Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council meeting
Thursday, March 10, 2005
9:00 a.m. session

Unedited Realtime Translation

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 was produced in all capital letters
and any variation thereto may be a result of third party edits and
software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the proceedings may
need to hire a court reporter.



>>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order. Chair will
yield to Ms. Mary Alvarez.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Madam Chairman. It is my distinct pleasure
to welcome Pastor Jeffrey Singletary to do the invocation for us today. I
will give you a little background on him. He was born in a small
agricultural community in Belle Glade, Florida. There he graduated from a
local high school, Belle Glade Central High. He further continued his
education, attending Tampa College where he achieved his degree in
architecture technology. But feeling a tug on his heart to do ministry, he
attended Clearwater Christian College majoring in pastoral ministry and
biblical studies. He and his lovely wife Amber have two biological
children Jeffrey II, and Yvonne, and four adopted children Erica,
Quintella, Craig, and CarLisa. Pastor Singletary is committed to
multiethnic, multicongregational ministry and worship. He is a convention
retreat and revival speaker along with doing prison missionary evangelism.
He has preached throughout the continental United States, Caribbean, Africa
and beyond. He currently serves as campus pastor of Idlewild Baptist
Church in Tampa, Florida.
After the invocation would you please continue standing for the
pledge. Thank you, pastor.
>>PASTOR SINGLETARY: Would you bow your head with me. Eternal father
and great God, we thank you for this great day you have given us. Father,
we we've come to ask for your divine blessing and guidance upon this City
Council meeting this morning. Father, we ask that you would give wisdom
and knowledge and understanding. Father, Lord, to this body that's
gathered today. Father, your word declared that if any lack wisdom that
ask of God give deliberately and abradeth not. Father, we ask that you,
god, grant your wisdom and knowledge to these men and women who serve on
this most honorable council, Lord, counsel them today, father. We ask you
give them your divine perspective on the issues. Then father when all is
said and done, when this game come to a close, that, father, we would be
careful to give you the praise, the glory and the honor that you so richly
deserve. We ask it in the precious name of our saviour, Jesus Christ.
Amen.
(PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE).
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, pastor.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to make council aware we have brochures
developed by the National Conference for Community Justice for prayers in
public gatherings. It would be great when we invite people to come here
and provide an invocation that we share these brochures with them.
(Roll call).
At this time we have Mr. Salisbury from the Lowry Park Zoo.
>>LEX SALISBURY: I am president of Lowry Park Zoo. 1105 West Sligh
Avenue in Tampa. And of course I couldn't bring you a real rhino this
morning, but we are giving you all a plush rhino in celebration of an event
this weekend which is the opening of our new rhino reserve. We have five
rhinos from South Africa that will be available for everybody to see, and
probably the nicest new development of the zoo which is contiguous to the
elephant. We have, it's a beautiful new area --
>>KEVIN WHITE: Lex, is this valued over a hundred dollars?
>>LEX SALISBURY: No, it's 4 dollars 6 cents, I think.
In 2001 we had 5,000 signed letters of support from people in the
community and you all allocated 10 million dollars in CIT funds to us. And
we knew at that point we promised that we would raise at least $31, and I'm
pleased to say we knew that we needed 20 million for bricks and mortar and
10 million for the endowment and I'm pleased to say that we exceeded our
goal by 5 million and we have raised a total of 35 million. So we are






calling our capital --
(APPLAUSE)
>>LEX SALISBURY: We are calling our capital campaign to an end, and
we couldn't have done it without you guys. I know a least people don't
come here and thank you, but I want to thank you for your support. We
wouldn't have been able to do it if it weren't for the support and
leadership of the city. I have just finished my 18th year at the zoo and I
used to be a member of the Parks Department. I was hired by the City of
Tampa and that's the reason I moved here 18 years ago. And we've gone from
one of the five worst zoos in America to the number one zoo in America by
an independent third party. We don't call ourselves the number one zoo.
That was something that child magazine said we were. And it's been a great
process, and we couldn't have done it without the help of the city. So we
hope that you think that we are a good investment.
And our goal is to continue to make the zoo as good as it can be for
the City of Tampa because the people here deserve it. And I want to turn
it over to my chairman Fassil Gabremariam.
>>FASSIL GABREMARIAM: Good morning. I hope you can hear me. If I
bend any lower, I will be scratching. My name is Fassil Gabremariam. I am
the chairman of the board of the Lowry Park Zoological Society. On behalf
of the volunteers, so many of the volunteers and our donors, we want to
express our appreciation to you for your partnership and your support for
the initial confidence you had in the zoo to make that a significant step
forward. Which has translated now in what you see what we promised to do
or the staff delivered what they promised to do.
The Lowry Park Zoo has a tremendous impact in that neighborhood. The
economic neighborhood, we're close over 80 million dollars, over 900 jobs
and soon to be over 1 million customers coming in, 100 manage impact is
not -- is not -- is within easy shot. Our challenge is one of a challenge
of growth. And that challenge of growth continues to require us to
continue to be innovative, not in terms of what we present to the public
like the rhino exhibit, like when you go out and see that areas like you
saw the elephants of Africa, that place is completely done. You will be
amazed. I was amazed when I went and saw it. Within a few weeks, Lex
takes me around, I look around and I see this tremendous beautiful site
with different animals. I felt like I was in the middle of Africa.
Honestly, I mean that sincerely.
We have to do more with what little we have. But we need to be a lot
more stronger in our partnership with you, and we know the challenges of
growth bring with them requirements to raise more money. And one of the
areas where we would like to be very, very active and get your support is
in getting a stronger partnership in the areas of transportation, access
ramps and things like that, signs. We'd like to be partners with the city.
And we'd like to be involved in the strategic planning process so that at
least we can offer some ideas and thoughts that we have. Doesn't mean that
we drive it, but we would like to get our ideas inputted.
We had a tremendous presentation from city staff this week on the
transportation plans, and we have explored potential avenues for
partnership. We have already applied for additional funding at the state
level and the federal level, up to a tune of close to 3 million dollars for
budget request. And that type of partnership is what this is all about.
Great cities have great zoos and great zoos have great cities. And
great cities have great communities. And great communities have great
partnerships. This is what it's all about. And I am so proud, so proud to
be allowed to chair such a tremendous organization, especially the people,
the management, and the operations staff of the Lowry Park Zoo have to be
commended. They are the best in the nation. They are the best in the
world. In fact, we have a world-class zoo here.
If you are the best in the United States, you are the best in the
world. And when you are the best in the world, everybody comes and visits






to see how you do it.
The other day, Lex had to host over 80 zoo directors at the zoo. All
of them come out to see how he does it. How they do it. And I think this
is an enormous source of pride. It is an enormous asset for the estimate
it is an enormous source of publicity for our city. And I just am so
grateful for your partnership and support. Thank you very, very much.
>>LEX SALISBURY: Our vice president for marketing Trish Rothman and
vice president for advancement are also here and will be able to answer any
questions you might have.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Lex, first of all, you know how to get our attention.
This is very cute. Thank you. I don't have questions.
Anytime you come up here I have a dilemma Craig, Fassil, or you now,
Trish. You come for two reasons, basically. You come to ask us for
assistance, and if we do our job well, we can justify what we give in terms
of financial commitment. Because what we get in return, always, is the
product of business acumen. You always do what you ask other people to do,
kind of put your money where your mouth is. You have an incredible board,
an incredible list of supporters and you always do your share. So
obviously we are challenged many times with giving money to this or
allocating money to this. But the gratefulness that I have is the fact
that I am always confident that when I -- in terms of supporting you, that
you always come back with good results. And I think that's what the
partnership is about.
Further than that, and I try to say this differently each time, but
there's just so many ways to say congratulations and job well done.
Talking to you, you said you were praising Fassil because he doesn't know
how to say no, 40 hours is not enough. I realized as you were talking, I
realized that is the philosophy you all have, you never know how to say no.
You have a commitment to what you do. And we see that in terms of product
of the zoo.
I have said that many times, our zoo was awful when I was at Loyola.
Ottoman Zoo was just incredible. Tampa needs something like that. Now if
I were in New Orleans I would say gosh New Orleans needs something like our
zoo.
Congratulations on what you do. It is wonderful to be in partnership
with all of you.
>>LEX SALISBURY: Thank very much.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I want to thank our chairman for once more allowing
-- thank you, Fassil, Craig, Trish, everyone who makes this zoo so special.
We are so lucky to have them because they do so much with so little with
public support. That's the facts, guys. We know we are looking at a major
investment downtown here with the new museum and they're asking for an
operating subsidy of 2 million dollars a year. And we provide about
350,000 a year for the Lowry Park Zoo. They do a very, very good job with
very little from us. I have always believed that we ought to reward
success and innovation, and they show us time and time again that they're
able to do some things with not oh whole lot of help. So I hope that we
will remember that during budget time this year and take a good serious
look at helping them retain that number one ranking for children's zoos
across the country.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. Lex, Craig,
Fassil, Trish, you all have done more than we've asked you all to do. And
being that you are in my district, I am exceptionally happy that you have
gotten to your goal. I know that every time you invite me out there to see
your various, like the Africa, the elephants and so forth, it's just
amazing what you do with you such a little plot of land that you-all have
there. And it just goes to show that you people are committed, and that's
what it's all about, is commitment, that you want to do the best for your
city. You have done that.
You have made it the number one zoo. We are really proud of that and






we want to keep it as the number one zoo so we commend you, we congratulate
you, and be successful. And if you can, try to bottle this success for
other assets that we have in the city which need the big help that we
absolutely need here. So if you can, do that.
>>LEX SALISBURY: I think -- thank you very much for your comments. I
think one of the main reasons we've been successful is that all the people
that work there really love what they do and would really do it for free
and you've got people's full enthusiasm and buy-in. We have a really
diverse group of people, we embrace everybody. As long as they are good at
what they do, that is our only benchmark. You have to be good at what you
do. But we want to include everybody.
Thirdly, you have to listen to your customers. We have always asked
our customers what they like, what they don't like. And a lot of people
make the mistake of not doing that. And the number one thing that
motivates people to go to the zoo is it's fun. It's our job to get as many
people to the zoo as possible through fun, and then when they're there, to
educate them. But if you think you are going to get them there by selling
them this is an educational facility, that's not the way it's going to be
successful. It's got to be fun to people then we do a good job once
they're there. So I think that's a very simple formula that we use and has
worked to our success. But you shouldn't also downplay your role because
we could have 9/11 gotten there were it not for the city. The city has
given the seed money which makes the private sector take note.
The private sector isn't going to come on first. The public sector
has to come on first and make a commitment. And that's what you guys did.
And I think we have taken -- you now have like a 40, 50, 60 million-dollar
asset now that was built for a not-for-profit group that is basically
taking your land and adding to it and getting private sector money and
having it almost self-supporting. So I think it's a great deal for the
city too. But the main thing is to really listen to what the public wants
and the demographics here, there are so many people moving to Florida. If
we just ask people what they want, I think all these not-for-profits could
do a little bit better job.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: But you gave us the reason to support and the reason
was you had a number one zoo and that you were successful at it. So
continue that and we will be able to continue supporting you. And we will
certainly take you at heart with this transportation. I think that's a
real thing that we need to work on. Because you do need more signage, and
you do need the transportation element in this area. So we'll help you on
that too.
>>LEX SALISBURY: Thank you so much because the parks and
transportation are an important component. If we can get people off 275
going to the zoo and have that more of a celebratory entrance going for the
number one zoo in America that is a no-brainer so we would like to work
with you guys on that.
>>GWEN MILLER: Everybody has said what I would want to say but I want
to say Lex continue on doing the job you are doing. You are doing an
excellent job. Don't let that chairman leave. If he leaves he will help
someone else so don't let him leave, let him stay with you. So thanks for
giving us such a good report and thank you in everything that you do.
(APPLAUSE).
>>GWEN MILLER: We now go to department heads and city employees. We
now have Cathy.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you. Catherine Coyle, land development.
Mine is a simple request. We have a case scheduled for April 14th, ZO 544.
There was a slight error with the legal description that was posted in the
newspaper and it was a basically staff error, so I would ask that you make
a motion to have the clerk readvertise the legal description and waive the
amendment fee due to the staff error.
>>So moved.






>>GWEN MILLER: So motion and second. All in favor of the motion say
aye? Opposed nay.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Morris Massey.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Morris Massey, legal department. I'm here on item
200, responding to council's motion whether we should amend the criteria
for PD rezoning districts. I did meet with Gloria Moreda and Catherine
Coyle about that issue. I think this issue came up with reference to
zoning petition where the zoning folks had issues regarding whether
procedurally it should come before council because the same relief could
have been granted by the variance review board.
In reviewing other governments' PD regulations, they don't have a
strict criteria saying if you could go before VRB you don't come before
City Council and PD. I'm not sure you want to limit yourself in that way.
I think what staff was trying to say maybe in is what we need to pay more
attention, is to look at what the purposes for the PD are in our code. Let
me hand that out. That is in every staff report that you-all get. But
just to remind you -all.
I think I handed them all out to you but it speaks to the efficient
use of land, unique circumstances, large tracts where you have different
types of development, that sort of thing, and I think, you know, if staff
comes to you with an objection that they don't believe a proposed PD zoning
meets one of the purposes, that is a valid reason for you-all rejecting
that petition. And we may look at -- and let me also state that we're
also, the administration staff are looking at wholesale changes to Chapter
27 or whole land development code, and I think we may be looking at
refining the PD process in that context and we may be looking at other
things.
I mean other governments I will tell you one of the ways they restrict
it is a number of governments have minimum lot size requirements for their
PDs. Hillsborough County it's 2 acres. City of Orlando it's 2,000 square
feet. That may not work for the City of Tampa. Obviously, unincorporated
areas are different from the built-in areas of the City of Tampa but they
also have different purpose sections in their code. We may look to
incorporate some of their reasons and rationale and use that as a basis for
reviewing the requests that PD that come before City Council. Thank you.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Morris, this came up in two different contexts.
This came up recently in this context of should it go to the VRB and
otherwise. But it also came up earlier a couple months, at least six
months maybe or four months prior -- we directed staff to look at
additional criteria that we would add to PDs, and we haven't heard back on
that.
Before you answer that, let me talk about this VRB versus City Council
thing. Right now I don't think -- it doesn't appear to me that staff has
the latitude to reject somebody and send them through the VRB path. I mean
they can encourage them, I mean that's what I think we were hearing that
night. They can encourage them to go to the VRB path or whatever.
So maybe there's some language in there that we could sort of embolden
or empower staff to be able to say, this is really inappropriate and I
doesn't meet this criteria because we continue want to let some go through
the whole process, the fees, drawings and everything that night and then
get turned away. That is what we were faced with that night.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I understand. We should look at the purpose
section. Maybe the purpose section is what we need to look at and maybe we
can expand upon the purposes section of the rezoning in the City of Tampa.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm thinking also after purpose we could say, if
staff concludes during the application process that the purpose is not met,
you know, then it will not accept applications or some sort of delegation
like that.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I mean the PDs are a tool that are used by all






communities including the City of Tampa, and it's a creative solution to
unique problems, and that's really how it should be used.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: But it shouldn't be abused.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: It should not be abused. Staff can make it clear I
think. I don't want to take away from the authorities of the council. I
think staff can state and Ms. Coyle had stated to this applicant that we
don't really think this fits the purpose of the PD section. And staff will
object to the request because we don't think it fits within the parameters
of the PD rezoning. I feel uncomfortable with staff making that call. I
feel somebody has should have the right to come before you all and say we
disagree with staff and it's up to you to make the decision. But I think
clearly staff needs to be empowered and they need to focus on the purpose
section for PDs. And when they meet with folks for filing with PDs, say,
look we don't think it meets the purpose section for the PDs. There's
other ways to do what you want to do, and if you do file for PD rezoning,
we will object because we don't feel it meets the purposes for PD rezoning.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: I think we can give council a little anecdote.
When I was on the variance review board in this town someone came up to me
after a very, very difficult night at the VRB and she said to me, I'm never
coming back to the variance review board again. I'm going to take all of
my issues and do them in the form of a PD and take them to City Council.
Just because in her opinion it was too difficult at the VRB, so she opted
to go to -- and these are quote, unquote, words out of her mouth, she opted
to go to council at that time.
Obviously, that was four or five years ago when I was VRB. But that
is a real issue. And I don't think people should -- just like I don't
think people should judge-shop when they go to court, you know, you can't
pick your judge, and I don't think they should be able to pick their forum.
If you got this kind of project, you go to the VRB. If you got that kind
of project you come to council. One or the other.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I think we may want to expand or clarify what the
purpose of PD rezonings are in the City of Tampa, and that may give more
authority to staff to direct folks to go elsewhere and council more
leverage or authority when a petition comes before you all that should not
be before you even after council has counseled these folks they should not
file. That's my feeling.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: With regard to the revisions of Chapter 27, I think
it's wholly appropriate for this area to be revisited by the administration
and perhaps with direction from the council as to what council wishes to
see.
In my opinion, the purposes as they're presently drafted are very
broad. Council has a tremendous amount of discretion. I haven't spoken
with staff about it statistically but I would be very curious to know what
personal of new development in Tampa is done under Euclidean zoning based
on the criteria that council has previously delineated or what percentage
comes in the form after PD where both the developer and City Council have
tremendous latitude?
I'm looking throughout this section and there are criteria within this
section that council can more strictly apply if it so wishes on a case by
case basis. As council knows, they requested certain variances, and
certain variances have greater impact on the surrounding community than
others and council would be right to give those areas scrutiny during the
hearing. There is no burden set forth here specifically with regard to PDs
but the burden I would suspect would still fall on the petitioner by
substantial and competent evidence to show that those variances should be
granted. And council can hold that petition to a level of scrutiny to a
degree that it may not have been in the past. So you do have that kind of
latitude.
But with regard to tightening up the criteria, I believe that when the
revisions to Chapter 27 come in as Mr. Massey would say, it would be






appropriate for council to give direction to staff for greater guidance.

>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Shelby. Mr. Massey, I would
venture to say, having been on council a number of years, that it used to
be maybe 2 percent of the requests were PDs and now I say it is closer to
90% and I think all council members are under a tremendous pressure with
all of these. And so I have two points. One is that I believe we need to
revisit Chapter 27 as quickly as possible. And I'm concerned because it's
such a massive undertaking, I know our staff is so busy. I assume we'll
have to go to a consultant to help come up with it but that's okay, if
somebody, some consultant is used to cranking out zoning new codes, working
with our staff, I think it would happen more expeditiously and I will ask
what you the time frame is for this.
And the second thing is, I'm not sure that the kind of zoning we have
as the city has evolved is appropriate. Council members have you heard of
something called form-based zoning? This was cooked up about ten years ago
by Andrea Duane down in Miami. The premise is it doesn't matter as much
the use as the impact and how well it works with the other things, that if
everything is this size -- you know, things need to be compatible. It's a
very different way of looking at zoning than the traditional Euclidean and
it's kind of what we're moving toward with the PD. But it gives you a
better grip in terms of setbacks, mass, heights, lighting, signing, how
well it works with the surrounding uses and I think that's something we
need to look at. And my question would be, how quickly can we get on this?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I know for instance right now there's some
discussions with the administration about reorganizing land development
coordination to basically free up certain people to actually do a wholesale
review of Chapter 27, the thought process being yes, we could hire an
outside consultant, but every community is unique, and it probably makes
sense for people who know the City of Tampa and know how the code works and
the problems with the code to look at revising the owed so that's the
current thought process. And no finality decision has been made on that.
But that's what is being discussed. I know it is a priority of the
administration to look at it. I can't give you a definite time frame right
now but I know this is a priority of the administration.
My one word of caution and this is after talking to staff, is that if
you-all alter the criteria for PDs dramatically that could have dramatic
ripple effects in the code so we want to be careful about doing it in a
very thoughtful manner. One of the things I think we could do maybe more
quickly than a whole sale revision is that we could take a look at the
purpose section of the PDs to beef that up to empower staff further and to
empire council further to further qualify that. I would be careful about
having real black-line delineations until we have had a full look at the
code to see how that impacts everything within the City of Tampa. That
would be my only word of caution.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: If I K. with regard to the way it is presently
structured there is also a concern that I have, and I know Ms. Catherine
Coyle has stated it to council publicly, with regard to specific site plan
notes that perhaps are in the long run unenforceable or make it more
difficult for development in terms of -- I will give you an example,
limiting perhaps the number of employees on the site plan. Granted that
runs with the land but quite frankly I don't know as a as a matter of law
down the road were somebody to buy that land were they even on know it,
would they have to refer back to the site plan? Is that then challengeable
as a restricted use that maybe conflicts with another provision in state
law or in other statutes?
So with regard to compatibility I guess it's -- council as presently
structured has tremendous latitude. And with regard to specific notes, I






would just ask that in the meantime, until Chapter 27 comes through, that
council heed Ms. Coyle's concern as to -- in order to make things more
palatable, to put things in the site plan that may be not necessarily
appropriate to a notation, as a notation in the site plan.
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Yes. Morris you have given us as much
information as you can but I think we are still a little bit short in
regard to a timetable for this Chapter 27 revisions that we have been
hearing about frankly for more than a year. And so I would just -- I'm not
going to put you on the spot. I think I would like to make motion that in
two weeks Thom Snelling comes back or Cyndi Miller and gives us not only a
timetable but also a scope of services in terms of what is the scope of
these Chapter 27 revision that is we have been hearing about? And at least
that way when we have the scope listed -- and give it to us, Thom, give it
to us in advance of the meeting so we can look at it and say, oh, we're
missing this, or we don't want to you do that.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: And Thom would be the appropriate person. I notice
there are some noncontroversial provision of Chapter 27 that will come to
you pretty quickly, either late this spring or early summer so there are
tweaks that we could do that wouldn't dramatically change the system but
make it work better in these noncontroversial changes. The wholesale
review of Chapter 27 will obviously take a longer period of time. Thom
will be the one to tell you that. Obviously this is staff is full up and
there are issues there.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: He's got two people leaving and that sort of
thing.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: That needs to be addressed. Real quickly, one thing
I want to say is when you place conditions on the site plan, if it's a
permissible condition, something that CSC reviews, the construction
drawings have to comply with the site plan. So they ares fairly easily
achieved. Some conditions are more difficult for us to enforce, and you
just need to be aware of that, but that's very true.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the floor. All in
favor of the motion? Aye.
[Motion Carried].
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Massey, getting back to this note on the site
plan that Mr. Shelby was talking about, do these notes go with the site
plan once the building is sold?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Yes.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So how is it enforceable? Do people go out there and
physically look at this thing?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: When you purchase this property, you purchase
knowing that your property is zoned something. And it is up to the
property other than who bicycle the property to come down and check the PD
site plan. I mean they are on notice that zoning exists, the property is
subject to certain use restrictions so yes, those conditions would run with
the land. If that property owner can't abide by those conditions then he
would have to come back to City Council in the context of the PD and
request a modification of the PD to deal with that issue. But what
Mr. Shelby I think is also trying to tell us all is that there are certain
conditions that are more difficult for the city and the neighborhood to
monitor. And so those -- the more particular conditions you place on the
internal operations of a particular business of the PD process while we can
arguably place them on the site plan and they do attach to the land and
they do control to the zoning of the property, they are difficult to
enforce, to check on.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: One other question. Seems like every time we have a
PD and somebody is questioning it, either Cathy or the other girl --






Angela -- say that the PD is more stringent, that they have to follow more,
more rules because it's a PD than it is if it's just a plain old zoning. I
keep hearing that a lot.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: A PD is a much more flexible tool. It allows a
property owner to come in and ask you all to waive setback requirements.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Right.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Other requirements and come up with a plan that you
all say this is going to be the zoning for the property. And the way the
PD process works in the City of Tampa, really the layout of the building,
the parking areas, landscape areas are all shown and they have to use and
build the property exactly in accordance with that plan.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Exactly.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I think the plan -- I think what the developers and
the council likes about that is that they know exactly what they are
getting at the end of the day through the PD process. The PD process is
not necessarily more restrictive. One of the reasons typically people come
before council is that the typical zoning regulations, they have problems
complying with it. They can't meet the setback requirements. They can't
meet the parking requirements. They want to go higher. They want to do
mixed uses that currently wouldn't be allowed in their zoning district.
And you want to allow that flexibility to occur where it makes sense. I
think the concern is that sometimes people are abusing the process when
they don't need to go through that process oh to get the relief through
some other mechanisms.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: But when a person comes over to get either -- to get
either a PD or a rezoning, isn't it the staff that's telling them which is
the best for them?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: They are counseled by staff, that's correct.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: They are counseled by staff. All right. Thank you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to encourage counsel tonight when we
have this significant zoning meeting to pay real attention to what the
staff says about PDs. I think we have a lot of the tools in place now and
we just need to really listen to statement but I'd also like to ask
Mr. Massey and Mr. Shelby to take a look at the purpose section and tighten
it up in, I guess, 30 days?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: We can bring some language. I already have some
language out of Hillsborough County, Orlando, some other jurisdictions that
might be useful for us.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 21 days?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Give us 30 days to look at it. I want to sit down
with staff and make sure they are in agreement with it, bring you all a
draft that would incorporate overall changes in the planning commission.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: That last comment is of concern to me. When you
say tighten it up are you talking about restricting the ability of someone
who comes in and asks for a PD? Saul assault I believe we have to be very
careful about doing that because for example we just got rid of the 80%
people do have the have the avenue of coming in and requesting a PD. If we
limit it to two acres that would limit most of those requests and it would
be a tenuous position so I'm not suggesting that. But they said that
Orlando and some other communities have crisper language and I would like
to see what it is.
I feel as if PDs, you know, have great power for good and ill. I love
the specificity. I'm uncomfortable with when people use it to do things
that we know the communities and we really don't want to see happen, but we
don't have any legal teeth to question it. And so that's the kind of area
that I want to see if we can get some guidelines on.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I will give you a for instance that I don't see in
our purpose section that I saw in other local jurisdictions' purpose
sections. They speak to the compatibility of the PD to surrounding uses.
That's not addressed specifically in our lists of purposes. When you look






at the criteria about buffering, yes, we get to it in the details but it
would be better to lay it out and I think that would be in the purpose.
SPEAKER 1: Like the counties.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: That is very good. I think the idea that not being
able to do the forum shopping like councilman Dingfelder suggested, I'm not
sure about that because the VRB people are good and smart people and are
doing things for the right reasons but they are lecture are not elected
officials and they don't have to answer to the voters. We do. So I think
we ought not to restrict the ability for someone to be able to come
directly to us rather than going the VRB route. But we can get into that
later.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Legally we can get into various reasons. The VRB is
restricted about when they can grant variances. The purpose of the PD has
more flexibility. I think in some instance it makes sense to come before
you all. You just need to make sure the petitioner comes before you for
the right reasons.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dave Parkinson?
>>DAVE PARKINSON: Urban development. Here on items 48 through 57 on
council's consent agenda today, these ten items also have ten companion
items on the CRA agenda, which you will see at 11:00 when you convene as
the Community Redevelopment Agency. So all told we are talking about 20
transactions.
I will try to simplify the understanding of what those will
accomplish.
On both of those agendas you will be presented with an agreement
between the city and CRA and reciprocally the CRA and the city for the CRA
to act as staff for the Community Redevelopment Agency to carry out the
implementation of the community redevelopment plan. So that's two of the
agreements.
The other two agreements one in the CRA agenda approves the TIF budget
for the current year and the one on the City Council agenda appropriates
those funds so they can be expended. So there are four agreements for each
of five CRAs. So there are 20 transactions. But you can simplify it by
thinking about it as establishing an agreement between the city and CRA,
approving the TIF dollars for expenditures, so those will be coming to you
at 11:00 this morning. The five CRAs that will be addressed are Ybor 1,
Ybor 2, Drew Park, channel district, and East Tampa. These budgets, when
you do see them, I hope you will recognize that they are the result of
months and months of work between city staff and some very dedicated
community representatives.
Since June of last year these communities have had to effectively form
and organize committees that represent their communities. They've had to
identify and discuss and privatize their needs, and ultimately they have
developed consensus among themselves for which programs to support in this
first year. That's a huge under taking in a relatively short period of
time.
Because of the scheduling of council's consent agenda, the CRA meeting
later this morning, we would ask that items 48 through 57 be held and acted
on subsequent to the CRA meeting because the CRA will need to approving the
budget and the agreement in order for the money to be appropriated and for
the city to reciprocate. So because of the timing we would ask those be
held and moved to after the CRA meeting.
One final note, on item number 54, in our haste we missed a
typographical error and we have provided a substitute agreement to the
resolution to the clerk and we would ask that that be substituted at the
time that these items are considered.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you know how we are doing with the hiring of
the person who's going to be the overseer of all the CRAs?
SPEAKER 2: Oh, I dream of this daily. We believe that we are right
now on track to, in about 90 days, have what we hope is the final candidate






in Mark's office for him to be concluding an employment conversation.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We share your eagerness.
>>DAVE PARKINSON: We have been through the cycle between two six and
seven-month periods. We have come to an offer with two different
individuals and both, as shocking as it seemed at the time, both of them
for family reasons concluded at the 11th hour that they were making a
mistake in making the move. They were both out-of-town candidates and
their families' opinions came to bear, which is fine. But it's just
unfortunate that we have used so much time successfully twice, we thought,
and now we are in the third cycle of that. We're hopeful that we will be
successful.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Scott Guffey?
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: Good morning. Scott Guffey, Tampa Police Department,
here to speak to you on consent item 43, which is wet zoning during the
Saturday night St. Patrick's Day parade. I wanted council to know there is
no security, the security department requirement has not been met for the
temporary wet zoning. I spoke with the petitioner yesterday. She told me
initially she contacted the sheriffs office. The Sheriff's Office rejected
that application Wednesday of this week and quite frankly there is no
chance that it's going to be filled by us before Saturday night.
So we would ask that council not approve that temporary or if you do
approve it, approving it with the condition that they have to have security
in place and present proof of that to the police department before the
event.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, do you want to speak on that?
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: No, he's with us.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: I don't know if the petitioner is here or not. When
I talked to her, she said she wasn't sure --
>>GWEN MILLER: You are here, you want to speak on that?
>>DR. AARON SMITH: Good morning. Can you hear me? Good. My name is
Dr. Aaron Smith and I'm one of the board members of Marti-Maceo. We
submitted all the appropriate papers we thought to the appropriate places,
so it's not so much as we didn't submit the papers and much as we
understand that the format or the protocol Hillsborough changed and instead
of sending it to the Sheriff's Department -- I think is where we, as I
understand it, it should have been sent to the police department. So we
hope you would consider that, even though we can understand if you did not
support our wish for the license.
We do need to make the agency available to the community and we
thought we were in compliance by submitting the form to the appropriate
place only to discover that appropriate place Hillsborough changed to
somewhere else.
>>GWEN MILLER: Do you all have the police in place for that night?
>>DR. AARON SMITH: We are still attempting to secure that but because
of the lateness we were unable to find someone so far, but we are still
attempting to find someone.
>>ROSE FERLITA: This kind of presents a problem, and I'm listening to
what Dr. Smith says, and this is one of the issues that I had talked about
a while back. And I think we talked about perhaps looking at a special
events committee and again the administration took it over. And it has
been my experience that -- I don't think anyone who wants a temporary wet
zoning wants to be abusive of the process but I'm not sure that
organizations and charitable groups that come in to want to do a one-day
wet zoning are real clear about what they should do. In Dr. Smith's mind,
representing his organization, they felt like they did their due diligence
by calling the Sheriff's Department.
And Scott, you know I always support what we need to do in terms of
coverage, but I am not sure that where we are is where we should be in






terms of special events information to the consumer. So, you know, as much
as I think it's important that the police be there, I'm not sure if we are
doing a good-enough job telling them what they have to do. He went through
the efforts, and I'm supportive of that, because of the fact that there's a
lot of confusion, and I don't think it's been well defined.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I would like to ask officer Guffey, do you have any
information on why the application was denied by the Sheriff's Office?
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: I don't know the reason for that. I know with the
new sheriff they changed some policies but I'm not going to stand and speak
for the Sheriff's Office.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Dr. Smith, in regards to that, I won't even say you
went to the wrong agency, because the Tampa Police Department is obviously
a source. If they were not able to fill that application, then you could
have also gone to the Sheriff's Office. If the Sheriff's Office is not,
you could also apply to the Florida Highway Patrol. So there is no one
main source. Of course if the event is happening within the city limits of
the City of Tampa, I'm sure the Tampa Police Department appreciates first
crack at any extra-duty office.
>> Dr. Smith: I would imagine had we had the appropriate information
in time to go to those sources, we would have done that. But we didn't get
that message until around 12:10 yesterday. So we put the papers in order.
That's when we applied -- I believe we applied earlier in the week.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: February 18th.
>>KEVIN WHITE: February 18th? Madam chair, what I would -- this is
under my committee, but what I would be willing to make a motion on when
these come up under these committees, is to allow them to have their wet
zoning with the condition that they do have police in place, security
personnel, whether it be -- well, if they can't get it, I mean rules are
rules. We need police security at wet-zoned events. If by chance you
cannot secure off-duty personnel via Tampa Police Department or Florida
Highway Patrol, I would not be able to support the application without
proper security in place.
How many people are you looking at possibly attending this event?
Dr. Smith?
>> Dr. Smith: It's a little hard to project because we would be
opening it to the public, considering that's going to be the parade route.
>>GWEN MILLER: St. Patrick's parade route. So they will be open to
that.
Dr. Smith: And, of course, the security people who might have been
available had already been claimed by other places so we thought we were in
cold by submitting it early but we didn't get information until
yesterday --
>>KEVIN WHITE: What actual building is this? The Cuban club?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes, right on the corner of 14th and 7th Avenue.
Right across from the trolley barn. Across the street from it.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, let me bring this up to you,
Mr. White, since it is under your committee. A while ago I said that
because of the result of the special events committee under Daryl Smith
some of the consumers or wet-day petitioners, wet zoning petitioners,
weren't sure what they were supposed to do. Belinda Allen is actively
involved in that organization, she's the legislative aide to commissioner
Scott. She just sent me this note. It says, Rose, we were just sent in
the papers March 3rd. Yesterday is when they were notified that the
process had changed. And so there they were in the middle of whether they
should call TPD.
>>GWEN MILLER: You mean they did the right thing, just we changed the
process.
>>ROSE FERLITA: At noon yesterday they were informed the process was
changed.
>>KEVIN WHITE: There is a lot of ambiguity.






>>ROSE FERLITA: There is. I remember when Italiana did this. If you
recall, one of the fire rescue people was hurt, with not enough people.
And this is the issue. I don't mean to be harping on this all the time,
but if we have a process, we have to make it user-friendly. For them to
send in their paperwork on the 3rd of March and at noon yesterday be told
that the process was changed, I am not sure that the special events
committee accomplished what they wanted, and it always brings the situation
to us. And I don't mean to be interrupting you on your consent agenda, but
the problem is, it always ends up here. So we have to make that decision,
and as you said, as a former TPD officer, Kevin, we want to follow process.
But at the same time, we want to give charitable organizations every
opportunity to comply. And if the procedure is not clear, it's not clear,
it's not fair to people like Dr. Smith, or any other charitable
organization. At the same time, it's not fair to us. Because you are
caught between a rock and a hard place. If you remember, those of you who
were here the last time, chairman Miranda always said, nothing personal
about the charities. But if you come with a late wet zoning request, I'm
not going to do it.
Well, it's a little different from this. They attempted to get their
coverage on off-duty but the process has changed and they can't comply so
here we have to say no to a charity? I just -- I just think that maybe we
need to ask at the end of the day here, that whoever Daryl Smith wants to
send as a representative of the special events committee, to come and
redefine for us and for the listening audience, so then there will be no
reasons and no excuses about what they have to do and not do. But I
mean --
>>KEVIN WHITE: I agree with that, Ms. Ferlita, but one of the things
I have a problem with, this was the Sheriff's Office process that broke
down, not the city's office broke down. That is a county organization and
we are not responsible for their processes. This is an event that was
coordinated and was going to happen within the city limits of Tampa, in
Ybor City, I think all of our personnel, people know that is well within
the city limits of Tampa, and Tampa Police Department I would feel should
have the first crack at that.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. White, you are right, but what I am saying is, to
avoid these type of situations, you are right, and you are right that city
processes are different from the county process, it is incumbent upon us to
inform the public about what they need to do.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I understand. That is a county breakdown process, I
just wanted to delineate the two.
>>ROSE FERLITA: You can certainly redefine that. By in terms of the
petitioner, they thought otherwise. So I think we need a packet or another
something so that people that need to take place in the city process will
better understand it. Then we wouldn't have people going to a Sheriff's
Department for wet zoning. It is a breakdown in communication.
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: I have talked with Ms. Allen several times. She said
in the past they had used the Sheriff's Department for several events so
they were going back to the venue they had used previous so in their
defense that is what they had done in the past. But I wanted to make
council aware the security requirements had not been met.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Guffey, do you think they can get the police
department to cover their event?
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: Guff I checked with the department and they said they
could not cover it that night because they are already busy, the labor pool
we use foe that is working that event.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER:
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Just one question, Mr. Guffey. What is the process
to ask for a wet zoning? Is it -- a temporary wet zoning? Is it 30 day,
15 day, or what? Because this one came on March 3rd.
>>GWEN MILLER: They filed it February -- they changed rules on March






3rd.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I see.
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Legal department. Oh, you do. They have to be
filed 15 days in advance of the event. If they are not filed within that
15 day period, it would require a waiver of the notice of the filing by
this council. But it's a 15 day requirement.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: That's probably not enough time.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Officer Guffey, how many officers does their petition
require?
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: The code recommends three. Last year we revisited
sections of the code and we said we would deal with specific wet zones
depending on the events. We had spoken before this event and he had said
he would require two for this event.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Dr. Smith, it may be my recommendation to you to get
in contact with the Florida Highway Patrol since they will not be great
participants as far as security personnel with this parade event. And I
would -- I can't give you any great assurity, but I would feel much more
confident that they would be able to come up with two officers for you,
more so than the Tampa Police Department. And if you can get an answer on
that and get that solidified by tonight, maybe we could waive the 15 day
rule, but to come back on tonight's unfinished business on tonight's
agenda.
>>GWEN MILLER: You understand, Dr. Smith? You need to go and call
and come back and let us know. We meet at 5:30 tonight. Thank you very
much. We have a motion to close the public hearing.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience that would like to request for
reconsideration?
We now go to our audience portion. Anyone in the public like to speak
on any item that is not set for public hearing? You may now come and speak
for three minutes.
>>MOSES KNOTT JR: I resign at 2902 East Ellicott Street. I thank God
for his grace in guiding me to come to this podium one more time. Madam
Chairman, first thing I want to speak about this morning, the gentleman
came from Lowry Park Zoo this morning. I was sitting back there and I been
thinking about this. These people got number one zoo in the world. I know
I go out there all the time. I am in a perfect place and y'all gamble a
little money, less than a million dollars. How in the world did they do
it? I don't know. Now y'all done get this trolley, the bus line, I mean
billions of dollars, conventions, I mean millions and millions of dollars,
and they don't have the best place in the world. And again, about this
Lowry Park Zoo, I want to say to the public, you know, I don't put all my
eggs in one basket when it comes to giving money and helping people.
You know, for years and years when I had my business, I spent about 15
or 20% of my money giving away, helping charities and different
organizations, churches and whatever. But I used to spend a lot of money
on sending neighborhood, underprivilege children to the school. You know
but I can't do it no more. But people come to y'all and criticize the
neighborhood, their little children, criticize them and everything but I
wish people would open their heart back up and go back into the old days
and send a lot of children, when school is out, send a lot of children to
this place. Send a bus load of children I used to and pay for it myself.
Let's go back to the old days of helping neighbors instead of turning to
y'all and crucifying them and everything. Open their heart up like the old
days, I always go to the Bible, they got a scripture they talk about people
paying tithes, they say that money is for fathering children, and the widow
women's and the poor and uplift the word of God. But today, they don't eve
talk about the part about fathering children, uplifting women today. Today
they catch hell. Nobody help them out, they come in and turn them in to
y'all.






Y'all talking about the site plan this morning. I your lawyer was
talking about that. I didn't get what the number was this morning. But I
was think being that site plan y'all go. You know, that site plan come up
in I think it was 1987 when I think Mayor Friedman she came up with this
site plan, you operate a business, you got to come up with a site plan.
Now they use it on people -- I went in business in 1963, now they use it on
me, you know, one small businessman in my neighborhood. They don't talk
about things that happen in my neighborhood, people get killed. But I just
got out of the hospital yesterday. But I had on my boys one guy telling me
about one small business man, neighbor, killed himself, Port Authority came
in there and took him out of business and he killed himself.
Mentesmot: I want to speak on the invocation, whatnot. Some
of these things need to be taken off the agenda altogether. And you need
to open up the meeting not like you opened up the prayer and other garbage,
but you need to open up with real issues. People come and speak about real
issues and they end up with charges against them, in jail. They end up
being incarcerated. People need to hear their representatives, just like
when Sam Gibbons was down here yesterday, saying you know, your
representatives need to be discussing the future of the city. There was an
article in one of the newspapers yesterday saying the things he came out
with that the City Council don't even think about. They don't think about
the people that reside here. Now, developers, Glazier, anybody can come
from out of town and get whatever they want to.
Step into town and get whatever they want to, all kind of benefits but
the people that live right here, that reside right here, can't get their
representatives to listen to them for one second. I remember when the
people from New Tampa had to come and beg for $30,000. Those people pay
millions and millions of dollars in taxes and they had to beg for $30,000
to get a community center. It shouldn't be that way. Especially for us
who are suffering inside the districts that are black. We have no black
representation. Absolutely positively none. The things that black people
are concerned with, the police violence that goes on against us and against
our communities, we have no black representation. As if these things don't
happen. As if these things don't happen.
People want to hear our representatives discuss real issues. Discuss
oil prices. Has any representative up there wrote the oil company saying
why is gas prices so high? That's what the people want to know about.
They don't want to know about the garbage issues you bring down here week
after week. They don't want to hear about this person award, that person
award. Do some work. Do some work. This man got to come down here for
wet zoning, like whatsoever, who he can and can't get from the police
department. That off-duty situation is completely racist. It's completely
racist.
When black people go down there, they can't get no kind of off-duty
officers. But white business owners can go down there and get what they
want. They can go down there and get what they want when they want it to
make black money. But black business people can't go down there to make no
money at all. Oh, call the Highway Patrol and see if he had? No. Why
can't the City of Tampa? They have business in the city, why can't the
City of Tampa? Why can't the City of Tampa police department send someone
out to preserve the security of event? They can never do it that way when
it come to black people because they hateful, they spiteful and they
racist. None more, none less. And people want to hear their city, their
elected representative, discuss real issues and black people need
representation I inside this estimate we need representation. We pay taxes
and we need representation. Real representation. Not these people
changing seats and changing seats and running for this office and running
for that office and no results. No money, no money coming this side of 9
black community. 674 million-dollar budget and not one penny, not one
black person can say we benefitted from that. Nobody can benefit from it.






But developers, white developers benefiting all over from it.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Next? Is there anyone else who would like
to speak? If not, we will go into our committee reports.
Public safety, Ms. Rose Ferlita.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, thank you I would like to move
resolutions 21 through 25, please.
[Motion Carried].
>>KEVIN WHITE: Number 22 is coming back.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you. I meant to exclude that.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion, second,.
[Motion Carried].
Parks and recreation. Mary Alvarez.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you. Move items 26 through 31.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: Public Works Committee Mr. John Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Thank you, Mrs. Chairman. Move items 32 through
36.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: Finance committee Mr. Kevin White.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Madam Chairman, I would like to move items 37 through
42 and 44 and hold 43 until tonight.
[Motion Carried].
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move items 45 through 47.
Seconded.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And 58 through 69.
Seconded.
[Motion Carried].
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me. Wait.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: It's kind of weird because we've got these items
which match up with the CRA and we have to do these during this hearing?
Oh, we are going to hold them?
>>GWEN MILLER: Hold them until after CRA and we'll come back and vote
on them.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Oh, I'm sorry. Misunderstood.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion, second. All in favor?
[Motion Carried].
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I move items 70 through 72.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: We go to our public hearing for second reading. We
need to open items 2 through 9.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Just for purposes of clarification, was any action
taken on item 22?
>>KEVIN WHITE: We removed it.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: It was removed?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes. We have a motion to open items 2 through 9.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: If there are any members of the audience who will
speak on items 2 through 9, please stand and raise your right hand? (No
hands.)
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay, we need to open Number 2. Is there anyone in
the audience who wants to speak on Item Number 2? We have a motion and
second to close.
[Motion Carried]. Would you read 2, please, Mr. White?
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance from the City of Tampa, Florida to
repeal ordinance 2-75 pedestrian mall 16 H street to 16th Street pedestrian
way that restricts or prohibits vehicular traffic along 16th Street
pedestrian way providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have motion and second to adopt. We have a motion
and second. Roll call and report.
Anyone in the audience to speak on item 3?






[Motion Carried].
>>ROSE FERLITA: Move an ordinance approving historic preservation
property tax exempt application relative to restoration rehabilitation for
certain property owned by golden flame restaurant, Inc., in Ybor City
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, and move to adopt the ordinance upon second reading.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and reading of the ordinance. Vote
and record. Anyone in the audience who wish to speak on item 4? Motion
and second to close.
[Motion Carried]. Mr. Harrison? Excuse me, Ms. Saul-Sena?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to request if the clerk reads the votes,
say it's unanimous if it is, or if not, say what it is.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I move to adopt the following ordinance upon second
reading, making lawful the satisfactorily beverages containing alcoholic 4
C.O.P. (R) for consumption with the restaurant business establishments upon
that lot located at 2010 East Fowler Avenue Tampa, Florida as more
particularly described in section 3 hereof, waiving certain restrictions as
to distance, based upon certain findings, providing for appeal for
ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: Vote and record.
[Motion Carried]).
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience that would like to speak on
item 5? Motion to close.
[Motion Carried].
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to adopt the following ordinance upon second
reading an ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 308 and
310 West Warren Avenue in the City of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
described in section 1 from zoning district classifications single family
to PD family detached and multifamily providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: Vote and record.
[Motion Carried] unanimous.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience that would like to speak on
item 6?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to adopt the following ordinance upon
second reading. An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of
6506 south Himes avenue in the City of Tampa, Florida, more particularly
described in section 1 from zoning district classifications RS 60
residential single family to PD, residential single family, providing an
effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: Roll call vote. Vote and record.
[Motion Carried] unanimous.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience that would like to speak on
Number 7? We have a motion to close.
[Motion Carried]. Mr. Dingfelder?
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Move to adopt the following upon second reading,
rezoning property 2811 West Marlin Avenue more particularly described in
section 1, residential single family to PD, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. Roll call vote and
record.
[Motion Carried] unanimously.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience that would like to speak on
item 8? All in favor say aye.
[Motion Carried]. Mr. White?
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to adopt the following ordinance upon second
reading, move an ordinance rezoning the property in the general vicinity of
7502 South Kissimmee Street, 7524 and 7609 South Westshore Boulevard,
Tampa, Florida, from zoning district classifications IG, industrial
general, and IH, industrial heavy, to RS 50, residential single family,






providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. Roll call vote and
record.
[Motion Carried] unanimously.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience that would like to speak on
item 9?
[Motion Carried].
>>ROSE FERLITA: Move to adopt the following ordinance upon second
reading, ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 2709 west
Dekle avenue more particularly described in section 1, PD residential
single family to PD residential single family providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: Vote and record.
[Motion Carried] unanimously.
>>GWEN MILLER: Item Number 10 cannot be heard. We need a motion to
reschedule. Petitioner want to speak? We have a motion and second.
Come on up.
SPEAKER 1: Can I ask for a date?
>>GWEN MILLER: We need your name on the record. We will give you
one.
SPEAKER 1: Isabell Peter.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion?
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: What date?
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: What is the staff recommendation on a date?
>> Their required notice is 30 days.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: We should give them a little more slack. How
about May 21st?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: They're to have it done as quick as possible,
whatever time you can give as soon as possible.
>>GWEN MILLER: April 14th. 10:00. All in favor of the motion, say
aye.
[Motion Carried].
Anyone in the audience going to speak on item 11 through 20? 15?
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: 15.
>>GWEN MILLER: 15. Please stand and raise your right hand.
(Sworn.)
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to open Number 11. All in favor say aye.
[Motion Carried].
>>MARTIN SHELBY: And when you state your name, please reaffirm that
you have been sworn.
>>ANNIE HART: Annie Hart. I ask that you open a designation for the
Babe Zaharias Golf Course, located at 11412 North Forest Hills Drive in
Tampa. The historic preservation brings this forward to you at the request
of the neighborhood. The commission reviewed it and they forwarded the
motion based on the condition that the streets that had never been
developed within the golf course be vacated. That action has occurred
therefore the commission has found this significant under criterion A,
which is the community development, the role the golf course played in that
area, and B, significant persons, Babe Didrikson Zaharias. And I have the
report.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I move the item up but I have a question. What is
the process now? Once we initiate it, how long will it take and what
happens after this?
>>ANNIE HART: It will go to the planning commission for review. I
believe it is on their April agenda and it will come back for a first and
second reading. Also attached to the report is a copy of the design
guidelines, since this is a historic site without a significant structure
on it. Move to close the public hearing.
[Motion Carried].
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I move to initiate the local landmark designation.






[Motion Carried].
>>ANNIE HART: I'm sorry, I gave you the wrong report. I'm sorry.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I guess the issue is whether they have to have a
resolution setting a public hearing today.
>>GWEN MILLER: We had a motion to do that. All right.
Number 12 is to continue the public hearing.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development. I have made a number of changes
from the proposed areawide rezoning after the public hearing from last
week. Giving out the maps showing the proposed rezoning. At
Mr. Dingfelder's request I went through the site's information in the
computer system to find out the duplexes in the YC-8 area. And I found
there was duplex at 2605 east 11th avenue, 2701 east 10th avenue and 2703
east 10th avenue. I have deleted those from the YC-8 and placed them under
the YC-2 designation, and I also received a request from Magnum Steel.
They have asked for their property to be left in the IG.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Where are they?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: They are located on 6th, 5th, and that would be
24th. You see that spot within the YC-7 within the IG district? They will
be retaining their existing IG until the visioning process is done as well.
And really, that's the input I've had from the last two weeks. The
ordinance that is before council will need to be revised, to reflect the
Magnum Steel change. I just received that information today since I was on
vacation the earlier part of this week. But after this public hearing if
there is additional input from the public, there might be some additional
adjustments at council's direction. Otherwise, I think Mr. Massey says he
can bring the ordinance back tonight for first reading.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: The Magnum Steel is kind of interesting because
unlike the Adamo Drive properties, this one is a little bit deeper actually
into the district. Do you feel comfortable with letting it ride for now?
Or --
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Well, the reality is they are in the historic
district, the Barrio Latino Commission.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: All of them are in the district. Right?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: That's correct. So in terms of new construction,
they will be moving forward. They are in a land use that allows for the IG
district to remain at the -- at this point in time. I think they are
concerned also -- they have representatives here, I believe, that maybe can
explain to you why they want to retain the IG for now. But yes, I do think
that eventually the change to the YC designations is necessary, in the
historic district. But since we are allowing Mr. Schuller, the other RM 16
property, a little further north to remain, while this visioning plan is
being done, I have no problem with allowing that same criteria to apply to
Magnum Steel.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience that would like to speak to
item 12?
>>FRAN COSTANTINO: Good morning, council chairman, council people and
staff. Fran Costantino 2416 14th Avenue, president of the East Ybor
historic and civic association. The association is a little concerned over
several things, and I'm going to give you copies of e-mails that got sent
from Mr. Kimins, Vince Pardo and an answer from Mr. Kimins as to where they
were doing their due diligence when all of us were notified attending the
meetings and now at the last meeting they want to be left out which is
causing a hindrance to everybody else.
And I know that City Council has passed an ordinance where they are
making developers now get with neighborhood associations so that they would
have the input. Well, that I know of, that visionary has not met with our
east side or with the west side to get any idea of what the neighborhood
associations want for the visioning. I believe he was flown back in -- I
didn't attend that meeting but he was flown back in to Kimins for a meeting
with their Adamo corridor group. Some people in the group feel that should






have been done at a public meeting, not at a person's business where
certain people can't be there to attend.
I was also asked why Mr. White -- I don't know how much have you had
contact with Mr. Jim Hill and his visioning plan, but you represent that
district and a lot of people who don't know about the notices and the Ybor
Flash and all that stuff. Have you met with Mr. Hill? See? And we feel
like the vision is being directed all in a certain direction and we should
step back and have them meet with both people with east side, west side,
our council person, and representing everybody.
What is bothering this is by setting this off, you are just delaying
the benefits that everybody else would be reaping, other than the group
that it is helping.
I have been sworn, yes. I want to put on record that I want to quote
Mr. Dingfelder from a couple weeks ago. Fran Costantino doesn't have a dog
in this fight. I am president of East Ybor. I own no million-dollar
properties. I am on my two little lots our family has had since 1926 and
that's where i work from. It is not that I am pro development. But my
cause like the ladies that come over and over again is only to protect and
respect the integrity of the historic district and Ybor City. It's not
about Fran, it's not about business. And hopefully my hair won't be the
gorgeous color that Margaret Vizzi's is. God bless her, she looks
gorgeous, but I hoping my time will not be to that extent.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for you. So your civic
association which represents residential and I guess commercial property
have not participated in the visioning process?
>>FRAN COSTANTINO: We have never been contacted. Those that can come
have come to several of the meetings on Saturdays. But it is very
difficult. The Giuntas' father is very sick. A couple members, Joan's
mother is 90 some. She is very ill. They are all doctors. So I feel some
effort should be made to accommodate those just like effort was made to
accommodate those people, and they have not made any effort to us to see
what we wanted.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you. I would like to comment on that. I
think -- I have to admit, I had total heartburn with the visioning plan
when they listed historic preservation as an obstacle. That really gave me
heartburn. To me the whole point of Ybor city is its historic character.
When I chatted with Mr. Hill about it, the guy was defensive. I mean, to
be candid, he was not like -- he didn't have great listening skills. And
I'm very concerned that he's just looking at development as more new big
stuff and not also protect can and respecting what's there. And I really
want toe make sure that before this visioning plan comes out, he hears from
everybody. And I really don't want to move ahead until he's listened to
the neighborhoods and he's listened to Mr. White who's a council rep and
he's had another opportunity to listen to council. I'm very concerned
about that. And I appreciate you taking the time twice now to come down
and bring this to our attention. I just think this plan needs to reflect
everybody's concerns and the historic preservation should certainly not be
considered an obstacle in Ybor City.
SPEAKER 1: That's what has us totally flabbergasted, and I don't know
how he got that information, how he arrived at that kind of conclusion,
certainly not from us, or any of y'all. But I don't know. I guess
council -- my thing today is to ask that it not be prolonged, like six to
eight months from now, because while it's benefiting one group, it's
hurting the others also. And to request that the visionary be directed to
me, be directed to everybody before he comes to a conclusion.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else from the public like to speak?
>> Vince Pardo, Ybor City Development Corporation. I wasn't but now I
must. We had focus groups meeting with every stakeholder group, including
residential. If you remember immediately after the meeting with the Mayor
we had a special session with council. All were invited to the Mascotte






room. We had great attendance that day. Our schedules are what they are.
I didn't bring the calendar of events but I will provide you after leaving
this meeting with the date. We had specific with residential concerns in
this. If you remember one of the issues we also included one for
residential commercial. Mr. William fits Gibbons said he had not been
included but we V. I reminded him we have only had to people from south and
4th avenue who attended that meeting that was one of the results of wanting
to get more involved with the process. We have had Saturday workshops. We
have had every one of the meets as we indicated we would with the Adamo
corridor which was publicly noticed this week. We do what we can to let
people know to attend meets. If they want to, council people, community
people as well. Anybody can attend. We did have people from the community
attend that meeting other than the property owners. So I wanted to let you
know. Specifically the residential, I will let you see every one of the
stakeholder groups that we H. Mr. Hill is meeting with the visioning
committee on Tuesday. They will be reviewing the current draft of this
plan, feedback. Will be making presentation to the barrio on Tuesday
morning. And we will try to get them to hear everything we want to. We
eventually will have discussions about some -- Ms. Saul-Sena you have
comment beside some of the verbiage in there. He will be submitting his
report. As we said, the community groups through YCDC may be submitting a
companion report if there are things in the final report we agree on just
like the noisep here are some things we want to take into consideration for
doing that. Since he has been my contractor I have had several discussion
with his him. He said you hired me to come in from outside and make
recommendations. I will do that without -- recommendations. This is how I
see it from the future of Ybor City. Every e-mail we received we
transferred to him so he's been privy to those. In fact, we received
three yesterday from Barrio commissioners and each one of those -- two from
Barrio commissioner and one from the staff and each one got transferred by
e-mail yesterday.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think it would be valuable if would you make the
comments back to him available to us. Because ultimately we hired him to
write this but ultimately it's got to be adopted by council sitting as a
CRA and supported by the Ybor community. So I think that having a sense of
the breadth of the conversation would really be valuable to us because you
know there might be really good comments that he didn't feel like including
but that we feel like including. So that would be really helpful.
>>VINCE PARDO: Okay.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And also a list of all the meetings that have been
scheduled and also a sense of whether the last couple coming up will allow
public participation.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Just one quick comment really along the same lines as
Ms. Saul-Sena. Linda, have I heard the same concerns and comments from
other people and consultant wand hired based on criteria I guess but when
he comes in and Mr. Pardo is saying he's interested in the future of Ybor
City I think he needs to be keenly aware of the history of Ybor City and to
me, someone who is not very sensitive to the preservation aspect of it I'm
not real sure that's going to the heart of what we need in terms of a
vision for Ybor City. When we talked about too many bars and venues that
weren't commentary to what Ybor City wasb it seems to me that the
preservation aspect is part and parcel to that. So I'm going to agree with
Ms. Saul-Sena not only to send a message but send a strong message back
that I would think if he's a consultant that it's appropriate for Ybor City
that's one of the key things.
>>VINCE PARDO: Sure. Just as protocol, your agreement, your contract
for visioning is actually with YCDC, Inc., who subcontracted with Mr. Hill
and that's why it's important. Anything you feel the consultant may
recommend but maybe was not strong enough in some areas you will be getting
some companion reports from YCDC as well, to give you an idea of how we are






using Mr. Hill versus who your actual contractor is with the process.
That's where the community process comes back in, how the reports are
structured.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: In defense of the consultant, I had been to the YCD
meetings at least there of these, and some of these same issues a that
we're talking about now were relayed to the consultant. Your comment about
the preservation, he took that to heart. He's got a draft of the vision
plan already. He's addressing that part of it. Let's just wait until we
see this draft before we make any more comments. Because he's --
everything that we are addressing right here now have been addressed by the
YCDC. They have come out and they literally told him exactly what they
wanted in the vision plan. So that's my defense of him. And we are having
the visioning committee meeting on Tuesday. You are welcome to come. Sit
at the Mascotte room. I'm only talking about the council now, I'm not
talking about the public. But come and see. I will share my plan with you
so you can see it. If you want a copy of it too I'm sure we can get you
one. But let's give this guy a chance.
This plan will come to us in its draft form. One thing I noticed that
he didn't address in there was the street car. And I've already made that
known to him. So there's things in there. Of course he's doing the best
he can and he has addressed as much of the concerns from the various focus
groups that he had. So you know let's just wait until we come up with the
plan. It's only a draft. We can add or subtract anything we want.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. Alvarez, you being our CRA chairman, I don't
think that Linda and I meant that in that type of a tone. It just seems
like it's better to point the person to what we want him to concentrate on
as opposed to wait until he comes back and say "this is what you should
have thought about too." So it's constructive criticism.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: And I'm taking it as such. What I am saying is that
we are making these concerns known but they've already been addressed. And
you probably don't know it yet until you see the visioning plan.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Right. That's fine.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: And you won't, because it's still a work in progress.
He's already come up with the draft, and I'm sure he will come and talk to
us about it when, you know, when he sees that everything is like he thinks
it should be. And then we still have the chance to change it any way we
want. They have been working for three, four months on this thing, and
it's not an easy project, not an easy thing to get focus groups Saturdays
and Monday and nights and weekends. So it's --
>>ROSE FERLITA: Let me start a fight with Mary. Do we really need to
talk about the street car in this?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes, we need to talk about that. Because that really
got to me. Anyway --
(Laughter)
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone else in the public that would like to
speak about that?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Just for the sake of the record, Mr. Pardo, you were
sworn?
>>VINCE PARDO: Yes, correct.
>>TEDFORD CAUBBON: (Sworn.) I came down here today.
>>GWEN MILLER: Put your name on the record please.
>> Tedford Caubbon, 64615 Quillo Avenue, Tampa, Florida. I came down
here to be a listener because being a good listener is part of
participation in government. But since you brought up Ybor City where I
was born and my father was born, 12th and 17th and I was born at 21st and
12th; I don't have to tell you where that is. I have always lived out by
the zoo. So I live in a changing neighborhood that a nice middle age man
told me standing right on this podium, we have to work together for
government to work. So I believe in the system, I believe in the City of
Tampa. If I didn't, I'd move.






But Saturday afternoon I came home from work at 2:00 and my dogs were
in the yard, my back doors were open, and in 55 years, twice within six
months all my stuff's been taken. And I have to live with it, survive,
report it, and believe in the system and hopefully they will find out if
these crimes are connected.
So in order to participate in the street car and the government, we
have to pay our taxes and work. And let government do its job and vote.
And other than that, I'm going to sit and listen. Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak? We need to close the
public hearing. So moved. Wait, Mr. Massey wants to speak.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I have been sworn. Just a couple procedural
matters. Because of the change in some of the legal descriptions that
Ms. Moreda gave you this morning, the ordinance does need to be revised. I
can have that ready if council chooses it for first reading. You have also
chosen on the agenda the second public hearing by state law. That should
be if you want to hold that continue for two weeks if you want to have the
second reading on that.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. All in favor say aye?
[Motion Carried].
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to continue.
>>GWEN MILLER: We will bring that back to 5:30. Number 13, we need
to continue for two weeks? So moved, seconded.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: Now we need a motion to continue.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: If you would set a date and time certain.
>>GWEN MILLER: March 24th, 10:00. All in favor of the motion?
[Motion Carried]. Any open items?
>>THE CLERK: Number 12.
>>GWEN MILLER: It's closed.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to open 14.
>>GWEN MILLER: Move to open item 146789 all in favor?
[Motion Carried].
SPEAKER 1: James Cook, land development. Not been sworn in. Sworn.
Land coordination. Petitioner has requested to vacate a portion of
Gardenia avenue running from Cleveland street to Kennedy Boulevard. In
point of reference this is the urban center, Sports Authority, I believe
this is the Wachovia Bank. Petitioner's property is right here in red. In
1994 part of the rezoning as part of Gardenia code put in a cul-de-sac.
Petitioner is requesting vacation of a portion of the cul-de-sac between
Gardenia and the cul-de-sac.
This is Gardenia looking north towards the cul-de-sac. Petitioner's
property is on the west-hand side. Another shot looking north from
Cleveland.
Petitioner's property is right here. This is Gardenia through here.
You can see cul-de-sac is bollard off right here. This is a shot looking
south and the cul-de-sac towards Cleveland. Petitioner's property is over
here on the right-hand side.
This is another shot looking south from Kennedy towards the
cul-de-sac. This is just a shot of the cul-de-sac. Based on objections we
received from the Department of Public works, staff objects to this
vacating request.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm sorry, I'm of course a little trouble
orienting myself. Can you tell me the major streets? Kennedy is to the
north? What are the east and west bounds?
>> JAMES COOK: This is Kennedy due north, Cleveland, Westshore is
over here to the east. This is the Sports Authority that is on Kennedy.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
>> JIM COOK: Wachovia Bank.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: James, I read the staff report. I wasn't totally






clear on what the public works objection was.
>> JAMES COOK: Christine is here from public works. You want to
answer it?
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Because I believe that cul-de-sac was dead-ended
a long time ago to keep people from cutting through those neighborhoods
from Kennedy.
>> JAMES COOK: That's correct. It was done in 1994 as part of the
rezoning for the Sports Authority. Transportation is looking at it in the
near future if we ever need to put Gardenia through for circulation, they
would like to remove those bollards and make it a through street.
SPEAKER 1: I have no comments other than since our objection we don't
typically prepare an ordinance in preparation of these type of hearings so
if you do move to approve this I would also ask that you move for city
legal to prepare one commensurate with the conditions. Thank you.
Christine burn ham, transportation division. When we looked at this
vacate, the petitioner is asking for all 50 feet of the right of way. Our
understanding is that he needs three feet in order to split the lot. And
meet the RS 75 in the Beach Park area. It is not our practice to approve
vacate petitions for development requirements. Also we didn't want to give
up our -- the right of way for in case in the future -- we don't have any
immediate plans, but if we ever need to remove the barricades and push
through Gardenia. I have not been sworn. (Sworn.)
>>MARTIN SHELBY: And what you've said previously is the truth?
SPEAKER 1: Yes.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
EDDIE DIAZ: Good morning. My name is Eddie Diaz, I am the
representative of the Jenner Trust.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn?
EDDIE DIAZ: Yes, I was. You took away a little of my thunder with
all the pretty pictures. That's what I had. But basically I much just
give and you quick overlay of the property as it relates to --
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can you specifically focus in on the comment from
Christine in terms of, do you need three feet or do you need the entire 50
feet or whatever?
EDDIE DIAZ: There is 7-and-a-half feet between the property line and
the sidewalk. Okay? As you see, I'm 147. I need 150. I attended -- I
approached this with a concept that basically I wanted to present to
council for purposes of the logic behind my approach. But yes, I'm
satisfied, to be very honest with you. When I purchased the property for
the trust, I used to be chairman of the board of adjustments, and I'm very
familiar with Beach Park -- I knew I had to deal with that. So when I
purchased the property I had already made arrangements through city staff
that I could cut the property along the Gardenia street. And I didn't need
to have anybody's permission to do that. Being what I considered the
appropriate way of handling the situation with a neighborhood like this, I
asked the neighborhood, what would they prefer? And their approach was,
well, we don't endorse, we don't support or we don't do anything. We
basically take no position. But we concur with you. I believe there was
an e-mail that was sent to y'all that had the same effect.
But going back to the rest of the issue, the city is obviously -- has
no position at this point to maintain this property. And the points that I
would like to point out to you go back to some pictures here. As you
notice here, this is half of the right of way. The other half of the right
of the way has already been covered over. Nobody has bothered to maintain
it. Nobody has bothered to find out why it was covered out when it was
redone.
There is a retention area built into this already, and so forth. I am
very adamant in explaining to you that it doesn't matter, but for aesthetic
purposes, I would prefer to take possession and put in a brick -- and I
nice entrance way and it would be an entranceway from the side to a garage






so that basically I could have the aesthetics being a lot more presentable
than what I have here. When we first purchased the property, somebody had
a garbage dump just sitting in there, just a place to put it. So there is
nobody policing it. There is nobody paying any attention to it. So if you
are not going to view that as city, then why keep it for purposes of
maintenance? And I am willing to take on the responsibility of
maintenance. Okay?
My intent is to put back -- to allow for all the easements through
there. I have no intentions of building anything on it. I just want to
have access for maintenance purposes and the ability to control. When you
are going to put something close to a million dollars home which is going
to be my home I would prefer to have it looking as nice as possible. And
unless the city is going to maintain that property, that is one of the main
reasons I was proposing to close it all off.
I am planning on moving the Homeowners Association requested that the
sidewalk stay. I said fine, I will move it over and fit it within the
architectural designs that we planned on putting there.
The other point -- I keep going back to aesthetics -- is, an example,
like that. This is a Parkway. But yet, we are unable to -- there's nobody
maintaining it. And if a property owner that owns the adjoining property
wants to maintain it, I don't think I should have to do it because nobody
else is doing it. I think I should be authorized to do it and be able to
take possession of something that someone isn't taking care of. You are
two lots away from another street cutting across into the neighborhoods. I
think everybody knows the neighborhood well enough and if I'm not mistaken
in the same e-mail it was described that they don't particularly agree with
what city staff is recommending on being able to come back somewhere down
the line and taking back possession of this. Like I said, I have no desire
to move any of the utilities or build anything on it. I just want the
right to maintain it. So whatever the council's pleasure, as long as I can
get the three foot or up to 7 foot, which would get me to the sidewalk, it
would be deeply appreciated for the investment that I am putting into this
property.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Diaz made reference to the e-mail that we all
received, and it's not very often that we get Beach Park Homeowners
Association to agree with something. So it must be good. And they also
say that the Homeowners Association wishes that the closed north end of
Gardenia and Cleveland to remain closed forever, and do not wish to see any
additional traffic routed through Cleveland, Gardenia, or any other
residential street in Drew Park.
I can't concur with transportation. You are telling -- you are giving
me a tough scenario here. Well, what's the future scenario? Are we
talking about five years from now? Are we talking about ten years in now?
And don't these people have a right the talk about this when you do decide
to open the street? I'd like a --
SPEAKER 2: Yes, the neighborhood is able to comment on it.
Transportation does not want to give up the right if in the future we do
not have immediate plans to open it up. We are very aware of Beach Park's
concern about cut-through traffic and the neighborhood concerns but we
don't want to give our option up in five or ten years if this neighborhood
redevelops or develops in a different way, that we are not going to be able
to have a north-south street.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Then can you have somebody go out and clean this
property up?
SPEAKER 2: Yes, I can speak with the director and see that it be
cleaned up.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: The Homeowners Association doesn't do this very often
and that carries a lot of weight with me. Like I say.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: I think I lean towards staff on this one just
because I think in the short term it is very unlikely this would be opened






up. Five, ten, fifteen, twenty years from now, I don't think it will be
opened up. But perhaps a hundred years from now or 50 years from now that
whole area could be redeveloped and the public -- this is a public
street -- and the public might want that street, and once we deed it to
that gentleman we can never get it back. That is what always disturbs me
about vacating anything. I think he can accomplish his purpose by giving
him the three feet. We maintain the public right of way there. We are not
going to open it up. I don't want people panicking out there. We have no
plans to open it up. But I think we should keep it. There is no public
purpose that has been described here today to give it away or to vacate it.
So I would lean towards staff in that regard.
I definitely have a concern about maintenance. And I think perhaps we
can accomplish this purpose as well by giving Mr. Diaz some sort of
temporary easement or something to allow him to do whatever maintenance
activities he might want to do on a temporary basis. Perhaps a revocable
easement that he can use it, landscape it, or whatever. But it is
revocable, so 50 years down the road if council wanted to put a road down
there because the use had changed, we could revoke that and take away his
landscape or whatever.
CHRISTINE: Transportation can see plans of what he wants to do. We
could probably handle it through a maintenance agreement and we can work
with legal to see if that is tied with which property owner and if the
property is sold and how all that transfers.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: It is all doable. I would like to give him three
feet. That's what he needs. And go from there.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you. I have a staff question. Christine,
you are good. We have huge drainage needs all over this community. What I
am beginning to think is sometimes when people want things vacated we
should look at it and see if it is something we could use for drainage,
maybe even a slight swale situation. Because we are so busy creating
impervious surface all over, I'm sure the petitioner wants to build two
homes which will create more impervious surface than exists there now.
Would it be possible for our storm water department to potentially use this
for a drainage solution?
SPEAKER 2: I can forward a copy of the survey to Alex Awad in storm
water and have him take a look at it.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay, thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone from the public?
>>STEVEN KOONTZ: Good morning, Madam chair, Steven Koontz. I have
been sworn in. I'm a member of the Beach Park board, Homeowners
Association board, also a property owner at 204 south Occident street,
which is located just about a half block from the subject property. I want
to reiterate a few points that Amy Reynolds had sent you in the e-mail and
with reference to the Beach Park Homeowners Association position. We are
offering our conditional support to this petition for variance.
Mr. Diaz did meet with Beach Park Homeowners Association several
months before filing this petition for variance. We appreciated his taking
our input. The reason we're providing our support for the three feet is as
you've already mentioned, there are two, to our understanding, the two
existing lots are conforming, and without any variance or additional
petitions, could be built fronting Gardenia Street. The residents and the
Homeowners Association would prefer to see those homes fronting Cleveland
Street to fit in conformance with the rest of the neighborhood, surrounding
area.
We will not support any additional variances or nonconforming lots.
Whereas it was our understanding with the three feet that these lots would
be both conforming lots fronting Cleveland Street. Mr. Diaz, again,
indicated his commitment to maintain this property, which has not been
maintained, and we'd like to see something done in that area.
Finally, the most important reason, again, is to object to the city






staff's recommendation that Gardenia Street ever, in the future, be opened
back up to -- as a through-way between Kennedy and Cleveland Street. We do
not want to see that street opened up. We do not want to see additional
traffic flowing through Cleveland Street. If you recall back a couple
years ago when the Gables Town Homes got their request to develop that
property, they actually closed off another street that cut through between
Kennedy and Cleveland, and that was a requirement.
So we are in the business of closing these streets to come through to
Cleveland, not to open them back up. So I just wanted to reassert our
position for the Homeowners Association. Thank you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just have a quick question of potentially using
this property for some sort of minor retention? When I say minor, I don't
mean a deep hole that has a chain-link fence but it would always remain.
As opposed to if a property owner receives the entire piece of land,
chances are they will put a pool, a deck, maybe additional structure back
there. If it remains in the public trust that is perhaps looked at as a
passive drainage retention arbitration it could absorb some of the runoff
from all the increased building.
SPEAKER 1: When it was first brought to us, it was stated as we just
needed three feet of the vacated property to get the two nonconforming lots
so we hadn't considered taking possession of the entire right of way.
Certainly we would support anything that would allow that property to be
maintained and beautified and to provide more of a ooh scenic access. We
have worked very hard with the urban center and Wyndham hotel and Sports
Authority to get them to maintain their property that fronts Cleveland
Street and we are finally making some progress on those fronts so this is a
section that is starting to look deteriorated compared to some of 9 other
areas on that north side of Cleveland. So I'm not sure I could envision
what the specific retention area would look like. But, you know, certainly
we're mostly interested in the property being maintained by whoever's
owning it to match the surrounding landscaping.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you. Anyone else in the public like to speak to
an item? Move to close.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: There's rebuttal. Are you rebutting a positive?
SPEAKER 2: No, I'm not rebutting anything (this is Diaz). I figure
this is about the one and only time to have an opportunity to ask so I
figure if you don't ask, you can't get anything. I want to go back to the
site plan here real quick. As you are well aware, because of not being
able to close the streets this now becomes a 15-foot setback because it is
a corner. Because of that, and I do have 7.3 foot, if at all possible, I
would like to get at least 6 foot of it. And I will tell you the basic
reason why. There is some very large oak trees here and I cannot move
them. I have no intentions of moving them. So by picking up that little
bit, that gives me an extra three foot to make up for the 15 foot I got
to -- before I can lay the house site up. So I don't know if I made sense.
I don't think I made sense to myself. But basically, by picking it up,
instead of the 3, the 6, and having a 15-foot setback, I basically have a
little bit more room to play with to lay the footprint of the house out.
And that's the only reason why, if at all possible, considering I got 7
foot 3 that I would like to pick that up because I now have to deal with
that 15-foot setback.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: You how big is the entire right of way?
SPEAKER 1: Total right of way is 50 foot. Again, if I am going to
maintain it and it is really not going to be for traffic or anything, it
becomes -- because, as I promised them and I am telling you, I will not
come back and ask for variances. Well now if I can't come back and ask for
variances I have to deal with that 15-foot setback and that is one of the
hardships I created by not closing the street off. Not hardship, but it's
an issue that I have to address. And I thank you, and I appreciate your
support.






>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close the public
hearing. All in favor say aye?
[Motion Carried].
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: I am comfortable with the 6 feet. I think that's
a reasonable compromise. He said he needed 3 and he gave a reasonable
justification for the 6 but I'm not comfortable at all with vacating the
entire street so I would like to make the motion to approve the 6 feet and
to ask legal to draft an ordinance accordingly.
SPEAKER 1: Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: Any questions?
[Motion Carried].
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to ask Mr. Awad, if you would just
take a look at this and see if it could potentially be used for a storm
water --
>>ALEX AWAD: Absolutely. Alex Awad, Storm Water Department. I have
not been sworn.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That's okay. We are done with that.
>>ALEX AWAD: Yes, our department can take a look at the right of way
and see if there is storm water potential for the neighborhood.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Good. I am thinking in other situations like this
it is so expensive to purchase land and we are in so much need of
additional storm water areas if we are not going to use areas as roads, we
could use them as storm water areas.
>>ALEX AWAD: We will take a look at that.
>>GWEN MILLER: Item 15. Advertise petitioner here on item 15?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Petitioner is not here. They did communicate with
me yesterday and they requested the public hearing be reset for April 21st
at 10 a.m. if that was okay. Okay.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
[Motion Carried].
>>THE CLERK: We have a resolution?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I provided the clerk's office with a substitute
resolution.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second. All in favor?
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: We are now going to go in recess for CRA and we will
come back after CRA.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Is this a real recess?
>>GWEN MILLER: Real recess. We are going to do CRA, and then after
that. Mill.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Community Redevelopment Agency meeting is now called
to order. Roll call, please.
(Roll call) (all present except Rose Ferlita)
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We are here for the recommendation of the CRA
financial parties and administration and we have Mr. David Parkinson going
to talk to us about it.
>>DAVE PARKINSON: Good morning, Dave Parkinson, urban development.
On the CRA agenda this morning we have ten of the items that are referred
to at the City Council meeting this morning that constitute the agreement
between the city and the CRA and also budgets of each of the five CRA
areas. The first item on the agenda is maybe because of the value that
it's been to us, maybe the most important item. In order for us to work
effectively with the community, various communities, we established a
written policy and set of guidelines so that the community could recognize
what our expectations were and vice versa. And it took no small amount of
work to come together on two pieces of paper with all of those issues
covered. But I think we did a very good job and we are now at the point
where this is consensus between all of the communities and the city staff
on the content of those policies.
It's based on those policy that is the following ten items or five of






the ten items were established, the budget for each of the five CRAs. Even
up until about ten days ago, we have made wording refinements to that
policy's document that are refinements that clarify how the community adds
advisory groups are constituted, whether or not the wording in the policy
is satisfactory to legal and not in conflict with the Florida statute. So
we have basically an option this morning. I do have that refined policy.
If you would like I can easily substitute that. You can move to approve
that this morning. If you would like to review yet that policy which has
been brought forward over several meetings because we have done refinements
over that period, if you would like to continue it until the next regular
CRA meeting, that would be fine. Or I could suggest a substitute, if you
would prefer.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We haven't, frankly, had enough, in my opinion,
opportunity to really understand the implications of this. And I wondered.
Council now has meetings set up at the beginning of the month where we can
chew on things that require some discussion. And I'm wondering if we can
schedule this for the first meeting at the beginning of April to give us
additional time to look at it and bring it back to the next CRA meeting. I
think we have something scheduled for 1:30. To we have something scheduled
for 2:30?
SPEAKER 1: That would be fine. Acting on this is not time critical
for us. We have used this as the basis for effectively working about the
community and everyone is satisfied with the result but to move on
specifically we can do that later, sure.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to do this at 2:30 because we council
sitting as the CRA really haven't had a chance to take a good look at it so
I would like to schedule that for April 7th at 2:30.
>>THE CLERK: As the council reviewing this?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes. That's a motion that we take a look at this.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: As the CRA or as council?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I don't care what hat we wear.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Well the clerk does.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Let's do it as CRA.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: I will second the motion and I have a few
comments.
Mr. Parkinson was kind enough to call me and we talked about this at
length yesterday. I just have a few comment business the overall process.
You hit it on the nail head to a certain extent. I will speak for council.
I don't think any of us have been very well informed except maybe Mary
because she is chair. The last six months there has been a vacuum about
what is going on that sort of thing. I'm not being critical of Dave. I
told him that yesterday. I just think that we have sort of been out of the
loop until the process is done and then it's brought to us, and we're just
sorts of, again, in the position of rubber-stamping. And I object to that.
I think that if we are here, we are here for a reason. And it's to be, you
know, informed as these things are going along and not just at the end of
the process.
The other problem I have, and somebody is going to need to convince me
of this before I vote on this, is the dollar amounts that this is called
out for is 550,000 dollars for consultants. 550,000 dollars for east
Tampa. 230,000 dollars for Channelside and $225,000 for Drew Park. That
is almost a million dollars for consultants to draft these five-year work
plans and some of the other things that the consultants are being asked to
do in their scope of work. I feel like this is the consultant welfare act
of 2005. And I don't know. It's like maybe we would be better off hiring
one or two employees paying them $200,000 to do all this or maybe even
temporary employees as opposed to hiring consultants for a million dollars.
So that's number two. Number three is not as harsh. Number three is
that I think that when we do schedule these budget hearings, I think they






should be scheduled out in the CRAs that we're talking about. And I think
basically, that would involve four different meetings out in the community.
And it wouldn't be live telecasts. They could do maybe a delayed telecast
or something like that. So I don't want to get involved with the TV issue.
But TV is not required for CRA.
Or for anything, for that matter.
But the bottom line is, I think it would really benefit the public to
be able to have good conversations with us in the evening in their own
neighborhoods where we're talking about spending their money. And that
would -- and I would say do that once a year when we have CRA budget
hearings in Channelside, in Drew Park, in Ybor, and in East Tampa. Dave
and I talked about that. We talked about that around I'm certain that each
of the five CRA communities would love it (that is Dave).
SPEAKER 1: So.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: So flows are my comments. I second the motion
for continuance. I have a problem with the money about consultants. If I
could add a friend friendly amendment to your motion, Linda, to at least
look into next year because it will take coordinating but next year when we
go through the budget process to, go out into the community.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes, I accept that friendly amendment.
SPEAKER 1: By way of explanation at least in part on the consultant
issue, there are a wide range of professional opinions that we need
regarding financial analysis, marketing analysis, public input processes,
engineering design, and project estimation. It's kinds of anticipate wide
range of things, which in order to get a result reasonably timely, we think
it may be more effective to put the burden on somebody else to collect that
group of professionals to come to these conclusions as opposed to trying to
find individuals who we could hire to do this maybe over a lodger period of
time. So I realize there are two views of that but that's basically our
thinking. So that -- I'm sorry?
>>ROSE FERLITA: David, I wanted to make a comment on that. I agree
obviously we are always supposed to be very conscious of cost containment.
But like I say, hiring one or two employees staff-wise probably you will
not have the grand scope of expertise. So I think the happy medium in that
is not to go crazy on allocations for consultant fees and try to be
reasonable and conservative about that. But I think you are going to need
different people in different areas to come together with what we need for
CRAs and TIF and those types of issues. Just a comment.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a motion and a second on the floor.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My specific motion was to continue number one,
which was the policy decisions, until after we have this workshop on April
7th.
Assistant Attorney: (Inaudible.)
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: I appreciate the clarification. I thought you
were continuing to hold.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, that's not true. We could. But to specify
my motor vehicles it was just to look at number one.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: I'm okay with that, but I think it's short.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I will speak to the other stuff after we vote on
this.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Okay. We have a motion on the floor. A motion and a
second, to continue item 1 to April the 7th at 1:30 p.m. on the CRA
agendas. All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We're actually going to have a meeting on April
7th at 2:30.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: It's about CRA policies.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Any opposed? Okay. Motion carried. Ms. Saul-Sena?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay. Several months ago I had discussed
uncovering the bricks in -- we had had a lot of discussion about uncovering
the bricks in Ybor City as part of the long-term planning. It's just a






small example of something that, frankly, I don't exactly -- I feel like
the rest of the consultant contracts and things coming before us, we have
not had enough specific dialog and conversation about. I'm just very
concerned that council sitting as a CRA, if you look at the magnitude of
the responsibility and you correlate that to the amount of time that
individual council members have dedicated to this sitting as a CRA, it's
not much time and it's a lot of responsibility. And I understand the need
for consultants. And I'm actually okay with going ahead with that. But I
want council sitting as a CRA to say we are serious about this
responsibility, and we want to dedicate time. And if 11 o'clock isn't a
convenient time we pick a Thursday afternoon a month but we dedicate enough
time to adequately address the responsibilities.
We used to have one CRA, Ybor City, and downtown was sort of spoken
for, and we didn't devote enough time to Ybor City. And now we have five.
And if you do the proportions, we are spending even less time on each of
them. And Chairman Alvarez, it isn't your fault. It's all of our
responsibility. But I think collectively, we need to say, this is a major
responsibility. Either we empower a group of advisors in each of these
areas to take the ball and we recognize that we're nothing but a rubber
stamp, or we step up to the plate.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think we are all very conscious council members,
and we are willing to devote at least 20 minutes a month to each of the
CRAs. We have five CRAs, so do the math, we give each two hours, and make
that commitment. Because I look at the gentlemen in the audience who have
been working very hard on these CRAs and they haven't got enough time in
front of us to discuss the areas in depth of the issues that they
represent. And I don't feel good about it the way I should.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Saul-Sena, I agree with you, in essence of what
you are saying. The problem is that here we are six months into the budget
process and these people need -- these CRAs need their money in order to
get going. I don't know whether you want to take them one at a time; the
resolutions one at a time, or approve them all at once. But we've got to
get the ball moving. And I don't know how much more time we can devote to
this unless you want them to sit down with us one afternoon and go through
every one of these items before we approve them. This is all I can tell
you at this point. Because it's not our fault and it's not their fault
either. It lies in between. And so because we have been trying to get
these things to us a lot sooner, and it hasn't happened because of one
thing or another. So I don't know how to proceed other than to ask to tell
Mr. Shawn that he has the floor.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thanks, and I agree with the chairman. I think
that we have to do something. We trust those involved, and I hate to use
the word rubber stamp, but there are professionals here that have been at
this for a long time and these guys know what they are doing, and I think
we need to say, all right, you got your money. I do have a question about
that, though. Does this come from the city's general revenue or is this
CRA money that's already been --
SPEAKER 1: This is TIF money.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: TIF money for each these districts?
SPEAKER 1: Yes.
>>GWEN MILLER: I have to concur. These communities have been working
on this for a long time. I don't think we need to hold them up any longer.
They need to move because they have been wanting to do this for years and I
don't see why we are going to hold them up.
Dave: I think there is a mild sense of urgency to the exgtent that
the statute, it presumes that you will -- that these budgets would have
been developed and approved the first of October, pretty much in the same
cycle that the city has, and the expectation of the statute is that those
moneys be encumbered or spent before September 30th. So we have about a
half a year to do what the statute would presume would you have 12 months






to do. So it's a little unfortunate, but it's what we have to work with.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I was going to make the comment that I believe we need
to move and get these off the dime as well. I try to get with Ms. Alvarez
as often as I can but he I grey agree with Mr. Dingfelder I don't think the
information is disseminated to the other council members in time enough for
them to digest what the reports are indicating. And I think one thing may
we may be able to do to expedite this a little bit more and or give the
other council members a little more confidence in what it is we are doing,
at least when each one of these resolutions is done, if we can get it
disseminated to each council member at that time, it gives them a little
time to review each one of them. Especially if they have any questions.
We are not coming in at the 11th hour having to question why we are
spending so much money on consultant and what the consultants are going to
be doing. If these were going to be questions, if Mr. Dingfelder had these
information two or three weeks ago he may have been able to have in a
question answered for him or to find out why the consultants are charging
or why we are setting as much money aside as we are for consultants. But
do I feel very confident with all of the resolutions that we have and am
prepared to move forward with them but in the future I do think we need to
disseminate these in a much more timely fashion to the other council
members.
SPEAKER 1: Dave: It's our plan in the cycle we are just about to
begin, we are going to start budget prep for 2006 citywide in the next few
days. It's our intention to have the CRA budget prep adopted now for that
same cycle so we will do budget prep for the CRA at the same time the city
is doing its budget prep. That will have two outcomes. One is I believe
it will keep you more informed. But it also puts those needs in the CRA
areas that are not TIF' eligible in direct competition with the other
resource that is the city has to maybe address those items. So we should
have both effects.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Council's comments are all good, and I know we
don't want to hold up the progress of redeveloping these areas. That's not
my intent. The other thing that -- one thing that I didn't mention earlier
is, and Mr. Parkinson and I talked about this as well, it's that with this
money it's kind of a use it or lose it mentality because it's driven by
statute, that if we don't use it in the particular year, then we have to
give it back to the various agencies that might have a claim on it, like
the county or the school board or those types of things. I think that's
somewhat correct.
SPEAKER 1: Dave: Yes, that's the basic format. The expectation is
that it be spent or encumbered by September 30th. In the event that it's
not, and if the item that the appropriation was too address is a capital
item, you have the opportunity to allocate that funding to a particular
capital item, capital project that has to be completed within 36 months.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Yes. So that's another parts of my problem with
this, going back again to these examples. In east Tampa you have $550,000
for consultant or Channelside -- well Channelside is perhaps a better
example. To me it's kind of like well, we've got $250,000 in Channelside,
so we might as well just give it, you know, find a consultant and use it
all for the consultant because we don't know what hard items we really
need. And it just seems like there's a better way. You know, let's find
out how much money we need for the consultants first, which I think you are
already in the process of doing with the RFP's, and maybe the consultants
will come in at $100,000 or $150,000 and we can use that $80,000 for
something more tangible like starting to buy park lands or light posts or
what have you and at least it would be identified. Like you say, if we
identify the fact that we are going to use that money for light posts
because that is what some of these areas want -- special light posts --
then we might be able to build a little more time in and have that 36
months. So I worry about the cart before the horse.






>>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Dingfelder, let's give our CRA department heads a
little bit more credit than that. I think they know what the consultants
are all about and they have been working at this a lot longer than you and
I have. So Mr. Harrison?
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: They know I'm not picking on them individually.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I want to say, on Channelside, if we need to hire a
consultant to be able to tell us what we ought to be doing in Channelside,
that is not money well spent. That horse is way ahead of the cart there.
We're pretty much done with the planning at Channelside at this point.
What is our consultant going to be doing for Channelside?
SPEAKER 1: We have three issues that are particularly interested
about Channelside. One is we have huge infrastructure needs that are sort
of chasing the project development. Instead of putting the infrastructure
in place first we have development that is outpacing us to a certain
extent. So the strategic action plan we have asked for a one-year action
plan the first year, is to prioritize which infrastructure needs we should
address first. And that would include potential undergrounding TECO,
undergrounding cable, undergrounding telephone, modifying the storm water
handling system which has some fairly substantial problems in Channelside.
So much of Channelside will be infrastructure-related.
One other item that the Channelside district has asked to us look at
specifically is to have someone help them work through sort of a kit of
parts that would be design guidelines that all of -- everybody in the
district would adopt so that there was some commonality as to lighting,
seating, trash receptacles, streetscape accommodations, so that
theoretically as you drove into the channel district you would say, I know
I'm in a channel district because of this set of features that all of the
developers would like to adopt but right now they are each acting very
independently, they are acting just very individually. So they have asked
specifically for that as an example.
>>GWEN MILLER: Madam chair, I would like toe move resolutions 2
through 6.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I support the motion, but I really want council
sitting as a CRA to commit to two hours every month to hearing in depth
about where we are. If we get so caught up that we don't need it, we
should cancel it. We are three months behind. I am really embarrassed.
But I would like to see us make that commitment. The next time we have a
regular CRA meeting planned, instead of making it at 11 o'clock, that we
make it at 1:30 and that we commit two hours to it. I would like to deal
with that after we deal with these items first.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: All right. We have a motion and a second on the
floor to approve items 2 through 6. All in favor of the motion please say
aye. One nay.
[Motion Carried].
>>DAVE PARKINSON: I have a quick comment on the balance of the items.
As you recall this morning I had a substitution for a typographical error
for an agreement that was attached to the City Council resolution. We have
the same typographical error that is attached to the CRA resolution. This
is for Item Number 8. Substitute agreement to be attached to the
resolution.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Is there any questions on the budgets here?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Do we need to receive and file them or do anything?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is this for one of the items 2 through 6? Item 8
on the agendas is the transmitting of the --
DAVE PARKINSON: It's Number 5, I'm sorry.
>>GWEN MILLER: So moved.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a motion and second to substitute Number 5.
All in favor please indicate by saying aye. One nay. We have a motion to
receive and file Number 11. So moved. We have a motion to receive and
file items 7 through 11. All in favor please say aye. One nay.






(Mr. Dingfelder no.)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Our next CRA meeting is our regular -- well, it's
next Thursday.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Parkinson, are we going to have anything for the
17th?
>>DAVE PARKINSON: I believe that one week, if I understood the
conversation earlier, I think one week from now will be too soon to
consider these policies documents.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Perhaps it would be more efficient if we looked at
it on April 7th at 2:03 and in addition to the policies document we plan
for presentations by the staff representatives of the different CRAs to
answer any questions we might have on the budgets we just adopted this
week, and just have a little philosophical time. And I think that we need
to plan on that kind of time to hear what's going on. I really don't feel
like we're up to speed.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Saul-Sena, on April 7th we have a workshop.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes, at 1:30. I meant 2:30. That's what we had
said previously. So we need to have it for 2:30.
Assistant City Attorney: On the last motion ((Inaudible).
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I meant to transmit.
Attorney: (Inaudible.)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that was Mr. White, and Mr. Harrison made
that motion.
>>THE CLERK: Ask for the budgets to be adopted.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to rescind the prior motion.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Second.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a motion to rescind the prior motion. All in
favor please indicate by saying aye? Nays?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: And I move to accept and adopt the items 7 through
11. And transmit? Whatever we need to do.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a motion and second to transmit and adopt
items 7 through 11. All in favor please indicate by saying aye. Any nays?
One nay. (Dingfelder.) Anything else to come up?
>>DAVID PARKINSON: Only the reminder that the City Council, items 21
through --
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We're trying to get there. Anything else to come
before the CRA? We stand adjourned.
>>GWEN MILLER: Now we go back into city council. (At 11:41 a.m.)
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: For the viewing public, council is having
scheduling discussions, not substantive discussions. The TV is on, so --
>>ROSE FERLITA: That's another thing, too, Madam Chairman, if some of
us have a scheduling conflict, Ms. Alvarez I understand is not coming back?
I'm not coming back. How much more of our agenda? We are going to have to
finish it, yes.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have no clerk. We have to do the unfinished
business and we have the informations and then we will be finished.
Ready?
[Sounding gavel]
Tampa City Council is called back to order. Roll call? (All
present.)
>>GWEN MILLER: At this time we are going to go back to our committee
reports. Building and zoning.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move resolution 48, substituting
54 through 57.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: We are going to unfinished business. All of them,
Mr. Dingfelder?
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: They are all the CRA items, right?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes. All of them.
Now we go back to item 16. We have a report on Number 16. Anyone






have a resolution to move it?
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say aye?
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: Item 17?
SPEAKER 1: Move for resolution.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor say aye?
[Motion Carried]. Item 18?
Move the resolution. We have a motion and seconds. All in favor of
the motion say aye? Opposed, nay.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: Item 19?
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: We go to information from council.
Mr. Dingfelder, do you have anything?
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Two quick items. I have been asked by residents
in Palma Ceia, they have concerns about quad, attached quad developments
being developed on two different locations and they think it's contrary to
city code. That's at 3410 Barcelona and 3406 Granada, so I would like a
report back from land use staff within two weeks to discuss that.
SPEAKER 1: Seconded.
[Motion Carried].
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: And secondly, sort of a continuation of the --
Sol Fleishmann had that issue in front of us with the wall versus the fence
on Bayshore. I would like Della Costa to come back to us in two weeks and
talk to us about the possibility of workshopping. Not only that unique
issue about the Bayshore but also any issues that are being raised out
there about the historic preservation process and the ARC process because
trust me as the council member representing Hyde Park I receive a lot of
complaints on both sides of the issue. Some people say the ARC is not
strong enough some people say it is too weak so maybe it is perfect. But I
think we need a workshop in two weeks.
[Motion Carried].
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: I want a personal appearance, either Dell or
Cyndi for a workshop.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move commendation for Tommy Franks
to receive the presidential medal of freedom.
[Motion Carried].
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I would like to move a commendation for Tony
Saladino, Jr. Last week we named the baseball complex for Tony Saladino,
and I would like to have a commendation prepared for him for 34 years of
service that he has given to that community and to the park.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: Anything else? Ms. Saul-Sena?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I forgot a little thing. There is a woman here
representing Palm River. I spoke before the county commission yesterday
suggesting that the city and the county talk to each other about providing
basic water and sewer services to Palm River and I think she's here to
speak own this. They said they would write a letter to the Mayor and
skits. One commissioner said they discussed it in '97. I said maybe it is
time to revisit it.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: A couple things. Marty, charter review. It sort
of fell off our radar screen. Can you give us an update on that quickly?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: The short answer to the question is yes, we have. I
know that T.H.A.N. -- as a matter of fact I spoke with Steve this morning
on it. T.H.A.N. is working on their own independent review and they are
plans something I guess in May is my understanding. But in regard to the
charter, the way we had left it is to put it off until after the first of
the year. So we're there.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Could you just check with T.H.A.N. and see when in






mar they would be thinking they could come in and we could just get an
update on it at that point? We don't need you to do anything other than
coordinate that.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That's assuming the council wishes to have T.H.A.N.
and its committee to take the lead with regard to presentation to council?
That is the council's desire?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Not necessarily. If they are working independently
I would just like to know where they are.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Okay. I will have a report for council next week.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you. The second thing Madam chair is I would
like someone to come in and update us next week on the museum of art
project, where it stands, what remaining hurdles have to be ironed out. I
think the deadline is March 31st to bring this to council and if any of us
have any remaining issues remaining hurdles are we need to let the time
folks at the museum of art so they know what those are.
[Motion Carried].
>>ROSE FERLITA: That being said, let me tell you in full what I have
done. I have sent a memo to Mayor Pam Iorio, and chairman Bonnie May Wise.
"Based on recent news articles it appears there is potential for matters
related to construction and/or finance of the proposed new museum of art to
be presented to the City Council for consideration sometime in the near
future. In an effort to prepare for such matter, I am asking copies of
following public records related to the proposed new museum. First, any
and all public reports council has received in January '03 regarding
projections for revenue, operating expense, savings, et cetera for the new
museum, including but not limited to the city's administration analysis for
the consultant report and study, any and all public records related to
regarding any financial plan for the new museum, including but not limited
to records regarding the proposed bank load finance and personal
guarantees, et cetera; any and all public records related to the proposed
construction contract, including cost and supporting documentation for the
proposed new museum; any and all records, public records, including draft,
any requests, proposal, agreement, or other matter or item which the city's
administration will or may present to the council for consideration or
action regarding the proposed new museum. The above-referenced request is
submitted pursuant to Florida statutes Chapter 019, public records law.
"I request that all the above records be provided as soon as possible.
If all records cannot be provided by Monday, March 14th, '05, please advise
me immediately as to when they will be available, and if some of the
records can be provided sooner than others, please do so and advise me of
when the remainder will be available. Thank you for your assistance."
I think that goes to the same heart concern we all have. We listen to
different articles, read different articles, and I think that that is going
to be a very serious issue, and we are going to be asked to do a lot of
things like, you know, approve a bond issue or construction contract, et
cetera. And that is not something that any of us will take lightly, and so
that's why I am putting a time limitation on when I need it. And because
now obviously Mr. Harrison's request, I think they should all provide us
the same thing in a very expeditious fashion, because we are going to have
one side of our population that is going to hate this, one side that is
going to like it. So just from the standpoint, nothing else, of asking the
administration to expedite it. I think when I submit it via the Florida
statutes 119, it's the best way to get.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Obviously, as a citizen, you clearly have a
prerogative to do a sunshine request. It seems rather unusual for a
council member to do that, because I think we all feel very comfortable
with the administration and to ask them for record, I don't know why you
didn't -- let me finish.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Don't say we. You.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: I had the floor.






>>ROSE FERLITA: Go ahead and finish.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: I find it confusing. If you already asked for it
on an informal basis and they haven't given it to you, then I can see why
you would step it up on a legal basis and ask as to a formal basis. It
seems confrontational to do it right out of the gate. Have you asked for
it and they haven't given it to you?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Dingfelder, we have all had some communication
with different people. I want to make sure when I have it in front of me
so I can have the right information is inclusive of all documents. At no
point did I mean this to be confrontational. I meant for it to be
inclusive of everything and not right out of the gate or whatever you said.
We've got this issue coming up in just a very short time. And if I feel
this will secure getting the documents, that's how I want it. And it just
jots down everything here for Bonnie Wise to go through my list of requests
and do it. And if it's based on the Florida statutes 119, then I'm sure I
will get it in an appropriate fashion.
This is another thing I referred to and again one time, not
confrontational, I hate to tell you but it made our system more efficient.
We were getting our agendas too late to review, sometimes as late as
Tuesday night, sometimes Wednesday night. When Mr. Carl was here, I asked
for it in the same fashion I did here. You know what the result was? We
all got it earlier. So all I am asking is we adhere to this. Send it to
me. There is no confrontational. On this particular issue the Mayor and I
have agreed on several things. So, Mr. Dingfelder, you operate the way you
want; I will operate the way I want. I feel this is a way to secure what I
have, need what I have when I am evaluating the documents so don't try to
decipher what I meant, confrontational and otherwise. I did not. It is
simply a request, formally stated, so the administration can give this body
what we need when we have to vote.
>>JOHN DINGLFELDER: Thank you.
>>ROSE FERLITA: You are more than welcome, sir.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I will not be attending next Thursday's meeting
and I was wondering, Mr. Harrison, do you really want to do it next
Thursday or put it off to the following one? I would love to be here for
it.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: 31st is when it is going to be presented to us.
That is two weeks away. You all will get the information I'm sure. They
there very well may be the need to for it up the week after too so it will
be a follow-on process.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anything else, Ms. Ferlita?
>>ROSE FERLITA: No, that is quite enough.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I would like someone from public works give us an
update than on the Cyrus Green pool project.
>>GWEN MILLER: All right. All in favor?
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: We got a memorandum that they had made a agreement
with the builders? When it whites white it still had several people in the
public who were calling.
>>KEVIN WHITE:
>>GWEN MILLER: They were going to start back to work. There was an
announcement. Clerk, do you have anything?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: On the issue of receiving and filing, just a
reminder. There was a specific reference made at an earlier public hearing
to an e-mail that was received. I just want to make sure that as a general
rule that, the aides are -- and I'm sure this is the case, just a reminder
that the aides get that documentation to Erin and the appropriate clerk so
it will be filed.
>>THE CLERK: I have it right here.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: You do? See?
>>GWEN MILLER: We need a motion to receive and file.






>> So moved.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Motion to receive and file the documents.
[Motion Carried].
>>GWEN MILLER: We will go to our audience portion. Anyone in the
public that would like to speak? All right.
(Meeting adjourned.)