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: You would not have to move forward with
second reading if the vote is to deny.
But they could do it either way if you prefer.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: In abundance of caution if council directs
I will read the ordinance or whoever wishes to read it.
But I would ask that the ordinance is heard.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: For clarification as to what we are
voting on?
>>GWEN MILLER: All right.
We will read the ordinance.
Mr. White.
>> Move an ordinance making lawful --.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Question just for clarification.
Maybe it's inappropriate.
But my understanding is that prior to council's
deliberation, part of the deliberation process is a hearing

of the ordinance.
That is to be deliberated upon.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Shelby, the only thing before us
right now is the ordinance itself.
And therefore a motion to deny the ordinance wouldn't be
appropriate, that it would be better to just go ahead and
vote on the ordinance itself?
Just read it, vote up or down?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe that to be the appropriate
course of action, to have the ordinance before us.
The issue is the ordinance.
It's here for second reading.
And I believe before council should consummate by a vote
either up or down, for the purposes of the process, to have
that ordinance heard.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
Just a point of order.
My motion is already on the floor to deny.
If you just want to have the ordinance read, that my motion
pertains to, that's fine for clarification.
But my motion takes precedence.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
There is a motion on the floor to deny.
And perhaps I have to clarify this with Florida statutes
that I don't have in front of me and I wish I did.
What I'm asking for is before council makes the
determination, that that ordinance is heard verbally.
And if council wishes -- I will clarify this between now and
the next meeting, or tonight's meeting just to clarify it --
just so that council knows that ordinance, which is under
question, if council directs me, I will read the ordinance,
pro or con.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't you do that?
>>GWEN MILLER: So what you are saying is when we have an
ordinance to read, we should not vote to deny, we should
read it and let the person who is going to deny vote no when
we vote?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: No.
What I am saying is this is the ordinance that's on the
table.
Let me just go through this.
This is the ordinance that's being presented for second
reading.
That ordinance is -- and I quote -- an ordinance making
lawful the conditional sale of sale of beverages containing
alcohol of more than 1% by weight and not more than 14% by
weight and wines regardless of alcoholic content, beer and
wine, 2(APS), in sealed containers for consumption off
premises only at or from that certain lot, plot or tract of
land located at 2511 West Swann Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as
more particularly described in section 2 hereof, waiving
certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain
findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
conflict, providing an effective date.
That is the ordinance that's on the floor.
There is a motion made to deny relating to that ordinance.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Now we are ready.
>>GWEN MILLER: We are ready to vote.
We have a motion and second to deny that ordinance.
All in favor to deny say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's a tie vote.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: 3-3.
>>GWEN MILLER: So we have to bring it back next week to
vote again.
>>THE CLERK: Dingfelder voted no.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That was actually a vote yes to deny.
>>GWEN MILLER: So we will vote next week on the same
ordinance on item 5 because we have a tie.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Let's set a time certain, like 11:00
o'clock.
I move that we hear this next week at 11:00 o'clock.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could we take a break?
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Ferlita is going to leave.
>>ROSE FERLITA: That's fine.
I just want oh some new business on the record.
>>GWEN MILLER: Take a break for five minutes.
(Brief recess.)


[Sounding gavel]
>>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to order.
Roll call.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
>>GWEN MILLER: Here.
At this time we need to go to item up in 7.
Need to open the public hearing.
So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>> Is there anyone that wants to speak on number 7?
>> Move to close.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.
(Motion carried)
>> Move to adopt an ordinance on second reading an ordinance
rezoning property in the general vicinity of 2311 west Henry
in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
described in section 1 from zoning district classifications
RS-60 to PD residential single family providing an effective
date.
>> Second roll call vote.
Vote and record.
(Motion carried)
>> Need to open number 8.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>> Anyone in the public want to speak on number 8?
>> Move to close.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to adopt the following ordinance on
second reading, an ordinance rezoning property in the
general vicinity of 2920 West Cypress street in the city of
Tampa, Florida more particularly described in section 1 from
zoning district classifications CN to PD professional
office, providing an effective date.
>> I have a motion and second.
Roll call vote.
Vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried.
>> Move to open number 9.
>> So moved.
(Motion carried)
>> Anyone like to speak on number 9?
>> Move to close.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to adopt the following ordinance
upon second reading.
Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity
of 315 west Genesee street in the city of Tampa, Florida and
more particularly described in section 1 from zoning
district classification RS 50 to PD residential will single
family providing an effective date.
>> Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: Roll call vote.
Vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried.
>>GWEN MILLER: We go to information.
Ms. Ferlita has to leave.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Before we move on there's something I
would like to bring to council's attention relative to the
issue that we had heard before -- before the break.
Council has moved to close the public hearing.
The public hearing is closed.
Therefore, under council's rules, to break a tie vote
Ms. Alvarez will have an opportunity to review the tape,
review the record prior to the vote.
There will be no additional testimony taken at the next
meeting.
I advise council strongly against ex parte communications
relating to this issue.
And I would submit any ex parte communications that are
disclosed through e-mails or whatever kind of communication
be put -- given to the receptionist and put in the public
record box.
And I would advise against any communications that would
prejudice the record and ultimately prejudice council's
decision, whatever it is.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, thank you.
Just for the record I am going to represent our chairman and
our council at a function so I appreciate the fact that I

have an opportunity to put this on the record because I need
to do that.
Last week we had an issue that was very heated and in some
ways vying one neighbor against the other and that was what
we were trying to take care of in a very compatible way, and
that was the dog park in Palma Ceia.
And at that time, my colleague, my friend and colleague
Mr. White, suggested that perhaps I head up a dog park
committee, and I was certainly willing to do that.
There are some things that have happened since then that --
I'm calmer now because it's two days later but I still want
to put it in the record and discuss it with all of my
colleagues here.
Let me read just one of the letters that I got and then I'll
explain why this is.
This was from Debra Mudry.


Watching the debate on the Palma Ceia dog park I was
heartened, finally people in the neighborhood would be
consulted in the parking safety and congestion problems.
Imagine how flabbergasted I was this afternoon at 2:30 p.m.
when I noticed a city works truck laying down five parking
spaces, didn't get any neighborhood input south of San
Miguel to San Carlos on the west side of Marti.
I wanted all of you to mo that again city government seems
to be letting us down.
In talking with fire department people they cannot get a
truck down the street under this new parking in case of
emergency.
A TPD police car has also struggled to get down the street
because of the narrowness of the passage.
Is it going to take a house burning down or person dying, a
child being struck because of the new parking regulations
before you realize the safety issue?
And what happened to all of your words to communicate bet we
are the three blocks surrounding the congested and
inflammatory situation?
Were those empty words?
A couple of days ago, I got not a call but several calls.
And at first obviously they were very, very belligerent
until I explained to them as Ms. Mudry alluded to, I did not
know this was happening. The city elected to send the

public works department people out to restripe the parking
slots that I understand were there initially awhile back.
And that causes me some concern along with others that
called me and other e-mails that were sent to me.
It was my understanding from being present at our meeting
last week that when Mr. LaMotte got up and said there were
some things we could do about relaxing the transportation
issues.
However, I'm one of those people that like public input.
And I said, you know, Mr. LaMotte, you showed that on that
MacDill issue with some businesses and I'm happy to hear
those wonderful words public input, because hopefully that
will be what we need to blend the for and against in terms
of this particular dog park.
It was my understanding at that point that's where we were
going to go.
Kevin had nominated me as committee head to get this
organized and see what was right for that dog park and for
every other one in the city.
I was willing to do that.
However, this was absolutely -- I could not believe that
this was happening after those comments from Mr. LaMotte.
So as soon as I got those calls, I called Mr. LaMotte and he
said, you know, Ms. Ferlita, I'm really sorry.
I said was this something already in the working?
He said, no, it wasn't.
I said, this makes it look like we are not very honest in
terms of our commitment to the city.
When I look at somebody eyeball to eyeball in this chamber
and I say we are going to do this, but after everyone weighs
in and then this happens just a couple of days after, that
doesn't make us look good.
He was very nice, very gracious, was a gentleman about it
and said I will go if you want me to door to door to tell
them that you had nothing to do with this and you didn't
know that that happened.
I thanked him for his offer.
But I told him still it didn't mat ber taking Rose Ferlita
out of the equation.
It was still distrust for the government because we had said
one thing and had done another.
So I continued my research because he wasn't able to tell me
what actually happened.
I called Santiago Corrada and he was surprised, did not have
an answer.
I called Mr. LaMotte's boss, Mr. Jack Morriss.
He said, I don't know.
I had nothing to do with it.
I said I need to have some answers so I can answer the
neighbors the right way.
"okay, I'll get back to you today."
Close to 5:00, 5:30 I hadn't heard.
I asked my legislative aide to write him an e-mail and say I
need to listen to an excuse or reason or explanation,
nighttime.
Gave him all my numbers.
Finally that night he called me and said, I found out what
happened here, that Darrell Smith, the chief of staff,
decided to do this.
I said, Okay.
Well, that certainly goes in the face of what we had said we
were going to do with the citizens.
I said, I hope that Mr. Smith makes an effort to call me
before Thursday so that I don't have to speculate on why or
why not.
He did call me the next day and we had a conversation and
basically it went like this.
And I thank you for your indulging me in this explanation,
Madam Chairman, but it's important.
He called me and said, "What seems to be the problem?"
I said, well, we had this conversation.
He said, well, that's not what Mr. LaMotte meant.
I said but he said we were going to have public input.
He said we were going to have public input in the event we
considered one way.
I said, "Well, Mr. Smith, you looked at the tapes, I
attended the meeting, and obviously people have different
perceptions of what was meant. The neighbors seemed to take
my interpretation as to what we meant."
That being the case, I still don't understand.
They were striped.
They were unstriped.
Now they are striped again.
So in my aggravation, I asked him, does it mean now that we
are going to stripe this, and now we are talking about too
narrow a street, and it goes on and the problem continues,
and now you have people bickering against each other again.
What was the urgency to do that?
And he said, well, that's because it was like that before.
I said, well now what happens?
He said, well, if we have public input and they don't like
it, we'll unstripe it again.
I went, oh, okay.
So that's the explanation.
And I thought it was very important to tell this audience
and the audience listening, I had nothing to do with that.
Because I think if we have anything as council members that
you elected, our word has to be our word.
So it was very important for me to explain and reexplain and
call as many people as I could to tell them I had nothing to
do with this, so help me.
This brings back hints of the old Gasparilla committee that
I think was effective for four years, or so, and I think
Linda Saul-Sena thought it was good, and at the same time
when Mr. Smith thought it was an administrative decision,
they took that committee away from us, and that was fine.
Hopefully they had made strides just like we had at pre- and
post-meetings.
But ladies, all of us are busy doing things and I don't
think any of us shy away from taking on other jobs and
that's why I committed to doing what Kevin asked me to do as
a committee head to do this.
I have had people from the neighborhood and out of the
neighborhood call me and say, this is going to be a tough
job and I would be happy to help you.
So I thought I had enough support.
But because of what's transpired because of the striping, I
am going to have to look at this a little differently.
I did some research and understand that the dog park
committee was disbanded already.
At the beginning of Ms. Iorio's administration.
And perhaps maybe it was because of something similar to
this, that some of the things were not run through those
members, and they weren't effective.
I had neither the inclination nor the desire to go head to
head again with Mr. Smith.
He has done this.
This has put a bad taste in the mouth of many of the
residents.
And I don't think it would be fair for me to try to see
what's going to happen at the end of the committee
discussion for him to decide to overrule it in terms of the
next executive decision.
So at the end of my speech and I'm almost there, I would
like to ask Mr. White to consider rescinding that offer to
me, and what I will do is to show good faith in way want to
happen hopefully to make something that we end up with
compatible to both sides, the ones that want it, the ones
that don't, and where we go as a legislative body.
And I think looking at that ordinance as a legislative
issue.
But it seems to me early on Mr. Smith has decided to take
some of this on, and I appreciate it because certainly my
plate is full as well.
So those are the reasons why I don't want to do that.
At the same time, on the other hand, I have already
scheduled a meeting and will continue to schedule those
meetings as long and as often as I think it helps the parks
and recreation.
Monday I'm meeting with Santiago Corrada, and Mr. Tertel who
has a wealth of experience heading the committee long ago,
as a consultant.
So we will do that.
I feel at this point we don't need to bicker back and forth
between somebody on the legislative branch, somebody else
doing something without consulting the neighborhood, and
created a committee to do that. That is my disclaimer.
Again, Mr. White, I don't know what the procedure is.
But I just feel this decision was surreptitiously done.
And whether it was or wasn't I think we can do by not
bickering.
If the administration can take this over I think our
citizens will win.
>>KEVIN WHITE: With that being said, I will be happy to
rescind the motion.
And the reason I nominated Ms. Ferlita for that was because
like I said, I thought it was a city-wide issue.
I know in regards to that one particular dog park, there
being several proposed throughout the city.
But if this is something another council member would like
to take on, I personally would not, but Mr. Dingfelder may
want to take this.
I don't know.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Alvarez isn't here.
Maybe we'll give to the her.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Anyway, I move to rescind.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Whatever you think is appropriate.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: To rescind the motion.
It was already voted on.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I move we dethrone Ms. Ferlita on the dog
park --.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Defrock.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Take her leash away.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
It's a new motion.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Make a motion that Ms. Ferlita be relieved
of her obligation as spearheading the committee for the dog
park, and just be a liaison to the community with
Mr. Tertel.
(Motion carried)
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Dingfelder, let me import one thing and
then it's in your court, my dear friend.
In terms of people that asked to be on that committee if
somehow it goes forward, either headed by the administration
or Mr. Dingfelder but certainly not Mr. White, I would still
encourage people who called me on their own free will to say
I would help if they needed help and I truly appreciate
that.
But I think the dynamics work better if we don't have a
combative attitude.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: All right.
We move on to our agenda.
We go now to our public hearings items 10 through 14.
Need to open.
(Motion carried)
Those who are going to speak, would you please stand and
raise your right hand.
(Oath administered by Clerk.).
>>GWEN MILLER: Item number 10 is already open.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Didn't we receive a memo?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Legal department.
Relative to both items 10 and 12, did you receive a memo
from David Smith asking that City Council open the public
hearings which you have, and to continue both of those items
to March 31st.
We ask that you continue them to a time certain, whenever
council --.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved, to 11:00 o'clock.
>>GWEN MILLER: We opened all of them.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Before we do, I need to say something in
regard to what Ms. Ferlita said about the administration.
Because --.
>>GWEN MILLER: I don't think you can say it now.
We have a public hearing motion.
We have to make a motion to continue.
We have it open already.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You're right.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to continue 11
and 12 to when, Mr. Massey?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: 10 and 12.
To March 31st at 11 a.m.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Or 10:30.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We know it's going to take an hour.
If we schedule it at eleven we have to come back after lunch
to deal with this item.
Maybe it would be better to schedule it at 1:00 after lunch.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excellent suggestion.
Move to continue to 1:00.
Number 10 and 12.
(Motion carried)
All right.
Number 11.
It's a continue public hearing.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: You should have received an electronic
message from the clerk and from zoning requesting a
continuance.
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes, we did.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: A request it be set for 10 a.m. six
weeks from now on your agenda.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move that.
>>THE CLERK: Requesting March 31st at --.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: We probably should make it April and not
March.
We need more time.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: What's the April date?
Instead of March 31st.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Then it could be the 7th or the 14th.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move April 7th.
And also conditioned that the petitioner be required to
submit revised site plan to LDC no later than -- that would
be revised.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Just add a week to that.
It would be March 1st.
March 3rd.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Where is this located, 1907?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: West cass?
I don't remember.
Cass and Albany.
It in the west Tampa overlay district.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: Just east of the armory on Cass Street.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
10:30.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Item number 13.
It's open already.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Item number 13.
A housekeeping matter.
I believe council members have a corrected ordinance.
There was a scrivener's error in the effective date.
I have corrected that.
It's a minor error.
You can still move forward with second reading but I want to
make sure if you move the ordinance with the correct
effective date in the ordinance itself.
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I wasn't here the first hearing.
This is where we are moving the 80% rule.
So Morris, a thumbnail sketch, what happens?
Just all PDs now?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Yes.
From this date forward anyone who wants to seek would have
gone through the 80% special use processing would have to
seek a PD unless you are in one of the overlay district
where the lots are smaller and you don't have that problem
at all.
Applications that are pending would still go forward before
council.
So we have a number, not many, but a few, that are still in
process, where we continue to process those.
But after today if council moves to adopt this ordinance we
would not accept any further special use approvals for 80%
lot development.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Massey, could you also just refresh
the fact that the PD would give us a lot more latitude for
denials for attaching additional requirements, or give us
more scrutiny?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Absolutely.
The way the special use process is set up, there is a
limited number of criteria that council is required to
consider relative to lot requirements or any type of special
use.
As long as the petitioner shows that they have met those
limited number of criteria, then it is really council is
bound to then approve that 80% special use permit.
Under the PD process, it's a much broader type of
application.
There's compatibility issues.
There's a site plan that must be rendered and approved by
City Council.
There's numerous other factors that council must consider in
the process.
It does bring it into a much larger context and give council
a lot more discretion relative to those types of petitions.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I will move this in one second.
>>GWEN MILLER: Not yet.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I did want to ask Mr. Massey.
There was a motion made a couple months ago to ask staff and
legal to come back to us with some additional suggestions
for additional conditions related to PDs, and we haven't
heard back.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I have to go back and research that,
Mr. Dingfelder.
It not coming to my mind right now.
But obviously we can get the zoning code on a consistent
basis.
In fact we are looking to several updates now.
That may be part of what zoning staff --.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: There was a specific motion related to
PDs and increase the criteria, look at increased criteria to
grant waivers, and that sort of thing.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I do recall there were a number of issues
related to PDs for the residential units that come at
eight-plex.
And I will check with Mr. Snelling and we will report back
to you shortly.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would
like to speak on item number 13?
>>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 South Sherill.
I am very happy that council has passed this on first
reading, and encourage you to do so today on second.
And we'll be looking forward to getting rid of the 80% rule,
though there are a few in the hopper.
We'll be back because there is one in Beach Park.
But after that, at least, they would be PDs with much more
restrictive language.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Anyone else?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move to adopt the following ordinance
also known as Margaret Vizzi ordinance upon second reading.
(Laughter)
Ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida repealing all
sections of the City of Tampa code allowing approval of 80%
lot developments as a special use, amending City of Tampa
code of ordinances, chapter 27, article 4, official schedule
of district regulations, section 27-77, official schedule of
district regulations, table 4-1, schedule of permitted uses
by district, and article 11, special use permits, section
27-272, regulations governing individual special uses by
deleting all references to 80% lot development therefrom and
amending article 12, nonconformities, section 27-303,
exceptions to 80% lot development to define existing
approved nonconforming 80% lots as conforming, providing for
repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for
severability, providing an effective date.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Before we vote on this I just want to
compliment the neighborhood leaders who spent so many years
working on having this ordinance repealed.
First we got it from being an administrative approval to a
council special use, and now we are eliminating it
completely.
I see this as a real testament to the voice and power and
organization, and articulateness of the neighborhood.
I thank you all for persevering.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I want to say thank you to Mrs. Saul-Sena
for keeping this issue alive.
I'm sure it's not going to get any press conference because
they don't understand the significance of it.
But this is a huge thing that we have just done here today.
And so I think it is a good day.
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
Roll call vote.
Vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried.
>>GWEN MILLER: Item 14 sauce Saul-Sena before people leave.
During new business I am going to suggest that we have our
tree and landscaping ordinance workshop on March 3rd at a
time certain which would be 2:00.
I just wanted, because some of the people who are here in
attendance, are also interested in the tree and landscaping
ordinance.
I want to share that with you.
I'll be bringing that up under new business.
And I hope you will be able to attend.
>> Fernandez, historic preservation department, file item
number 14.
I do have an application to submit into the record.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Fernandez, have you been sworn?
>>> I have been.
The subject property is listed on the national historic --
register of historic places and is a contributing structure,
the work is done with the historic standards, established by
the department of state, the improvements do exceed $10,000.
The staff recommendation is the tax exemption ordinance as
submitted.
I have pictures showing you some of the work in the
property.
The befores and afters.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public to speak on
item 14?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. White, would you read 14?
>> Move to adopt the following ordinance upon second
reading, an ordinance approving an historic preservation
property tax exemption application refuse tiff to the
restoration, renovation or rehabilitation of certain
property owned by Gary Sasso and Karen Sasso and Jeanne
Kronsnoble located at 2117 west hills Avenue Tampa, Florida
in the Hyde Park historic district based upon certain
findings, providing for notice to the property appraiser of
Hillsborough County, providing for severability, providing
for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
effective date.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Item 15.
>> Move to open.
>>PETE COWELL: Land Development Coordination, petition WZ
05-35, Brinker of Florida, Inc., a request for a 4(COP-R) in
a PD-A zoning district for a brand new Macaroni Grille
restaurant.
There are other wet zonings within 1,000 feet.
And they would be asking for a waiver of that requirement in
order to grant the wet zoning.
The map has a small error. The site is actually rotated
here under the industries, not over here as shown on the
map.
And it is in the Westshore overlay.
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: Tampa Police Department.
I have been sworn.
This is for Macaroni Grille restaurant.
I spoke with carver city neighborhood association.
They have no problems with this going in their neighborhood.
And the department has no objections.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner.
>> Good morning.
Crane, 500 east Kennedy for the petitioner, we are hear to
answer any questions.
We have all our staff recommendations for approval.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would
like to speak on item 15?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move an ordinance making lawful the sale
of beverages containing Florida alcohol regardless of
alcoholic content beer, wine and liquor 4(COP-R) for
consumption on premises only in connection with a restaurant
business establishment on that certain lot, plot or tract of
land located at 1508 north Dale Mabry Highway, Tampa,
Florida as more particularly described in section 2 hereof,
waiving certain restrictions as to distance based upon
certain findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
conflict, providing an effective date.
>> I have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
We need to open 16.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>PETE COWELL: Land Development Coordination.
Petition is WZ 05-40.
This is for Hillsborough County's museum of science and
industry.

11315 north 46th street.
They are asking for 4(COP-X) as an incidental use
unconditional for one year in conjunction with a new
Renaissance festival.
This is the same festival council looked at last year.
They are committed to the 6 weeks of the time period for the
festival, and then will be drying this particular license.
They are looking at coming back for a new wet zoning to
include the museum.
And this location in conjunction with a new rezoning that
they are doing, and we'll be looking at that as one package
sometime within the next several months.
There are no other wet zonings within 1,000 feet.
Residential is 850 feet from the site.
There are institutional uses within 1,000 feet.
Council would need to grant waivers to the residential use
and to the institutional uses in order to grant the
petition.
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: Tampa Police Department.
The site was used by the fair last year.
They had several off-duty officers work every day that they
were open for business.
We had no problems.
The department has no objections to it.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Just a question.
This is only being wet zoned for the festival, right?
>> PETE COWELL: Yes, sir, that's correct.
They committed to the same conditions that they had last
year.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner.
>>> Good morning.
Vicki Aarons, executive vice-president of MOSI.
We are here to answer any questions about the property.
The property on the west side of the MOSI property for the
use of the Renaissance festival.
We also have a representative from Festivals, Inc., directly
with the Renaissance festival should there be any questions.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would
like to speak on item 16?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move -- wait.
This is the first.
Move an ordinance making lawful a conditional sale of
beverages containing alcohol regardless of alcoholic
content, beer, wine and liquor, 4(COP-X), for consumption on
premises only at or from that certain lot, plot or tract of
land located at 11315 north 46th street, Tampa, Florida, as
more particularly described in section 2 hereof, waiving
certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain
findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
conflict, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
Unfinished business.
Clerk, do you have the new substitute ordinance?
Give it to Mr. White.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance vacating, closing,
discontinuing, and abandoning all those certain
rights-of-way known as Wesley Drive and Langhorne Court
lying off of Tampa Palms Boulevard west, in the map of Tampa
Palms area 2, 7-E, unit 2, a subdivision within the Tampa
Palms community development district, in the City of Tampa,
Hillsborough County, Florida, the same being more fully
described in section 2 hereof, subject to the reservation of
certain easements and to certain covenants, restrictions and
conditions as more particularly described herein, providing
an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
Mr. Shelby, would you like to say anything on item B?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
I filed a memorandum asking it be received and filed as an
update.
Since the time I submitted that I had an opportunity to
speak with Jeanne Johnson yesterday afternoon.
She indicated that the Temple Crest civic association will
be putting together a steering committee to meet with the
city to address the issue.
I spoke with Mr. Massey about it.
Mr. Snelling has indicated that he would make himself
available for that meeting and be able to participate.
Ms. Johnson indicated that we are shooting for the beginning
of March for that meeting.
I will keep council apprised through e-mail and directly
with Mr. Harrison.
But it is progressing.
The issue again, it appears that 20 years ago, the area was
rezoned to RM-24.
The issue was multifamily.
And they are going to be looking at options and they are
going to be getting direction.
I guess Ms. Johnson is going to be putting together a
committee to represent the entire civic association.
>>GWEN MILLER: Now we go to information from council
members.
Mr. Dingfelder, do you have anything?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, ma'am, a few quick things.
Number one, I'm concerned about Cypress Creek issue.
And we have been reading in the paper a little bit this is
regards to the proposed Pasco mall.
It's my understanding that the city governments and the
water department have been monitoring that process to make
sure that our watershed was protected.
And that's good.
And they have done a good job.
In the meantime, Pasco sent, I believe, their comp plan
amendment as well as their DRI proposal up to Tallahassee
for review.
Department of Community Affairs has filed objections and
initiated an administrative process through an
administrative hearing officer in that process.
I'm going to suggest that we get a report from our staff,
and probably the water department, or from anybody that
Mr. Smith choose, to come and give us a briefing, because I
think that my leaning might be that the City of Tampa
actually intervene in that process, the administrative
process. The reason I say it is not to say we are against
Pasco County or against Pasco development necessarily.
But we have an important water source and important
watershed to protect.
And if we don't intervene in the process we won't be at the
table.
And if there's negotiation that is go on between the
Department of Community Affairs and Pasco County to resolve
this, if we don't intervene and we don't have a legal right
to sit at the table then we can't participant.
I'm not saying we move to intervene at this point but I'd
like a report from staff and the administration and the
mayor to see what their recommendation is.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I second that as a motion.
And I too share those concerns.
I'm now an appointee on a quarterly Tampa Bay estuary board,
it affects the estuary, our river, effects our water supply,
and we should be part of it.
So I thank you for bringing that up.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll give staff two weeks on that.
I don't think there's any urgency.
And I have another Boy Scout.
They are coming out of the woodwork.
Troop 22, John Bartlett, receiving his Eagles goal on
February 21st.
They have asked me to make that presentation.
So I would ask for a commendation on that.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Finally, I was hesitant to jump into
this.
I hate to make bad jokes.
But in regard to what Ms. Ferlita was saying, council has no
dog in that fight, in regard to that street issue.
That particular street -- and you all saw it on the map,
Marti.
They have been parking on Marti for 20, 30 years.
All the neighborhoods can confirm that there was always
parking on Marti.
The city administration removed that parking, you know,
about a month ago.
It was a mistake.
The folks on San Nicolas and San Miguel started complaining
because instead of parking on Marti now park on San Nicolas
and San Miguel.
That's not our function.
I looked at the charter just now.
We all are familiar.
Our function is legislative and policy.
The mayor's function, and Darrell Smith's function, is the
administration and enforcement of laws, ordinances and
contracts, the exercise of direct control, supervision of
departments.
Including Parks Department.
That's their job.
We don't have a dog in that fight.
I'm sorry that Ms. Ferlita had to go but I'm sure she'll
hear what I had to say.
I think it was an unfair attack on Darrell Smith.
I think he does a great job.
At some point in time when these questions get bounced up
the ladder, somebody has to make a decision.
He made a decision.
I think it's the right decision as a neighbor who lives
there.
But not as a councilman.
Because it's not my role to tell the administration where to
put parking and where not to put parking in the city.
That's all I wanted to say.
Thanks.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
As a neighbor I concur.
Tree and landscaping ordinance.
We have done it.
We finally come out with what I think is a really good
proposed improved ordinance.
And I'd like to schedule a workshop on it which hopefully
will be relatively brief, on March 3rd at 2:00.
That's the day that we set aside for workshops.
We have one scheduled for 1:00 which hopefully will be
brief.
And I would like to schedule this for 2:00.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Nothing, Madam Chairman.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. White.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Just one thing, Madam Chair.
I'd like to thank the Tampa Police Department for their
efforts out on North Boulevard once again in front of Blake
high school.
I was on my way in to City Hall the other morning for a
meeting, and the traffic unit was out there at the base of
the bridge once again.
And I knew most of the officers so I kind of felt compelled
to stop and hang out with the traffic unit that was
enforcing the speed limit coming off of the bridge.
And as people were coming from the north to the south, one
of the teachers from Blake, happened to be running late,
which was running -- I won't say the exact, between 50 and
60 in a 35, was the unfortunate recipient of a speeding
ticket.
But, you know, we can't -- you know we can't show
favoritism.
That is a school zone.
And it's a very dangerous and high traffic area.
And they have been out there much more than I thought they
would have been.
And they are doing a wonderful job out there.
And I think the awareness is beginning to take effect.
And that is a high school.
And that is still a school zone, whether people realize it
or not.
And Tampa Police Department traffic unit has been doing a
wonderful job.
And I would just like to say kudos to them and thank you for
trying to continue to help make our city streets safer for
our children.
>>GWEN MILLER: Clerk, anything?
>> Move to receive and file everything.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby, anything?
Okay.
We will go to our public portion of the agenda.
(Meeting adjourned.)
-=-