Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
Thursday, June 9, 2005
9:00 a.m. session


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


[Sounding gavel]
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Tampa City Council is called to order.
The chair will yield to Mr. John Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This morning we are honored to have Reverend David Groves give our invocation.
As he comes up, I'll tell you that Reverend Groves is retired United Methodist pastor for 59 years in the Florida conference.
He's currently serving as interim pastor in my district in Port Tampa United Methodist Church on DeSoto Street.
He and his wife Marilyn, a teacher, have been Valrico residents in the county for 23 years.
We are honored to have Pastor Groves here this morning to give us our invocation.
If you will stand followed by the pledge of allegiance.
At our congregation, a parishioner came forward to say at show and tell time, we only have a rule no show but time.
Let us pray.
O God, we gather together again to exercise the business in which we're called.
For this day, we give you thanks.
For the vote and the democratic process that has brought us here, we praise you.
For the gifts you have given to each of us, we're grateful.
And, O God, for the patient manner and proud way in which we do our work we acknowledge our indebtedness to you.
Bless those who were called to serve.
Help us not only to hear their needs as they are expressed in various ways to us, but help us also to anticipate their needs and their emergencies as we live and work among them day by day.
Keep us ever alert, O Lord, to the differences that are ours.
Those that are expressed as well as those that could be hidden.
Keep us patient in our responses.
Help us to listen with concern to others, even when we are not appreciative of their views, or have not yet ourselves discovered the truths that they seek expressed.
We pray this day for all those recovering from surgical skills.
And grant, O God, that this day we do our work in such a manner that would be pleasing to you.
Amen.

>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
Roll call.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: (No response.)
>>ROSE FERLITA: (No response.)
>>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
>>GWEN MILLER: (No response.)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Chairman Miller and Councilwoman Alvarez are traveling on official city business this week.
All right.
We will begin with our department heads and city employees.
Mr. Dingfelder, do you want to go ahead and do our commendation first?
Let's do the commendation first.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Come join me.
Welcome, welcome.
We are so honored to have Jeanne Holton Carufel here today.
Jeanne had, as long as I have known her, I guess for the last couple of years, she said, I'm going to be moving soon but I'm still working hard for my neighborhood in Hyde Park.
And I think we all kind of said, yeah, yeah, you're all talk. Anyway, a couple weeks ago we read in the paper that that she was actually moving out to the county, and was going to be leaving Hyde Park and leaving her position as president of the neighborhood association.
So we thought it was timely to go ahead and honor her for all of her hard work on behalf of the Historic Hyde Park neighborhood.
And with that I'd like to give you this commendation.
It reads as follows:
Jeanne Holton Carufel, in recognition of your many years of service for historic Hyde Park neighborhood association, your tireless energy, your willingness to sit for hours at City Council meetings, in hopes of having the community's voice be heard, your commitment to the Bayshore task force, your love for preservation and all things historic, and for your involvement in the annual Hyde Park home tour which brings guests from all over the state and part of the nation.
Tampa City Council is pleased and honored to recognize and commend you for your dedication and exemplary community activism presented this the 9th day of June 2005.
Congratulations.
Jeanne, tell us who you have with you in support.
And Carson, and tell us why you're here, what you do.
>>> This is my son Carson Holton, famous for the Carson Holton eagle squat on Swann Avenue.
One of our newest board members on HHPNA.
Roger is our new president of HHPNA.
Beth Johnson is counsel for our neighborhood association.
And Randy is designer extraordinaire and is also on the Board of Directors and is working on the park which is so exciting, and of course the Kate Jackson park so we have so many things to be proud of.
I appreciate this honor very much.
And I think that if I deserve an honor for anything, it's probably being able to put together a group of such incredible professionals.
They are each and every one of them are awesome in their own way and I think that level of professionalism and expertise put together on the board is the reason why we have been able to do as well as we have been in the sense that we have actually prevailed at every public hearing we have ever spoken at.
And I think it's because we do our homework we put a lot of time into coming before you and we bring a lot of information so that you will have all the information you need to make your decision.
I think it's such an honor that the City Council and also this administration listens to the neighborhood, listens to the neighbors, makes us feel that we have a voice and honors our history here in Tampa.
I think we really have felt that we have a good voice, or have been heard here in the City of Tampa, and we're happy that we have been able to prevail as we have, and we hope that you will continue to remember our history and try to honor it.
Thank you very much.
(Applause)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Jeanne --.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I know Jeanne is moving out there to keystone in the county, and so I'm going to give Jim Norman and Cathy castor a heads up they better be on the watch because I think some other council folks have something to say.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Jeanne, why don't you come back up?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It's been my pleasure to work with you in a variety of community activities over the years, but particularly in your presidency in Hyde Park, you have shown, and your diplomatic skills, your ability to bring together people diverse opinions and to present things first of all using diplomacy within your group and also using diplomacy here before City Council is outstanding.
I think one of the reasons -- I know one of the reasons that you have been heard so clearly is because you all have presented things so well.
And that makes our jobs easier.
Your organized, professional approach is really appreciated.
You have been delightful to work with.
You have had some challenging issues from park to preservation issues, and your organization has been excellent, and you have been a terrific leader.
So we will really miss you.
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Jeanne.
(Applause)
Department heads and city employees.
The first sign-up is David McCary, three minutes, David.
>>> Good morning, City Council.
I have a brief PowerPoint presentation.
I'm actually here to speak on item number 27, which is the unfinished business to actually address illegal dumping within the City of Tampa.
Something that's fairly important that we address.
One of the things that is clear is that where you have enforcement, I've brought to you an actual map of the City of Tampa where illegal dump sites currently exist.
One of the most important things that we have to bring to our customers are options.
For the City of Tampa, the brief presentation that you hear will be very brief, but I'd like to get started.
Why do we have illegal dumping?
And what are some of the possible solutions?
One thing is clear.
For the most part, 90% of all the items that are dumped in the City of Tampa are dumped in the northern part of the city.
Most people may not be aware of that.
But when we have identified exactly 47 illegal dump sites throughout the city, and the main part is actually in East Tampa.
Now, because of the five strategic goals, one of them being economic development in the most challenged areas, well, quite naturally, the way you present, and the way people see the City of Tampa as it relates to the vision, the aesthetics, one thing that's important, illegal dumping in what is seen as always important.
Here you have an actual signage where there's actual dumping.
Currently over 13,000 cubic yards of trash is illegally dumped at an annual cost of over 120,000.
Now the unique thing about this particular picture that you see is of course you see the no dumping sign.
And what do you have there but actual dumping?
We believe as one of the solutions -- and of course this takes an integrated approach that requires more than one department.
It requires help from the citizens in the community.
This integrated approach from a solid waste perspective, we will actually share with you is what we feel are solutions.
Again, we talk about illegal dump sites throughout the city, but primarily 90% of them are in north Tampa.
What do we consider to be our first solution?
Many people have spoken about it but what solid waste has done and put in our CPI, capital improvement projects for this year, 2006, is we're putting together a neighborhood depository site.
As a part of that neighborhood depository site, we're looking at funding of about 275,000.
Now we're looking for property that will be in the neighborhood of two to three acres, quite naturally we're hoping to get that free.
We might have to look at some of our current inventory and see exactly what meets the criteria.
Now, one of the unique things about it is, we want to put it in north Tampa, preferably northeast Tampa, where 36 of the 47 are actually there.
The unique thing about it is, what you have before you is a picture of a neighborhood depository site in Durham, North Carolina.
This is one of the things that we brought into existence while I was there in North Carolina.
The three trucks that you see, just simple trucks that they are parked.
But if you notice behind them are actual dumpsters.
They are roll-off boxes, so to speak, 40 cubic yards.
We're talking about creating a site that will be aesthetically pleasing, that will give someone the option that before they turn around and dump something illegally, there's no question that they knew that there was an option for them to go to one of the neighborhood depository sites.
Now, for residential customers, this will be very nice for them, because as you can see they will back up to the rail, they will unload it, they will have a variety of containers that will stretch from yard waste, if they have a couch, if there's appliances.
We're talking about those items that we're picking up almost daily at the curb or the street.
And as opposed to that, if we gave it where it's a lot easier, a little more convenient, it's clear that if they have to travel across town, the option is, show me the closest ditch, show me the closest blocked street, dead-end, whatever is there.
They'll do that.
And of course we'll landscape it and make it aesthetically pleasing, make it extremely nice, but at the same time it's got to be the most important step to provide these options there.
Now, one of the things that we are absorbing in the budget is we are not talking about adding any personnel to man this particular site.
Once it's complete, we are actually talking about having it open seven days a week from 7:00 to 6:00 in the afternoon.
So that a person actually could present water bills or whatever identification that they have to show that they are a resident of Tampa, and actually open it up for them.
Of course we are not talking about adding any staffing levels.
We're going to take the existing staff, and change some things around to improve our productivity.
And we'll be able to do it.
We are currently at 203 positions.
We will maintain that 203 positions.
But we will also expand.
One of the unique advantages is because we'll be putting it in roll-out boxes, that means we don't have to take a truck that typically picks up debris off the street.
They can continue to maintain their regular collections, routine.
But this way we'll have roll-off drivers that will be able to pull it off.
Now, again, the construction actually begins in 2006, FY 2006.
We are looking for the land now before we end this budget year.
But we're prepared for that.
We will also press very hard to put out a very strong educational program which we feel is needed in these events.
Quite naturally that's important.
And of course just to continue to provide options to our customers is where we would like to start the very first time.
I'll be willing to entertain any questions if you have any.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any questions by council members?
Mrs. Saul-Sena.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just think this is an excellent option as you presented for the customers.
And I toured East Tampa last week and noticed the number of illegal dumpings, and it's a terrible thing for the neighborhood.
And this will be a great solution.
Thank you.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I would just like to thank Mr. McCary on his innovation.
I see Curtis Lane sitting behind you.
And I think this is an option that would greatly help alleviate some of the burden on his department and some of the things that the code enforcement officers do on a daily basis.
And I think it's going to take still some education and some public service announcements, things of that nature, to get the word out.
But how long do you feel before we can possibly implement a project such as this?
>>> Well, one of the things we'll have to do is put together an actual package, an RFP, so to speak, and given some of the details.
I would imagine that by this time next year we would actually have it fully constructed.
But what we will do in the interim is if we knew where the property was, we can do a temporary make-shift of this as early as before the end of this year, actual calendar year.
But it's about finding the property.
Now, quite naturally we have a construction piece that's there where they will have to have concrete.
You saw the rails, where quite naturally you have to be able to off-load it nicely.
But that piece of it can take as long as a full 12 months, just due to construction and that sort of thing.
But it won't stop us from getting it started.
And that's the most important piece.
So we'll stage some roll-off trucks and that sort of thing in actual boxes or containers for them while we'll have it done.
But we're hopeful to do that within the next six months, if possible.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I think the use and convenient location is going to be a big part of this.
And I think like you said, if you can find a spot that's within that 87 percentile, whatever number it is that you mentioned, to make it convenient for people, and also, I don't know about the utility bill necessarily.
But if we can make it more user friendly, because everybody doesn't have necessarily utility bill, may not be in their name, so that we have to go to the dump now and show your identification as well as your utility bill, I think making it user friendly.
I don't know what other types of form of identification that you can use from the city, maybe car registration or something like that.
>>> Well, one of the things we can always do is download the database to our customers.
You tell us who you are, you provide an I.D. and make it as user friendly as we possibly can.
Our whole concept for solid waste is not to make it difficult on a customer but be friendly greeting and actually bring them in.
Quite naturally you will still have those that take it upon themselves to illegally dump no matter what we do.
And of course that just has to be dealt with.
And of course from a business perspective, if someone is in the business, and in there trying to take advantage of that facility, then we won't allow that.
But for the most part, it's for Tampa residents.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. McCary, first of all I apologize I got here late for your presentation.
As I always start I appreciate you and what you do.
You know that.
I think that what you're proposing is in a way part and parcel to what discussions we have had about illegal dumping and the need for environmental crime unit.
I still think this is a component of arrest powers, et cetera, and that's an issue with TPD.
But I'm hopeful based on what you just presented that in some cases when people would think to dump something illegally someplace, if we make it available to them to do it legally, then perhaps we will cut down on some of that curbside environmental crime type stuff.
And I think at some point as we go through the budget hearings and try to finalize the dollars and allocate them to this or to that, when we do continue to talk about the environmental crime issue and how prevalent it is and what a quality of life issue it is, then perhaps maybe, as you have said, I think at Kate Jackson at that meeting, that these type of issues are not just solid waste.
These type of issues are not solely code enforcement.
And I think you're a proponent of coordinating processes and proceeds from one department to another.
So at one point perhaps maybe we can gather the other department heads and see how we can make all of these things that each of you are doing complementary to each other and perhaps solve some of these problems.
Your idea is great and always as -- as always I appreciate what you do for the City of Tampa.
You're incredible.
>>> Thank you.
One of the things we are doing now is we have regular meetings as it relates to the strategic plan, so to speak, where NEAT, code enforcement, TPD, solid waste, we are all actually sitting down and collectively talking, coming up with these ideas, just to put it simple, but it does take an integrated approach.
It does take everyone.
There's no "one" solution.
It has to be integrated.
>>ROSE FERLITA: And lots of types the neighborhood does depend on what NEAT does, except they don't have enough staffing so by the time they leave one particular area it's time for those residents to start being anxious about when they are coming back.
So I think we're doing better and I think the city is cleaning up very well and you're certainly instrumental in that.
I look forward to the.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm just curious about city real estate because I think one of the big hurdles and expensive items on finding the property to do this, and I'm sure that you either have or will explore with the city real estate department and other departments possibility of sharing a site?
>>> We have already created the conversations.
We already had a few meetings.
So that is underway as we speak.
That's why I feel pretty confident that once we at least have the land, within any six months after that you will start to see a change.
And because right now we are actually chasing piles, so to speak.
We know there's where the dump sites are.
A couple of days later, what we have just picked up is there again.
And that's real.
So I think this is the very important step forth city.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And obviously we want to be neighborhood sensitive and just try and stay in industrial areas to be doing this.
>>> Yes.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, David, for your report.
Donna Wysong.
>>> Donna Wysong: Legal department.
I'm here to speak on agenda item numbers 55 and 56.
Those are two resolutions setting a public hearing for consideration of a local landmark designation process for the Homer Hosterly structure and the public school.
There is an incorrect meeting date on it.
The original one says July 7th.
And so I have submitted a revised resolution to the clerk's office setting those public hearings for July 21st.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to go ahead and move those substituted dates.
55 and 56.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm very pleased that these have come up.
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Donna. Julie Brown.
>> Julie Brown, legal department.
I'm here to walk on a resolution approving a Tripar contract with the City of Tampa, the Tampa Bay Performing Arts Center, and Toby archer studio LLC for the design, fabrication and installation of fiber-optic cables with moving light on and around the Tampa Performing Arts Center roof as well as the PATEL conservatory. The city is paying $55,000 out of our trust fund, and the performing arts center is paying $115,000.
This is part of Lights on Tampa program.
And Jan Arnet is here to speak if you have any questions. The reason we are walking this on due to the inclement weather and the rising materials costs.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any questions?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll pass.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to thank you for getting this before us and to invite -- I was going to bring this up under new business but it's a perfect segue -- to invite all the council members to a public art breakfast next Thursday morning just prior to our council meeting at 7:45 where we'll have a discussion of the Lights on Tampa program, and the public is invited.
You have to pay for breakfast but it's going to be really interesting.
The Lights on Tampa program is going to be very, very exciting.
It's turning on this November.
So thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We look forward to the.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I don't have any questions.
I simply have a compliment.
I attended a meeting yesterday for the arts center and it's my sense they are doing even more than they have to.
So this is great.
I look forward to moving it along.
Thank you for your help.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any other questions?
Thank you, Julie.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: My suggestion would be to allow it for new business-a Lao public comment if there is any public comment.
That is my suggestion.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
Clerk, remind us when we get back to that.
Eric Cotton.
>>THOM SNELLING: Land Development Coordination standing in for Mr. Cotton this morning.
Here on items 51 and 52.
Item number 51 is the temporary wet zoning WZ 05-102.
And the petitioner is asking -- you're scheduled to hear under consent agenda -- asking for a waiver of the 15 day submittal requirement.
They did indeed file the notice with the neighborhood association.
They followed the code in that regard so everything is in order in terms of the corporate request.
And then the second item is WZ 05-103.
And that was asking basically for a one-week continuance in that you're a little overzealous in having it scheduled too early.
This meets all the standard codes and they are just asking for a one-week continuance of item WZ 05-103.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We'll hold those for public comment.
Thank you.
Karen Palus.
>> Karen Palus, recollection director, here to speak on two items.
Item number 25 and item number 29.
25 first.
I'm here to just provide a quick report on whether it's permissible to allow the consumption of alcohol on park property for special event in which parks are available.
As you know recently the alcohol beverage zoning code that was passed May 26th, by council, we identified 12 parks that are eligible for temporary wet zoning.
However, you are required to be a non-profit to pull a temporary wet zone permit for those special events and those activities.
So that is the way if you want to consume alcohol during this special event and have sale of it, that is the process currently.
If you want to generally have an event, shelter, a wedding event or such, that does not allow for alcohol based on our current alcoholic zoning code.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Quick question.
Usually, adult reception does have alcohol.
And I wondered if there's any -- if other communities allow this, and if it's something that we should look into, to be less restrictive on people who want to have receptions at our parks.
>>> One of the things I did look into, with several other municipalities close by, most of them do not allow, while a few do allow them in their interior facilities. I did contact the legal department to see how we could proceed if we wanted to look into that specifically for a rental facility like a Reagan park which has the indoor facility, and/or our gardens center which typically are the one that is host our wedding type receptions.
So we are looking into that to see how feasible that is because of the liquor liability requirements and the expense to the individuals to provide that type of insurance.
To be able to basically be a host where it's not for sale, but it's for consumption and how to control that.
There are municipalities such as city of Orlando, city of Maitland, that do allow for interior type facilities.
But the majority of their parks, Hillsborough County, St. Pete, do not allow for alcohol consumption within the park facilities on a general day-to-day basis.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
Will you come back to us with what you find?
>>> Yes.
I'll be happy to.
That's item number 25.
Move to item 29, which is in regards to the AIDS memorial park and our private-public partnership with the LLC there for the development.
I wanted to provide you a picture.
You had asked about the status of this.
This is the AIDS memorial park as you see now.
It was originally just a small pocket park and was not as well developed, if you have been by the new facility, it's just about done.
They are finishing up on their punch list and we are working with the organization there to do a new re-grand-opening for the site.
It's a beautiful site.
One of the things that was part of the agreement with them back in 2003 was for them to use it for staging area of their construction, and in turn they would then provide for the redevelopment of the park through partnership with our staff as far as design and such elements that would go into it as well as for the upkeep of maintenance from here on out.
So it got a 99 year clause on the agreement currently.
They have been great to work with.
They have provided us all the material and all the information that kept us right in the loop so we are pleased with that.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to clarify this because I think it might be a model for other sites.
So the city owns the land.
It's our park.
But the adjacent property owner has installed the improvements and has agreed to maintain it.
>>> Yes, they have.
And it is required to stay open to the public as well.
As a public park.
>> Thank you.
I think that's a great model.
And I think as we discuss Kiley park in the future it's something we might want to keep in mind.
>>> They have been a great organization to work with.
If you get a chance to run by it's a beautiful facility.
We look forward to that rededication.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. Palus, I was the maker of this motion, for to you come give us a report, because of the fact we have so much development, given the development and the value of those properties in the area.
I just want to make sure that this is something that we had committed to as a memorial to aids victims.
So I want to make sure that stayed as it was.
And I think that's what I'm understanding.
>>> As part of the agreement was required to keep the name, that was originally dedicated, yes.
>> And it didn't look so good not too long ago but it does look very nice now and the fact that we're standing by our commitment for that is great.
I truly appreciate it.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
Mr. Lane.
>>CURTIS LANE: Good morning, council.
I'm here on the request of council to talk about under unfinished business, number 28, reference the full-day hearing master for code enforcement cases.
Basically, what is being passed out to you is a code board and hearing master procedure, and this will give you some idea as to what the department, clerks, and also the city clerk's office has to prepare each time there's a hearing master case.
We began this with 207 cases starting on the 3rd of August.
The first Wednesday in August.
So, yes, we will be having a full-day hearing master.
Are there any questions?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any questions?
Ms. Ferlita.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Lane, I think that's what we asked for so we can expedite some of these cases, and that's fine.
Just one comment, not particularly to this but to Mr. McCary.
I still think we have to work together on the environmental crime unit issue in terms of illegal dumping.
And you're certainly going to be a key player in that, too.
So at some point I would like to request that you and David McCary and TPD get together, and I would be happy to call that meeting so we can get some, you know, some working together and interaction that maybe we can report back to the council on how that's doing.
And of course it's going to be contingent on whether or not our requests are heard about extra dollars for environmental crime unit individuals.
So expect that I'll call you.
Maybe we can meet.
Okay, Curtis?
>>CURTIS LANE: Look forward to it.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you for what you do as well.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Roy LaMotte.
>> Good morning, council.
Roy LaMotte, transportation manager, here to speak on item 22 under unfinished business.
You asked me to provide a report on what components from the transportation plan that was presented to you, the Tampa downtown partnership, can be implemented in the next year.
I'm happy to report to you that staff has been actively working on a number of the project recommendations that were made in that particular program.
And relative to onstreet parking on Florida Ave., we know there's a capacity issue here.
We believe that we can install parking on the west side between Madison and Polk and we actually can pick up 21 spaces here.
So that will be a recommendation that would go forward.
In regards to the need for the signal at Morgan and Washington, at this time, our signal 1 analysis is not showing that it is warranted.
But we will look at it again when the new school gets completed, and we believe we can reassess it at that point in time.
Utilizing the changes in the signal progression on Florida and Tampa to reduce speeds.
While we understand that this is an FDOT roadway, we have generated timings with slower speeds of progression for these two streets, and that we have attest pattern that we are running through now, and we believe that we can get reduction in speed down to 25 miles an hour.
And we will be discussing these changes with the Florida Department of Transportation.
And if they concur, we can certainly move forward with the recommendations within a year's time if they wish to do so.
You asked us to look at consider reducing the cycle times on Franklin and Marian to reduce regression.
We believe it can be done and we use half cycle lights to keep this kind of progression going on the east and west.
We recognize this will have some impacts on again the Tyler, Zack, Polk, but we can make recommendations in this area.
Furthermore you asked to us examine the conversion of one-way streets to two-way for Zack, Polk and Twiggs.
Our concept striping plans for Polk and Zack have been completed and based upon the available funding, it may be possible to convert a few of these intersections during the upcoming year.
Again, that's pending funding.
We know we are going through our budget cycle and that's very important.
You asked us also to take a look at improving visibility of the crosswalk at Franklin and Whiting.
The city is in the process of installing a signal at this intersection.
And again we did install some new high intensity crosswalk markings.
But on the area where the brick is, it doesn't well very well.
We will be addressing that when we go to signalization.
Final design of the cycle should be complete in the next six months and we hope to construct that within ten months period of time.
Councilman Dingfelder, did you have a question on that?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Actually, I had a question on item 32, you if you want to finish this item first.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mrs. Saul-Sena.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Steinback from the Planning Commission had written the transportation vision plan, and these are many of the components mentioned, and this would be one of the quickest turn-arounds that I have seen in the city between somebody suggesting some improvements and the improvements actually being implemented.
And I'm really, really pleased to see that.
I just want some reassurance on Ashley that crossing Ashley that we are also including looking at how to make that safer for pedestrians.
>>> We will do that.
That's one of the items that's still pending for our study.
We have obviously been short on time and everything else being asked of us, but we are looking at that.
We also looked at the analyzing the need for the eastbound left turn at Twiggs and Nebraska, and this intersection is currently part of a dew detour for State Road 60, Kennedy, for the Meridian project.
We have been asked that we hold on implementing that particular recommendation at this time because the demand for left turn signal might go away once the detour is complete.
And we feel that it would be prudent to do so.
And lastly, the city is moving forward on the north Franklin project.
We were supposed to have a shovel in the ground last week.
The weather has been rather bad.
We hope to do that fairly shortly.
We'll take any questions.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any more questions of Mr. LaMotte on this item?
You're also going to talk about the other item, number 32?
>>> Well, we have a study that's about ready to commence.
It's going through the CCNA process at this time.
The contract award will be in four weeks.
The T studies include overall comprehensive assessment of the potential developments south of Gandy to look at this in a comprehensive view.
And we would have those results for you in approximately a month or two when the study is proceeding.
Again, the results from future development, we didn't want to look at it in micro.
We wanted to look at in the global view and look at all of South Tampa because we think it's important, it's not just the front door concept.
In only a little time I think we can come back with better results.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Before I talk specifically about that item I just want to talk about Roy LaMotte.
Roy, I think you have been here about six months or so, or a little more perhaps?
>>> A year in August.
>> And you have just done a great job.
You really hit the ground running.
When neighbors call, you know, when folks call, businesses, whoever, you're just out there.
And just really being extremely responsive.
And I think we all want to thank you for that.
As related to item 32, I would ask, specifically ask, that you and Mr. Morriss look to add to the scope of work for that project, since you will be negotiating through the CCNA.
Look to add Westshore Boulevard, the impacts of all of this new development on Westshore Boulevard, because obviously the new development we're talking about is south of Gandy, but much of it is in the Westshore corridor, and especially along South Westshore, and clearly those cars have to go somewhere, and we all know they are going to be going up Westshore Boulevard.
So I would just ask that you and Mr. Morriss look to include in the scope of work Westshore Boulevard as well.
>>> We definitely will do that.
Thank you for the kind words.
I'm just doing my part.
And thanks to the great staff I have.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any questions for Mr. LaMotte?
Have a good day.
Next item on the agenda, request for reconsideration by the public.
>> Kathleen McElroy, 2 Adelia Avenue here to speak to agenda item 6, file Z-4-123.
Full excuse me, I have been taking too many depositions.
I request respectfully reconsideration for the following reasons: First the process is procedurally flawed.
Secondly, more importantly, council's decision to rezone park land to allow the construction of a parking garage was not supported by substantial and competent evidence that the use of the park land as a parking garage served an overriding public interest and was therefore inconsistent with the Tampa comprehensive plan.
Thank you very much.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Hang on just a second here.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: This is reconsideration.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: You said item number 6.
>>> From last week.
Seeking reconsideration of something that happened last week.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
>>> Thank you very much.
>>> My name is Steve Stanley.
558 west Davis Boulevard.
I'm president of the Davis Island civic association.
Cathy McElroy is handing out newspaper articles on Z 04-123, Tampa General rezoning from -- second reading was last week.
The issue that -- first issue I'm speaking about is the overriding public interest issue.
And of the items that are required to establish overriding public interest, specifically speaking about item A, which includes safety.
I have provided you -- and I will give the clerk one -- a copy of a Tampa Tribune article from May 29th which goes to hurricanes and disasters, and on the front page of that article it shows Tampa General Hospital.
It shows the surge area of category 5.
Almost 50% of the hospital is under water.
This is supposed to be a regional center.
And we are expanding it to the extent that we have a parking garage on a park, 1400 additional parking spaces, which is going to generate maybe 5,000 more cars at any given time.
And to vacate Davis Island is a problem on any given day that there might be a hurricane without additional parking from the hospital.
This exacerbates the situation.
It is a safety factor.
It's not just hurricanes.
It's other kinds of disasters.
Tampa General can't even vacate their patients in the hospital, couldn't in the last one.
So this is a fly in the face of the safety issue.
I have got some other boards I want to enter that show the hospital, show the garage that's there, the height of it, and also shows as you go up the sea wall, there's not even seven feet.
There's not even seven feet as contrary to what they are representing.
That's the new sea wall.
I have got another here for the record, shows helicopter pad on the ground level.
In a disaster.
Also, rather than a helicopter pad, a helicopter pad on top of the emergency room.
There's the on the pictures of alternatives that could have been considered that weren't acted on.
Here's the park.
You had a representative come to you that works for the hospital that said you can't see the water.
He lied.
He says he has pictures, and he took pictures that you couldn't see the water.
These weren't even intended to show the water but, by God, the water is easy to see in these pictures.
That is a waterfront park.
It's right on the water.
You can see skulls going back and forth, boats going back and forth.
There's no question.
If the pepper trees were cleaned out you could even see more water.
This is a park.
You're putting a garage on it.
It's a safety issue.
It doesn't meet an overriding public interest.
To put a parking garage on a park, where you're creating safety problems in the event of a hurricane, other disasters, evacuation, you create a gridlock.
The second part of that article shows what happens when you create gridlock.
The car is on fire.
This particular car caught on fire during the evacuation of hurricane Francis.
And by the way, how opportune this is.
There's a tropical storm just named this morning in the Caribbean that's moving into the Gulf.
So safety is an issue.
(Bell sounds)
And I move that you reconsider the rezoning.
This all goes into the record.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Right.
>>> I'm Denise Cassidy.
And I am a Davis Island resident.
Again, I'd like to, on petition Z-04-123, I think you all need to reconsider the Tampa General Hospital rezoning from last week.
First of all, as all of you know, the process and the procedure was flawed.
And I think all of you need to look at some of these e-mails that I have had the chance to look at, that have come into your offices, from concerned citizens seconding that exact thought, the process.
As one e-mail said, you have to hold each petitioner to the same standards, whether they are a developer, or they are a private hospital, they all have to be held to the same standards.
So don't forget the procedure was flawed.
And secondly, another e-mail that came into your office said City Council is actually here to protect the interests of the residents, not the interests of business.
And I really feel that Tampa General Hospital has a board to protect their interests, and you as our elected officials should be protecting the interest of the residents.
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Ms. Cassidy.
Next.
>>> Good morning.
My name is Neil Costantino.
I'm with the Florida public interest think tank, the public trust.
I hope today I'm also the voice of reason and compromise, because I think we can reason through this thing.
And there's much room for compromise.
And therefore I'm asking you to reconsider as well what has transpired -- transpired to date and that we stop in place and look and very carefully review the issues.
There's some very serious public safety issues that were pointed out.
And the only way to properly consider them is a long-range view, what you call long-range planning.
And we are at the Rubicon as far as we are concerned on that hospital.
We are at a point where someone has to make a decision, and we are hoping you will help make the Tampa General Hospital make that decision on what they are going to do in the future.
Because even if this goes through, we still don't have a view of the future.
And I think it's time to stop and say, if you're going to continue to grow, you're going to have to grow somewhere else.
That's what's good for the public good.
And so let's understand that, because unless we have a long-range plan, we're not going to be able to deal with this intelligently.
And to give you an update, the president of the Davis Island Chamber of Commerce recently -- and I spoke with him -- and he felt that the tranquillity park option was a good option and should be looked at.
So what we're saying, compromise.
We also talked to the D.I. planning group who originally remained neutral, and I got them to state publicly that you can't remain neutral, that indeed the majority of people on Davis Island -- and you have to understand this in simple terms.
Why would anyone give up a park to get more traffic?
I mean, it just doesn't make sense.
So no one would be for that.
Why would a community give up a park to get more traffic?
There's a disconnect here.
So you could say, well, the overriding good is the community at large.
Well, you don't know what the overriding good of the community at large is, until you look at their long-range plan.
Because once again we are at the Rubicon.
We have to decide now, this is the time to decide where Tampa General is going to continue to expand.
Or are they going to say, That's it, that's the last expansion we plan to do.
And of course if they say that, then that's a strong argument.
But who's going to believe it?
So we hope they expand.
But we don't want them to expand on Davis Island.
So now is the time to make a very important decision.
So we have the president of Davis Island civic association that originally supported this saying there's room for compromise.
We have the planning group that originally said they are neutral finally realizing that that wasn't representing the true feelings of the community based on just plain reason.
Why would a community give up the park to get more traffic?
So in reality, what is really for the public good?
And the only way we are going to find that out is for this council to ask Tampa General Hospital to stop in place, give us a long-range plan, a long-range plan, if for no other reason public safety.
Thank you very much.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
We have had four motions for reconsideration in the same agenda item from last week.
Is there anyone that would like to make a motion to reconsider this item?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: No, but I want to make a comment.
I'm not going to make a motion to reconsider.
But I have great concerns about what I'm seeing here from the civic association representatives, because I think what you're doing is setting up for litigation on this issue.
It becomes obvious sitting in this chair when folks are doing that.
And I respect that you have the right to do that.
Instead of litigating this, I would urge you to, you know, to approach the hospital.
I would be glad to facilitate that and see if there's any additional compromises that you might want to do in lieu of litigating this.
I can participate now that we would be out of the public hearing process and see if I can mediate some additional compromises.
But when it was spoken earlier about what is in the best interest of the residents, and Ms. Cassidy, I think you might have said that, I think all seven of us agreed that it's in the best interest of the residents of the entire city and the entire county and perhaps nine counties that TGH be allowed to grow and prosper.
It's unfortunate that they are at that location.
But that's something that we are all sort of stuck with.
But in light of that, I just urge you not to litigate this and to try and find some compromise that we can all live with and move on from this.
So that's just my two cents.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Other council member that would like to speak on this item?
Thank you.
There was no motion to reconsider.
Next item is agenda audience.
Anyone in the audience that would like to speak on any item that is on the agenda that is not set for a public hearing.
This is your time to do so.
>> Good morning.
Terry Neil, 4703 East River hills drive, Nice to see you all this morning.
And John said to me, trying to reinstate the Ross Perot look.
No, I'm not.
I just happen to like Bolo ties.
I want to thank Mr. McCary for bringing that up to you today.
That is a wonderful idea.
Have you ever tried to dump things at the city dump?
Oh, it's a nightmare.
I would ask that you make sure that he gets the neighborhood associations involved with this because it is very important that they have something to do with the aesthetics of this.
The pictures that he presented, with all due respect to Mr. McCary, were not too pleasing.
They do this at USF, incidentally.
They have a recycling area.
It's pretty neat.
It's surrounded by trees.
You wouldn't know it was there.
So please take a look.
Work with us.
And we will support that, probably very, very strongly.
I'd like to speak primarily on item number 47 regarding the riverwalk approval, and I want to state first of all that just for the record, as a member of the proud but silent minority, Mr. Harrison, that I support the history center.
I support all projects that have to do with the arts, and with the school, on a vocal music scholarship for one of my degrees.
So I appreciate the arts.
I love the arts.
But you can't get to the riverwalk if you don't have roads.
You can't get to the riverwalk, or you won't want to walk on the riverwalk if the river stinks because raw sewage is dumped into it.
And as you know the city is under already fine by EPC for dumping raw sewage into the river.
And it's happened in my neighborhood many times.
I just want to make sure that you know that the C.I.T. -- I want to put this on the Elmo here, if you will recall this.
I never can get Elmo right.
Never mind.
C.I.T. is intended for infrastructure first.
It's not intended for museums.
That's secondary.
I have nothing against museums.
But as I support your efforts to put the museum, the history center into the old federal courthouse, and let's use that money for roads.
But the riverwalk is being funded with C.I.T. money.
And it's not going to do us any good to have that riverwalk if we can't get to it.
$2 million a year to buy ribbons of green land.
That's all we need every year to match the federal funds for 40th street.
$2 million.
That's all we need to keep 40th street going.
Every year, to match the federal funds.
We have got $12 million in debt service that we are using right now for C.I.T. money.
We have got $25 million in reserve in C.I.T. money that we are holding for the art museum.
We have too much C.I.T. money not being used appropriately.
And I'm for the riverwalk.
I think it's a great idea.
But like I said, you can't get to the riverwalk if you don't have a road to drive downtown to get to it unless you live in Trump Tower, I guess.
But maybe they won't want to walk on the river if it stinks.
And trust me, I've seen raw sewage flowing into the river at the rate of thousands, hundreds of thousands of gallons an hour.
Non-stop, with no response from the city.
(Bell sounds)
So please, let's get that C.I.T. money back where it belongs.
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Mr. Neil.
Next.
>>> Sue Lyon.
My address is 3233 west Fairoaks Avenue.
I'd like to talk about item 32, Mr. LaMotte's transportation study.
If you look at the agenda there are several items that are coming up quite quickly about that area, big development.
I'm not exactly sure.
You have got first reading, second readings, all kinds of things on the agenda today for the program there.
I'd like to request that we get the study back before we consider any development in the Westshore area.
There are a lot of people in that area.
My husband particularly is an engineer.
And there are several areas that the city could work on putting in different roads and different entrances, the fact they are going to open up bridge street is not going to help that much.
Not if you put that many houses in.
If you come out onto Gandy you can't get out there.
And if you put another traffic light in you're slowing down the traffic coming on Gandy, which is what they are trying to avoid.
You need to do the studies before you promote the developments.
So if you are going to ask them to move back a little bit, I know it's back in June, but then he's saying -- and his is a normal request.
You have got to give him time to do his study.
The city needs to know what's happening.
You can't just put 3,000 homes.
And it's a Domino effect.
This development has got a thousand.
This one has got 2,000.
This one has got 700.
And you just keep doing it.
And they are only Westshore, and Manhattan.
It's not going to carry anyplace.
Dale Mabry is full.
Westshore is an F-rated road.
And then you are going to dump another 1,000, 2,000 houses on it.
It's not feasible.
It doesn't work.
You're in a high hazard flood zone.
Those people will have to be vacated in a hurricane.
You can't keep putting people in that area.
I know the people have a right to develop their property.
But you need to do studies, and you need to involve the roads before you put in any kind of development.
It nice that they are putting in nice things and making it friendly.
But, still, it's that many people, and there's no road to get them out.
You're going to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.
South Tampa is what it is because you can get out of it.
Shawn doesn't have to spend two hours driving to town if he lives in South Tampa.
And the other thing is, if John wants to work with the hospital about seeing if we can get some kind of compromise, I'd like to volunteer the neighborhood association -- this will be my last official act as president of T.H.A.N..
I retired last night.
Bill Duval will be the new president.
But if I can help in any way, to save the trees, to save any part of that park, I would certainly like to -- and the AIDS park is beautiful but it gives the impression that it's part of the condominium complex.
(Bell sounds)
That's going to have to be well-known that is a park.
It's beautiful.
It's nice.
But it doesn't really look like a park.
It looks like the front door of this condominium.
And that's what's going to happen with the hospital.
Their Promenade is going to look like it belongs to the hospital.
You have got to let people know that this is a park, and I can come here.
And like you say about the dumpsters, that's a great idea.
But if people don't know about it, they are still going to dump alongside the road.
And the little old ladies, what she's going to do?
You have to have some way to get people -- and I thank you for the for the extra time.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: And congratulations on your retirement.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Please come and visit us.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I have a feeling this will not be the last we have seen of Ms. Lyon.
>> My name is Lieber, Seminole Heights.
Mr. Harrison wanted to make sure this was an appropriate time to talk about item number 30 because you said to have the public come forward that didn't require public hearing.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: It is.
>>> But this is also about our city parks.
We have a beautiful -- I don't know how many acres it is.
I have been going there since I was a little girl.
The park in Seminole Heights.
And I live three house as way from it on Henry and about a month ago, I was walking my dog, to my horror, I see a five or six adults and older teenage boys playing paint ball, completely shooting up our entire park with a paint ball, and including the brand new playground equipment that we just had installed there.
So I immediately called the non-emergency police department.
They came out.
Same thing happened the following week.
And this time, I walked down there when the police came, and officer L. Molino told me it is not illegal.
And I said it's dangerous and littering and it's horrible what's happening.
Since then there's been four other occasions the past month.
And I contacted Ms. Ferlita.
And it took me five minutes to get on the Florida statutes web site and on our city code find a city ordinance against firearms being shot, including air rifles in the city limits, and there are also two Florida statutes involving paint ball, and one of them, I have it here with me, one of them says that you cannot shoot paint ball or skateboarding, et cetera, in a governmental owned entity, without that government's express permission, approval, and designated areas that are posted as such.
So what I'm asking is for someone to help let the police know that this is illegal, and there should be some consequences for this, and it could be going on elsewhere throughout Tampa.
I don't know.
But I would like to have it stopped.
I'm not against paint ball.
They can do it somewhere else.
But not in a public park.
>> Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Ferlita.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, we did communicate.
And subsequent to that we have contacted Kirby Rainsberger, who is the attorney for TPD.
And evidently, on our ordinances, when it addresses BB guns or gas-operated utilized compressed CO-2 guns, anything of that sort, paint balls per se, paint ball guns per se were excluded.
The constituent brings up a very good concern, and I think in a lot of cases, it damages a property and it's dangerous, and I would like to ask this council to consider supporting -- having it added to that particular ordinance.
I have seen some problems with it.
As a matter of fact, one day I came out to put my garbage in and somebody had paint balls, and it was just a mess.
And I just think it's something that could be detrimental.
And I think we ought to look at it more seriously and at least revisit why or why not it was excluded from the ordinance.
And if that requires something in the form of a motion, I really think it's a public safety issue.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: So what you're suggesting is we add paint ball guns to the Tampa code 14-112 ordinance.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Right.
Tampa code 14-1.12.
I don't know if you have a copy of what Mr. Rainsberger communicated to me.
He referenced that and he referenced the Florida statute.
So I've got a copy.
We do have one, right?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We don't have copies of the actual ordinances or statute.
The memo.
But let me just weigh in.
We have a motion and we have a second so we'll discuss it.
The Florida statute now says you can't operate a B.B. gun or a paint ball gun if you're under 16 without adult supervision.
Then we have a Tampa code ordinance that says you can't fire any gun, air rifle or B.B. gun within the city limits without a permit from the chief of police.
If we added paint ball guns to that, then even if you were over 18, you wouldn't be able to operate a paint ball gun within the city limits without a permit from the chief of police.
And I don't mind taking a look at the pros and cons of that but I'm a little uncomfortable with going to something that would be that restrictive.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Let's at least, Mr. Chairman, I can amend my motion to make a request perhaps that we discuss it further.
But in my eyes, whether you're 16 or whether you're 18, if you shoot a paint ball gun, you're still going to do the same damage.
I don't know if the age correlates to what we should restrict.
It's just the danger of the paint ball gun being used.
We don't necessarily have to make a motion crafted after Tampa code 14-112.
But I think it warrants some discussion and obviously we just have four members here.
Then let me retract my motion, if Linda will retract hers, and say I want this to be held full discussion when the rest of the council comes here.
Then if Mr. Rainsberger has something else to bring in terms of review or evaluation, then we can make a determination at that point.
But I think it's not overdue to be discussed because I think it is definitely harmful.
And, ma'am, you have a very, very good concern about what's happening.
And I'm concerned about the same.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
We'll discuss that.
Ms. Saul-Sena.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It seems to me that one of the issues that the lady brought up is that this took place in a public park.
And --.
>>ROSE FERLITA: The second issue.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would assume that we have rules that are different in a public park from just, you know, property.
So maybe legal should look at it from that viewpoint, making it illegal in public parks.
But the question you had about whether it's destructive and if it takes place in an alleyway or street or whatever, it seems to me that destruction is illegal without it being identified specifically from a paint ball, destruction of private property by an individual is flat out illegal.
>>ROSE FERLITA: But I think if we have a discussion, but it is damaging to property, and you bring up a very good point about city parks.
I think it's something that's long overdue to address.
And we can ask legal to come in and discuss some different options.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I definitely agree.
I think not only is it dangerous.
As a matter of fact, I was -- when I was over in the criminal justice system, I was involved in a case where young people were being prosecuted because they were firing point blank at other people, and it was a second degree felony that they were being prosecuted for.
So this is a very serious item.
And Mr. Shelby pointed out to me a second ago that I think, Linda, what you're referring to is criminal mischief, clearly, you know, if you're shooting these things and the paint is exploding in the parks and on playground equipment, and in the public streets, et cetera, that it well can be construed as criminal mischief.
Mr. Shelby has a background in criminal justice as well so I hope that we can include him in this legal review and discussion with the police department as we go forward.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Can we hear from Mr. Shelby?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Shelby, do you have anything to add?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: No.
I think except for the fact that it ultimately will come down to the tools that the police department has at its disposal that it chooses to use for enforcement purposes.
And I think as Ms. Ferlita raised the issue, I'm sure that will be part of the discussion.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Chairman, just to put this to rest for today only, let me just ask perhaps in two weeks -- will Ms. Miller and Ms. Alvarez be back in two weeks?

>> I believe they will.
>>> This is a motion to have TPD, recreation department, as it relates to parks, and the legal department come and discuss this issue so that we can craft something that will be protective of our citizens in the use of paint ball guns.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Include Mr. Shelby on that?
>>ROSE FERLITA: He will be here anyway.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Perhaps as a point of reference to you, Ms. Ferlita, perhaps this constituent's particular concern as to these particular instances to see how they could be, as a point of reference, to address those issues.
>>ROSE FERLITA: That would be fine.
Ma'am, if possible, I would really appreciate if you would attend in two weeks.
FROM THE FLOOR: (off microphone)
>>ROSE FERLITA: Just bring it forward.
You know, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Shelby brings up a good point and an old point and a redundant point that when continue to add issues or amendments to ordinances, et cetera, and it all comes down to one thing, and that's enforcement.
So if we talk about this, then we certainly have to have a big component of that discussion be directed at enforcement.
You are absolutely right, Mr. Shelby.
So hopefully we'll have a comprehensive discussion and get this done.
Because that is damaging.
It can hurt a person if your car happens to be parked someplace.
It's not pleasant when you walk out of a building or an appointment and you have got paint on the side of your car.
So we need to address that issue.
So that's my motion, Mr. Chairman.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion.
We have a second.
Let me weigh in.
I'm certainly willing to have a discussion on it, get a little more information.
I'm actually concerned to learn that you cannot operate a B.B. gun within the city limits without written permit from the chief of police.
And I certainly understand the B.B. gun can do a lot of damage as well.
But the coming of age for any young man is the ability to own a B.B. gun and go out in the backyard and shoot it.
And as long as you're not doing any damage with that, that seems awfully restrictive to me.
So when we have this discussion, let's just include all of Tampa code 14-112 and we'll see if there are ways that we might tweak the ordinance that we've got.
We have a motion on the table.
We have a second.
Any further discussion on the motion?
All in favor signify by saying Aye.
Motion carries.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Chairman, one quick response not to belabor it.
I think everything in terms of usage and allowability in terms of legality is all back to responsibility and how it's used.
I can show you three pretty little sites on two of my front windows at my drugstore that were caused by a B.B. gun.
I don't know if it was a 16-year-old who did it with BB guns or 18.
And personal personally I don't care.
I know it was done.
It all goes back to what we do allow or not allow so long as there's some responsibility put in that ordinance.
So we'll have a discussion, see what we end up with.
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Anyone else in the audience like to speak on any item on the agenda that is not set for a public hearing?
All right.
I see no one else.
Then we will move into our public hearings.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, item 24, Mr. Massey sent us a note about that and asked for a couple of additional weeks which I don't have a problem with.
Specifically this relates to our notice letters and to make sure that they are comprehensive, and updated and everything else.
And the only thing I was going to ask, Mr. Massey, during this next two weeks, it dawned on me yesterday as I was looking at this, that now that we are high tech in the city, especially with the clerk's help, and Shirley, we appreciate you and your staff working on this, that we have a lot more information than we used to that's online.
And so what I was thinking was, as these notice letters need to reflect that.
In other words, when we tell people, when a developer sends out the notice letter and says I'm looking to rezone the property next door to you, that letter should also reference, you know, if you want to see my petition, if you want to see the site plan, or whatever, here's the computer online location that you can go to.
Because we have that resource, we should make the public very, very well aware of that in the notice letter, if we're not.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I'll discuss it with the city clerk's office.
I don't know whether the files as soon as they are filed with Land Development Coordination are on the system at that juncture.
They are on that juncture -- they are on the same by the time they hit the agenda for City Council's consideration.
But I don't know when those are translated to the PDF format into the system.
So we'll talk about that and see if we can make more information available in the letter.
One of our concerns was that the letter, these letters attempt to row state code, and in some cases aren't entirely consistent with code.
And what we may want to do is have a more simple letter and just attach verbatim the language from the code.
But we are going to work on that and try to make sure --.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Maybe two weeks is really not enough time because there's a lot of notice letters, aren't there?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: There are.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would really like us to address this online possibility.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: We can come back.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Maybe after break.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: That would be fine.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: July would be fine.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I don't know either.
We have a motion for July 21st.
Do we have a second?
Any discussion?
All in favor of that motion signify by saying Aye.
Motion carries.
Thank you, Morris.
All right.
Going back to public hearings set for second readings, items 2 through 14.
Is there anyone in the public that intends to testify on any item, 2 through 14?
If you're here to speak on any item 2 through 14, please stand and raise your hand to be sworn in.
Okay.
>>THE CLERK: Do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
>>> Yes.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, just for the record I would ask at this time that all written communications relative to today's public hearings that have been available to the public at council's office be received and filed into the record prior to official action.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to receive and file.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>MARTIN SHELBY: And one more thing.
Just a reminder to council members if any council members had verbal communication with the petitioners, their representatives or any members of the public in connection with any of the petitions that are going to be heard today that that member, council member, should disclose the following: The identity of the person, group or entity with whom the verbal communication occurred, and the substance of that verbal communication.
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item number 2 we need a motion to open.
>> Move to open number 2.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item 2 this.
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. White, would you take number 2, please.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to adopt the following ordinance on second reading, an ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing, and abandoning certain public right-of-way comprising all that 50 foot portion of 35th street south of the intersection with 2nd Avenue all that portion of 2nd Avenue West of 37th street but not to include the intersection of 35th street, the easterly 10 by 50 foot portion of 36th street south of 2nd Avenue and all that 10 foot alley in block 11 south of 2nd Avenue bound by 35th street on the west and 36th street on the east in the second revision east bay park, a subdivision in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida the same being more fully described in section 2 hereof reserving certain easements and conditions, providing an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
Further discussion on the motion?
Vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miller and Alvarez absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 3.
Need a motion to open.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item number 3?
>> Motion to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>ROSE FERLITA: I move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading: An ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing and abandoning a certain right-of-way all that alleyway lying south of Caracas street north of Ellicott street east of 29th street and west of 30th street, in block 16 of Belmont Heights, a subdivision located in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County Florida the same being more fully described in section 2 hereof providing an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
Any discussion on the motion?
Please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miller and Alvarez being absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item number 4.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll need to abstain from this.
An opponent of this petition is a client of our law firm.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion to open item number 4.
>> Second.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Moved 2 through 14 so they are all open.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Make a motion to open.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Can we open them all?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We are getting going here.
Item 4.
We have a motion and second to open.
(Motion carried)
Anyone in the public like to speak on item 4?
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading.
Move an order independent -- ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing, and abandoning a certain right-of-way known as all that alleyway Campbell street located east of north Central Avenue south of east Frances Avenue and north of east Park Avenue in historic Tampa Heights district, a subdivision located in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida the same being more fully described in section 2 hereof providing an effective date.
>> Second.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I encourage my colleagues to vote against this because it's in a historic district, and we said that alleys are part of the tradition form of our historic districts, allowing people to have their parking in the rear, and use the alleys for access.
And I feel like this vacation would not be a positive move, and our staff, our historic staff recommended against it.
So I would vote no and I encourage you all to vote no.
>>ROSE FERLITA: As opposing side based on the pictures that we saw, that may be the case in most cases but everything is obviously specific to the particular petition.
And in this one I have to respectfully disagree with Ms. Saul-Sena.
I think it would be a public benefit to close it.
So I will support it.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any further discussion on the motion?
All in favor of the motion please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: 3 to 1.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Under our rules of procedure this will be carried over until next Thursday.
Hopefully we'll have more council members at that time.
>>THE CLERK: Mr. Dingfelder abstained.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Clerk, have we opened everything else?
Do I need to keep moving to open all of these?
>>THE CLERK: Right now you have not.
You have not opened 5.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I would move.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second to open items 5 through 14.
(Motion carried)
All items are now open.
Item 5.
Is there any member of the public that would like to speak on item 5?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>ROSE FERLITA: Move to adopt the following ordinance after second reading.
An ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing and abandoning a certain right-of-way all that portion of 56th street lying south of Adamo Drive SR-60 and which dead-ends at the Crosstown expressway right-of-way in Tampa spring estates and Thomas J. Robert's six mile creek a subdivision located in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County Florida the same being more fully described in section 2 hereof providing an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
Discussion on the motion?
Please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Alvarez and Miller being absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
Item number 6.
Petitioner here on item number 6?
>> I reside at 1818 west hills Avenue in Tampa.
Jerry till ton.
We just ask for a continuance to give us more time to meet with the neighborhood association, which we have scheduled for next week.
Thank you very much.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: When would you like a continuance to?
>>> Probably in two weeks.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We should have a full council back in two weeks.
Your meeting is next week?
>>> Meeting scheduled for next week.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item number 6?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Move to continue for two weeks.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second to continue for two weeks.
9:30.
Thank you.
Item number 7.
Is there anyone in the public that would like to be speak on item number 7?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading: An ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida approving a second amendment to a development order rendered pursuant to chapter 380, Florida statutes, for the university center research and development park, DRI number 161, providing an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
Discussion on the motion?
Vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miller and Alvarez being absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item number 8.
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item number 8?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading: An ordinance approving an historic preservation property tax exemption application relative to the restoration, renovation or rehabilitation of certain property located by the Florida Department of Transportation at 1920 east 15th Avenue, Tampa, Florida in the 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.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion an second on item number 8.
Discussion on the motion?
Please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried, Miller and Alvarez being absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item number 9.
Anyone in the audience like to speak on item 9?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading: Move an ordinance making lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol regardless of alcoholic content, beer, wine and liquor 4(COP-R), for consumption on premises only in connection with a restaurant business establishment on that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 7720 west Courtney Campbell causeway, Tampa, Florida as more particularly described in section 2 hereof waiving certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
Any discussion on the motion?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to share with council members that Courtney Campbell causeway has been officially named a scenic corridor, which we have been working on for a number of years, and this will mean that it gets additional designation on maps as a scenic corridor, and money that's available for beautification.
So this will be on an official scenic corridor.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Congratulations.
Further discussion on item 9?
Seeing none please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried, Miller and Alvarez being absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 10. Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item 10?
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading: An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 305 north Armenia Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from zoning district classifications RM-16 residential multifamily to PD office providing an effective date.
>> Second.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
Further discussion on item 10?
Please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried, Miller and Alvarez being absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 11.
Is there anyone in the puns audience that would like to be speak on item 11?
>> Move to close.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>ROSE FERLITA: Move to adopt after second reading an ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 7610 South Westshore Boulevard in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from zoning district classifications IH industrial heavy IG industrial general to RS-50 residential single family providing an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
Further discussion on the motion?
Please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miller and Alvarez being absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item number 12.
Is anyone in the audience that would like to speak on item 12?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading.
An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 5123 north 44th street in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from zoning district classifications RS-50 residential single family to PD single family detached dwellings, providing an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and a second.
Discussion on the motion?
Please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miller and Alvarez being absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item number 13.
Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on item number 13?
>> Motion to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 3334 West Heiter Street in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from zoning district classifications PD, four unit single-family detached, to PD, four units single family semi detached, providing an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
Any discussion on the motion?
Please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried, Miller and Alvarez being absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 14. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to be speak on item number 14?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 5918 south sixth street in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from zoning district classifications RS-60 residential single family to PD residential single family detached dwellings, providing an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second on item 14.
Any further discussion on it?
If none, please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miller and Alvarez being absent.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, just after the fact discussion on 14.
I have noticed in the last year or so, there's quite a bit of rezoning activity in this little area down by MacDill Air Force Base, this 6th street, 5th street, and we have got one coming that's actually we are scheduling it.
And I would just like to make a motion that a month from now the zoning department report back to us and see if they might want to look at a small area wide rezoning for this particular thing, because it would seem to be more efficient that perhaps we look at it a little globally instead of all these PDs coming in.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion.
>> July 28th would be fine.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: All right.
We have a motion.
Do we have a second?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to second it for purposes of discussion.
As aware as you are as, as all council, the workload of our staff.
And I just wonder, before I ask them to do this, I'd like to hear back from them about what they think would be the best way to proceed, whether it's better in terms of staff time to do an overall area study, or to keep piecemeals it.
I guess I would like a report back in two weeks -- in two weeks from staff.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's what I mean when I have them come back and report to us.
I want them to report to us and say, look at what's going on down there, tell us how many PDs we have had, item us what's a better approach.
Should we just continue to allow the PDs, or should we look at it on an area wide basis, look at it in terms of resources, on July 28th if that's all right with you.
>>> That's all right with me.
I thought you were directing them to go out and do it.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: No, no, no.
It's not South MacDill, it's toward MacDill Air Force Base, in the vicinity of this south 6th street, and then we've got one later on the agenda.
Hold on one second.
South 5th street is item 80.
South 6th street was the one we just did which is item 14.
We have had numerous others.
Along that same area.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
We have a motion and it was seconded.
Ms. Ferlita?
>>ROSE FERLITA: I just have a question, since Ms. Moreda and Mr. Snelling are here.
Thom.
You heard Mr. Dingfelder's request.
And Linda's discussion of that subject.
What I'm liking to know, what would you be comfortable in coming back and discussing something?
We were talking --.
>>THOM SNELLING: I apologize, I did not hear.
I was in between.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Suggesting what you or your staff do, and then I would like to make a comment.
Not a comment but I would like to know what would make it easier for you.
Because we continue to inundate you with stuff.
So let's see how we work this out in terms of discussion.
John.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: This little area down by the Dale Mabry gate from MacDill, 5th street, 6th street, a strange little cluster with a lot of bizarre lots and a lot of rezoning history.
South 5th street, south 6th street, has been the subject of quite a few PDs over the last year or two.
There's one we just approved.
There's another one than we're scheduling for later in the summer.
And I've seen them happening over the last year or two.
My question was, for you guys to at least take a look at the history of this little four or five-block area and see if we might be better served instead of continuing to do it PD, PD, or changing the RS-60 to the RS-50, which is what some of these people have been doing, on a piecemeal basis that we might look at it more globally in terms of those five or six blocks.
The only thing I ask is that you all at least look at that and get back to us on July 28th to give us a report, and a region what is best for that neighborhood, and for city staff as well.
You know, because Linda expressed some concerns in terms of city staff time, is it better to look at this on a global basis or is it better from a staff perspective to go ahead and process the PDs?
I don't expect to have any answers today.
>>ROSE FERLITA: And Mr. Snelling, the reason I asked him to repeat that, I would like to add something if he would are considerate of having me add something to that discussion, John.
Address what he's talking about, because that's definitely a viable issue.
But at the same time, if you and your staff have some expectation of taking different approaches in the near future, would you like to take this opportunity now to talk about not just that area, all these issues that we continue to talk to you about, area wide rezoning, overlay district, et cetera.
I think we probably are at the point where we need to have a pretty comprehensive discussion about what we continue to ask you to do and what would be the most efficient way to address it.
And that's a big answer that you're probably going to have to give us.
So there you go, Thom.
>>THOM SNELLING: Doing a small area wide study for a four or five block area and being authorize-o right now, I honestly don't -- this morning you met Heather.
She just started.
In two weeks another planner starts.
It's going to be some time before they get up to speed taking some of the workload off of Cathy and Gloria.
Some of the staff members will be freed up.
Worry going to take a very large comprehensive look, extensive look, beginning September 1st on everything in the city in terms of -- or chapter 27 in terms of what areas are rezoned, how it works together.
That study will not really include any specific site specific areas in terms of their appropriateness of the type of zoning that they have, and looking at having that kind of analysis take place, with that study.
That's just to look at the text amendments of the code and trying to adopt things that address character city-wide, that address aesthetic design city-wide.
Now looking at a specific area and trying to determine what is best for that, that's a lot of work, you know.
In looking at and coming back with an honest analysis, with a recommendation that we are either going to down-zone or change the zoning or change the land use or do something like that, that's a pretty extensive work.
And coming back in six weeks, I don't have the resources to do that.
I'll be honest with you, with that kind of intensity.
If that's what you're asking.
If you're asking for analysis and a look and a recommendation that comes back and says, this is the kind of zoning that should be -- this is the kind of land use this should be, this is that.
If you're asking for us to look at that to see if it merits an investigation in more depth, I can certainly come back with a recommendation one way or another, taking a cursory review to see.
Some of that will be running the numbers game, how many rezonings issues, in a geographic area, what the importance is and things like that.
And the amount of time that we spent on just those isolated little PDs.
I can come back with a time study and say to do that kind of thing, you know, given my staff resources and everything I can accomplish that in X time.
And I can bring that back on July 28th.
But an answer to what I think should be there or what the city's best interest would be in our opinion, I couldn't do that.
Not by July 20th.
But I could bring back an answer as to how long it should take.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Should I clarify my request?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: It's your request.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's exactly what I was hoping to get, was not that anything would be done in six weeks.
Just that you would come back and six weeks and say we've looked at this, this is how many PDs have been processed, this is how many RS-60s or RS-50s have been processed.
This is a little pod of an area that we probably need to look at down the road.
Or, you know, come back six weeks from now and say, Mr. Dingfelder, it's not a big deal, let's just keep doing it the way we're doing it.
That's all I'm asking for.
>>THOM SNELLING: I can do that in six weeks.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Again let me clarify.
John, it was not to discount the importance of what you're saying but I know Mr. Snelling and his staff is pretty strapped for time so I didn't want it to be something that would be additionally cumbersome, because I think you have an attitude that we need to do something city-wide, because Mr. Dingfelder is going to be concerned about South Tampa and north Tampa, and I think you are working on it.
But it is no secret that you are just totally overwhelmed with projects.
Way was trying to do was in the event you have something coming our way, and what he's suggesting could be part of that project presentation, that maybe we could minimize at least a little bit the efforts that your staff has to go through.
>>THOM SNELLING: What we'll probably take advantage of as part of that same report is bring something back, and I think I may have anecdotally talked with each of you, passing each other in the hall.
What our intentions is, once staff is back up, and we are very close to becoming there, is how we identify what our work program is going to be, and the types of things that we are going to be addressing.
At that time, it may be appropriate to bring something back as part of this response to say, okay, here's what we are going to do for chapter 27, and here's the depth and breadth of the analysis we are going to do here in chapter 3, and vendors, and on and on and on, all those things, and how that all fits together and lays out.
That could be part of that answer as well.
Looking at a smaller geographic area to see if it does indeed merit additional looking, you know, we can certainly do that.
But I would like the advantage of doing that.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Colleagues, let's remember this wonderful department come budget time.
Secondly, I don't know if you and Ms. Moreda are going to be here later so I would like to take this opportunity.
Gloria Moreda in her humble, modest way has e-mailed everybody but maybe the president of the United States on this e-mail, and she's making a point to let us know that there's some congratulations in order for Cathy Coyle, and my friend Shaun James, and also welcome Heather that you just referenced.
But unless I have been misinformed I believe in that whole mix of organizational promotions that Ms. Moreda got a promotion, too.
>>THOM SNELLING: That's true.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I would like to congratulate her.
Gloria, you're invaluable to this council and we appreciate what you and Mr. Snelling and the rest of the staff do. But for some reason you ignored honoring yourself.
So thank you and congratulations.
Yeah, what can you say?
(Applause)
>>THOM SNELLING: Well --.
>>ROSE FERLITA: And I do want to tell you she is a wonderful addition to our sign committee.
Because whatever Gloria says, we listen to because she knows more stuff than we're ever going to learn.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion on the floor and we have a second on the motion.
Any further discussion on that?
All in favor signify by saying Aye.
Thank you, Thom.
Didn't mean to cut anybody off but we are still trying to move along here.
Item number 15 is an appeal hearing.
We have a motion to open.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 15 is open.
I believe we have to swear in the witnesses for that.
If there's anybody anyone in the public that intends to speak on the appeal hearing -- actually, on any public hearings 15 through 18, please now stand and be sworn in.
>>THE CLERK: Do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 15.
>>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
The petition before you is a special use 1 for extended family residence.
They are asking for a number of waivers to allow for the extended family residence to locate in a nonconforming structure to allow an addition to a nonconforming structure, reducing setbacks from the side setback 7 feet to 2.1 feet and reducing the rear setback from 20 to 5 feet.
They are also asking for an addition, square footage for the extended family residence from the 600 limited in the code to 1347 square feet in area.
The property is located at 3614 west Lykes Avenue, and the occupant of the proposed unit is Mr. and Mrs. David Boyd, the parents of Betsy Leslie, the property owner.
They are proposing to do an addition to the existing accessories structure to a total of 1600 square feet.
There is going to be additional parking area in that structure.
Staff has looked at the petition, has no objection to the site plan.
It is -- I do want to point out that the lot is an oversized lot for the zoning district.
It's 100 by 135, which is 80% larger than normal in this district, RS-75.
And even with the addition, the floor area ratio of the property is going to have a .25 -- excuse me, .27 FAR.
Staff has no objection with this proposal.
>> Betsy Wesley -- Leslie.
This is my husband John Leslie.
We are property owners. This gentleman in the wheelchair is my father David Boyd who will be residing in the residence, as well as my mother.
I concur with the approval.
And if you have any questions I would be happy to answer them.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Betsy, is your father Mr. Boyd who fixed all the clocks?
>>> That's correct, sir, the one and only.
Has been for over 50 years.
>>KEVIN WHITE: A little advertisement.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question.
Madam Chairman?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
Mr. Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thanks.
I think I saw where there was notice to the neighborhood association.
Any comments from the neighborhood association?
Or did you talk to anybody?
>>> No, sir.
I did receive about four phone calls.
All of them were from private residences.
And all of them simply wanted -- didn't understand the language in the letter.
So I explained what we were doing.
And they all were fine with what was happening.
I did not receive any phone calls from the neighborhood association itself.
>> And it's probably a silly question, since it's a wheelchair residence, but it's just going to be a one-story addition?
>>> Yes, sir. The reason we are requesting additional square footage is because by the time you get furniture in a 600 square foot facility, my father's wheelchair, in conjunction with walls, wall placement and furniture, he does not have much room to negotiate.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
Is there anyone in the audience that would care to speak on this?
Is there a motion to close?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Motion of staff before we close.
Ms. Moreda?
I'm not sure, you might have stated this earlier.
I recognize on a formal basis, you can't approve this because it's over the limit of your comfort level.
But do you have any comments, additional comments or do you have any strong objections to this?
>>GLORIA MOREDA: No, we don't have any objections to it.
Even with, as I was saying the floor area ratio of the development of the property, it's an oversize lot, we have no objection with the increased size for the accessory building.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's been a motion.
Is there a second to close?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: All in favor of closing the public hearing say Aye.
Ms. Ferlita?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Thanks, Madam Chairman.
Move an ordinance approving special use permit S-1 on appeal from a decision of zoning administrator for location expansion of an extended family residence at 3614 west Lykes Avenue in an RS-75 residential single family zoning district in the city of Tampa, Florida more particularly described in section 1 allowing the extended family residence to be located in an existing nonconforming structure, reduce the side setback from 7 feet to 2.1 feet and reducing the rear setback from 20 feet to 5 feet to allow an addition to said nonconforming structure, waiving the size limitation to an extended family residence to allow for increase from 600 if square choir square feet to 3740 square feet providing an effective date.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's been a motion and second.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: All in favor of that signify by saying Aye.
Motion carries.
Thank you.
Item number 16.
We need to open this item and then continue it to July 21st.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to open.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public who would like to speak on item number 16?
>>> Sue Lyon: These are the two that I was talking about.
It's confusing the way it's written.
And I think maybe before we do any hearings on any of these, we should get the report back from Roy LaMotte about the transportation.
We got a second hearing because the first one was postponed.
And the first one is in June.
And we are not going to get that study back.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Well, we should hopefully have more information by then.
>>> But we'll have the first hearing June.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I don't think so.
These two items are confusing.
I'm just doing what it says to do here on our agenda.
>>> That's what I was talking about when I was talking.
And I was confused as to where it was.
But that's the part that I think we ought to get more information on that before we hear it.
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Sue.
Morris.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: This is in conjunction with an area wide zoning.
Under state law we are mandated to notice the first and second hearings on these plan amendments and on certain area wide rezonings.
Because you all continued the first public hearing till the 23rd we have to now continue the second public hearing that was also advertised so it will fall two weeks at a minimum after the first one.
And since you have your July holiday and the first meeting you have after the July holiday is July 21st.
That's why it's being continue to that day.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any discussion on the motion?
Mr. Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other thing I wanted to point out to Ms. Lyons was the -- Sue, the other thing I wanted to point out was the fact that I believe that after we -- even if we did this, we are just going to transmit these -- no?
Would we approve these right away?
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Legal department.
Item 16 and 17 are small scale plan amendments.
So they are now transmitted to DCA prior to adoption. The reason item 16 was continued, the Planning Commission continued its hearing to June 13th.
So we had to continue the City Council hearings to accommodate the Planning Commission's schedule.
And item 17, the first public hearing was continued at the petitioner's request.
>> So if in effect these are the final adoption hearings?
There's no Tallahassee involved?
>>> On July 21st, that's correct.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Because we'll not get those traffic studies then back by July 21st.
So I don't want any misinformation out there.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I ask a question?
Thank you.
Because these are general plan amendments, will transportation be able to provide us meaningful feedback on this?
I guess this is a staff question.
In other words, should we wait until we get the report back from transportation?
Or because these are sort of general, can they really give us specific feedback under the terms of the transportation impact?
>>> Rose Petrucha, Planning Commission staff.
As small scale amendments we receive the comments from the city staff regarding these proposed amendments and they are part of those reports, so they will be in the reports when they are sent to or transmitted to you.
But because they are being continued, you do not have those reports yet.
But the transportation departments comments are incorporated as part of these reports.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Rose, aren't these less than an acre each?
>>> They have to be less than ten acres to be considered part of the small scale amendments.
>>.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Specifically I thought these were actually small.
>>> Commerce street is less than an acre.
And plan amendment 05-05 I believe is about three acres in size.
So they are small scale in nature.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any further questions?
All right.
We have a motion and second to continue item number 16 to July 21st.
All in favor of the motion signify by saying Aye.
Motion carries.
Item number 17.
Anyone in the public that would like to speak on item number 17?
We need a motion to open.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to open it.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Need a motion to continue to July --.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
>> Second.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 17 is continued as well.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: 9:30 a.m. July 21st.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 18.
Have we opened 18?
We need to open 18.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item number 18?
Seeing no one, we have a motion to close?
>> Motion to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: This is an ordinance for second reading.
Mr. Dingfelder, will you take this, please?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive plan, future land use element, future land use map for the property located in the general vicinity south of Hillsborough Avenue West of Habana street, north of haya street, from residential 10 to residential 35, providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for severability, providing an effective date.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
Do we have any discussion?
If none, please vote and record.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Alvarez and Miller being absent.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: All right.
Next item on the agenda are public hearings 19 through 21.
>> Move to open.
>> Motion to open 19 through 21.
Second?
(Motion carried)
The items are now open.
Item number 19.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I'd like to ask for those three items the people that intend to speak be sworn.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Number 19 through 21.
If there's anyone in the audience to testify on these items please stand and be sworn.
(Oath administered by Clerk)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 19 is open.
>>THOM SNELLING: This is a request to vacate an alley.
Vacate an east-west alley between Ohio and Woodlawn avenues from Myrtle to popular.
-- Poplar.
Staff has no objections
If the request for utility easement is reserved.
It right here.
This is Ohio.
This is Woodlawn.
The condition of what the alley looks like right now.
This is the petitioner here, where his fence is.
You see the fence there.
Right now, there are no gates.
It's being mowed by the residents.
This fence and other fences are blocking it.
It also fairly overgrown.
As opposed to this alleyway, looking across the street, this alley is paved, it's used, some kind of pickup is apparently going on, with trash.
This is being used by solid waste.
Then the opposite direction.
You will see there's some kind of -- it's gas?
And there's more fencing there.
It's approximately 6100 square feet.
And the reason, there are fence that is exist in that alley.
And remembering what we had done last week on some of the alley discussions about, you know, if there was any plan in these areas, anything in the five-year window of looking at this stuff, there is not.
There is no long-range analysis of what's going to happen in this area.
I believe as we continue to look at more and more of the historic districts, that kind of discussion will take place but in this area there is nothing planned within the next five-year capital improvement program.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
>>THOM SNELLING: And Mr. Santiago has completed the ordinance if you so desire.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone in the public that would like to be speak on item 19?
Come on up.
My name is Joyce Runfola, west Woodlawn Avenue.
I am the property owner.
I face the petitioner's rear lot.
I also have pictures.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Are you in favor?
>>> I pose this being vacated.
One reason I oppose it is for three years I have been opposing this alley and I have been trying to open it.
As demonstrated by the picture.
And maybe I can use this thing.
Am I able to or not?
Oh, I set it up?
Okay.
Up here is Ohio.
Here is Woodlawn.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can you tell us where you are and where the petitioner is?
>>> I live right here.
Here is the petitioner.
And there is their fence that jumps out into the clear maintained accessible alley.
I have been in communication and done my reports through the zoning process for the fence to be removed so that there can be through access in the alley.
There's mature trees in the area.
People come in.
They clip their trees.
It's great to bring a truck back in there.
And as you can see, people maintain the alley.
It's not a matter of we're dumping trees back there.
Also, and I have more pictures.
Let me just get things in order here.
This is basically what you saw.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: The petitioner is the one that has the fence down there, right?
Three lots in?
>>> The petition sister one whose fence is in the alley.
And actually what's going on now, they are petitioning to vacate the alley because, after three years of dealing with our code enforcement, which we all know is flawed, after three years, code enforcement has put them through hearings.
They are now being fined $40 a day, and they have been since mid April.
They are trying to avoid the fines accruing continually.
The case number, I do have it here somewhere.
I have it for you, believe me.
Am I limited by three minutes?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes.
Ma'am, just to point out, you live on the other side of the fence, right?
>>> Correct.
I live on the other side of the fence.
And I oppose it, not only is it in the alley five feet, but it's in the alley seven feet.
And I have a reported with a signed and sealed survey, the exact location.
This picture also shows exactly how much it juts out.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Ma'am, your time is up but I think we have a couple of questions.
Mr. Dingfelder, do you have a question?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, ma'am.
Could you put that on the overhead?
>>> This one?
>> Yes.
>>> Oh, it's upside down.
Now, this would be looking at Myrtle street.
This is how far their fence comes out.
This gate is located in the ground exactly where the survey rod is pounded into the ground.
And their fence juts out 7 feet and then there's three feet. This area right here is my garage which is well off the property line.
>> How long have you been in your home?
>>> I have been in my home four years this coming June, I've been in my home.
>> And when you were there, was that fence not there, when you first moved in?
>>> When I first moved in, the fence was a chain link fence.
And I reported several code violations.
And so they put up the wood fence.
And I also have an example of what the backyard looks like, and why I reported this property.
This was taken a few weeks ago.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Oh, my God.
>>> And I refer to it as my neighbor's backyard salvage yard.
And at any point in time, this is why they are applying.
They also had a commercial -- oh, looked like the back end of a tractor trailer truck set on the ground that they were using for storage.
And I've been dealing with code enforcement and I've been doing everything right.
And finally when code enforcement finally kicked in, had the hearings, and didn't let 'em go, because a lot happened.
I mean, it was pretty unforgivable.
They finally are getting fined now.
And now they are saying, well, let's vacate the alley.
And the way I understand it after talking to Rolando Santiago, he said the alleys are vacated to serve people, when they no longer are being used.
Well, I think the only reason this petitioner is trying to get this alley vacated is because they don't want to a crew $40 a day for many more years.
And I think that enough of the people maintain the alley, they use them, they walk their dogs through them, they come through, you see a pickup truck go through so that people can take their yard debris out that way, without driving on their lawns and stuff.
I use the alley.
The other thing I wanted to mention --.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Ma'am, your time is up.
Mr. Dingfelder had a specific question for you.
So unless anyone else has any other questions of you, we need to hear from the petitioner.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And this confirms that a picture speaks a thousand words.
Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, ma'am.
>>> Can I leave pictures with you to look at?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes, you may.
>>> Thank you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Is petitioner here?
Come on up.
I'm sorry, I should have called you on first.
>>> I would like to know how she invaded my private property.
>> Step up to the podium.
>>> She's obviously intruded on my property which I never gave her per permission.
My name is Dana Anderson.
I live at west Ohio Avenue.
Yes, the property looks like that, because I had everything in a container, and city made me move the container, and so I emptied out the container, put it in my house, whatever I couldn't get in my house, I put into the yard.
Part of that was a shed that they wanted me to tear down.
I tore it down under the process of taking that to the dump right now.
The privacy fence is around there so it doesn't bother her anymore.
But as far as the alley, that's not -- I'm not the only one that's in the alley.
There are other property owners who have their fences.
They have built buildings.
And I have pictures to show this.
They have built buildings.
And there are huge oak trees in the center of the alley.
There are palm trees in the center of the alley.
I have pictures of everybody's place as you walk through the alley.
You know, even on the end that she showed you, the two fences that are before her property jut out into the alley.
You really can't get -- it's not an alley that you can drive through like what she was trying to explain to you.
And like I said, I have pictures that will show you that.
I have been there 32 years.
I have a survey from 1973 that shows that the fence, my chain link fence was already out there in the alley, put up there by -- put there by the -- actually, I don't know who put it up there.
My parents bought the house.
That's how it was when they bought it.
Of course, you know, I inherited the house.
It not only for my benefit, but to vacate the alley, but it's for everyone else's benefit to vacate the alley.
I'm the one that has put up all the expense for doing. This no one else reimbursed me for doing any of it.
She's just got something in for me.
Basically is what it comes down to.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any questions of the petitioner?
>>> I have pictures if you want.
I can walk you through the alley.
I don't know if you can see them over here.
Would it would be better if I can take them up there.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Why don't you pass them real quick.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Ma'am, you need to go back to the podium or take the portable microphone with you.
It would actually be best for you to be at the podium so everyone in the audience can see.
>>> Anyway, like I said, the pictures are pretty much as you walk through the alley, you know, yeah, there are some sections that are nice and clear.
But most of the alley is not clear, besides trees, or brush that's grown up and so forth.
So again, I'm not the only one that's going to benefit, you know, from it.
There are plenty of other property owners, elderly people that have their fences, and garage, and whatever that's into the alley.
Because as I understand it, although I never actually saw the letter, but several of the property owners have told me that in years past they had gotten a letter from the city, and they were under the impression that the city had vacated the alley.
That's when they moved all their fences -- or some of them, moved the fences back into the alley.
In my research I found that did not happen.
The city just basically said that we're not going to maintain the alley.
So that's as far as that goes.
But as far as my own personal yard, I'm in the process of cleaning it up.
I did have to pull things out like I said.
(Bell sounds)
And I am in the process of cleaning it up.
I have a fence around it so she doesn't have to look at it.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: In your eyes it really is not relevant to closure of the alley what's in the backyard right now.
Do you have anything else to add to your presentation?
>>> No, other than, you know, the picture is right there again.
She's only showing you a little small section of the alley.
I'm showing you the whole section of the alley.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
Do you have a question?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question not for petitioner but for staff.
And that is, staff, I believe that several months ago, council requested that when a petition comes up that's initiated because of a code enforcement issue that that be part of the staff's remarks to us, because I think it's germane.
It didn't happen this time but in the future, I don't think we need to make a motion or anything.
I think you can all just include that as part of your report.
I think that's really helpful to council.
>>THOM SNELLING: Just for clarification.
Land Development Coordination.
So anytime there's a code violation on a piece of property that is coming through some type of public hearing process you want to know the history of the code violations?
Or that they are under some citations?
>>> Yes, yes.
Because I think it's, you know, it's part of the information that's helpful to us.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I think actually what she's saying is not the whole history-f there's active, which --.
>>THOM SNELLING: The active.
Okay.
I understand that.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. Saul-Sena, I think this is where you're going and if I'm wrong tell me to mind my own business.
I think what Linda is talking about, Thom, is an example that I can think of very vividly, not too long ago, totally unrelated to this petition, Phil Alessi wanted to do something to his property, and those violations -- code violations were of concern to me and other colleagues.
We talked about that in the process of the petition.
They were remedied.
So that gave us a better level of comfort and approve what Mr. Alessi wanted.
And I don't know if that's specifically what you are talking about.
But -- can I continue?
Or did I interrupt you?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes, go ahead.
>>ROSE FERLITA: So I agree with her on that point, not a whole five year history on code violations that have been outstanding or complied, et cetera.
But in this case, although it is not germane to the actual alley vacation petition, whether it was the business or not the business or how the neighbor got the pictures without having a ladder over the water or something, I really don't care.
My issue is that this is certainly something of concern to me, because whether she intends to clear it up or not clear it up, A, she's got her fence extended into alley footage where she should not be.
That is a violation.
And then whether a neighbor sees or doesn't see all the junk that's in that backyard, that is certainly conducive to a wonderful haven for rodents and those type things.
That's of concern to me.
The third thing that I see is I don't see another neighbor here that's coming in and saying this is a wonderful public purpose, and we support the petitioner in closing it.
And this council has had some difficulties, and I think that Mr. Dingfelder asked one of the departments to come speak to us at some point, right, John?
>> Well, a workshop planned.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Okay.
At the same time, I see, unless maybe I've missed some of her presentation, I see absolutely no public purpose in closing this alley at this point.
If the code violations were remedied, if the wall was brought back, the fence brought back and all of a sudden we had a majority at least of the neighbors who were immediately impacted or affected by this, then maybe I could look at this in a different posture.
But at this point I for the record will not support this petition to vacate because I don't see a public purpose.
And I am not impressed with what the wall is hiding.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone else in the public who has not already spoken on this item that wishes to speak?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Opportunity for rebuttal.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Petitioner?
No, you have already spoken.
So petitioner?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you have any comments you wish to say in closing?
The petitioner.
>>> Again, I'm not the only one that's going to be affected by not closing or closing the alley.
Because there are other property owners who have an extension on out into the alley.
And I guess if you all don't want to close the alley, then it will be up to code enforcement then to cite them so that they can move their things back to their property lines.
I know of at least two people that are elderly people, up in their 80s, that the one of them in the pictures there that has a structure, actual structure out into the alley, that I don't know, it's probably going to hurt them to have to be able to have to move that, go through that expense, to have to move it.
So, I mean, that's something that you can always keep in mind.
I'm not just the only one.
There's other ones, too.
And my fence has been there, you know, over 32 years.
I have asked neighbors that have been there longer than I have.
And they have said it's always been there.
That's my closing statement.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
Do we have a motion to close the public hearing?
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
Discussion on closing the public hearing?
(Motion carried)
Public hearing is now closed.
What is the pleasure of council?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, I'll move to deny.
I think the testimony and the evidence is overwhelming it's not in the public interest.
I think that the petitioner's alleged concern about her neighborhood is not very persuasive.
And with that I'll move to deny.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion to deny.
We have a second.
All in favor of denial signify by saying Aye.
Opposed?
Motion for denial passes unanimously.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I had a discussion with our attorney Mr. Shelby.
And I think that it's not illegal from the point that code can view a backyard so long as they don't trespass.
If they can see it from a ladder or they can see it from some other site like in the alley, then those situations are still violations of code.
So I as a separate motion I would like for code to review the condition of that backyard, and if it's necessary to cite them for code violations then I move they should do that.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: A second?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Also they would have to remove the fence; is that right?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Shelby?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe, in the course of the testimony, I believe this is subject to some code enforcement action.
So I just want to refresh your recollection.
I don't know where it stands.
But from what I understand of the testimony, it is part of action.
Is your request to --.
>>ROSE FERLITA: For code enforcement if there is an outstanding violation, then obviously to follow through in the process.
And if there is not one, then I think that the petitioner should be cited because of the disrepair in the backyard, and in addition to that, whoever has structures that are in the alley, they should be moved, hers or anybody else.
They should be moved because it not a vacated alley.
But I just wanted in the process to make it understood that just because you put a wooden fence around a lot of junk, that doesn't take the junk away.
And I know that lots of times code inspectors can do something without trespassing.
I'm not talking about one of our code enforcement officers going on the property.
But if it's visible from whatever shot they can see it from, then it needs to be cited because many things.
The rodent issue, et cetera.
That's a separate motion.
And Gail, you asked me her address and I'm sure it's on the petition.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and a second.
Any discussion on the motion?
Signify by saying Aye.
Nay?
Motion carries.
Thank you all for coming.
Item number 20.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to open.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
Just to refresh your memory.
This is the northeast corner of Platt and Audubon.
It is the old church building.
And we discussed it, across the street.
Through that discussion you advised the petitioner to go and redesign essentially, because they had the one large mass wrapping around the corner.
They did break up the units, and there is a drive off of Audubon now.
I did advice in the staff report.
You will note there is an objection from transportation.
The driveway that they are showing doesn't meet the corner clearance.
There needs to be a 25 foot separation from the radius to the corner of the driveway.
In discussions just briefly with the petitioner, Joe Taffe the architect has an idea what he could potentially do is essentially backfill and recreate the radius.
This is a very large radius.
He says it's approximately 60 feet.
Could potentially come in and backfill to take it down to what a normal corner is in the intersection.
That is something that has not been reviewed. I did speak with Melanie Calloway about it.
She doesn't necessarily have an objection but she does recommend we go and have Joe Taffee speak to the stormwater design and street design people to make sure that can happen at this corner.
We don't want to cause any flooding issues or any transportation issues.
If council is willing to do that particular revision, I would ask for two weeks for him to revise the plan graphically and work with those two design engineers to make sure it functions.
The second objection on page 2 is from solid waste.
Given the configuration now with the buildings broken up they can actually have garage pickup and the dumpster can be eliminated which actually would hopefully make this site a little cleaner because potentially dumpsters create debris.
So with those two corrections which I would suggest probably two weeks for them to be able to do that, staff's objections would be removed.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Can we do first reading now?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: No.
It would be on this particular plan and thon plan there are objections to.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We could set it for two weeks to come back?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: It would be a continuance.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: So at this point you are asking for a straight continuance.
>>> Yes.
But I do believe the property owner Mr. Scaglione is here as well and he does have some objections to register.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question of staff.
Ms. Coyle, refresh my memory.
It's showing ten units now.
Was it ten units before?
>>> Correct.
>> And second, I see how they could go in straight off the street rate now and get to that dumpster.
I'm a little curious -- and I guess solid waste staff is not necessarily here -- but I'm a little curious how they would access those units, 1, 2, 3 and 4.
>>> The way Shanda Way described it to me, with solid waste, the way that she had described it to me is that the truck comes in, for straight approach, and backs out.
They can go two different ways.
They can go this way, back up and leave.
>> So they can make that turn?
>>> Yes.
They can make that radius.
>> Okay.
As long as they are comfortable with it.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Do we have a Planning Commission report on this?
>>CATHY COYLE: I do not believe they have registered an objection.
I think they found it consistent because of the density.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: All right.
Petitioner.
>>ANDREA ZELMAN: Fowler White, 501 East Kennedy.
We would like to go forward and make our presentation here, and hear from the neighbors as well, hear from council.
And the reason why is, under current code, we can develop nine units, without rezoning.
And one of the issues that was brought up last time was whether the density was too much or too little.
We'd like to know today if we can go forward with ten units, in which case we would be glad to come back in two weeks with a revised site plan. If the answer is you all are not supportive of ten units, we would rather know that today, and just with -- just withdraw and go forward under current zoning.
And I don't say that as a threat.
I'm just trying to make clear we kind of need an answer to that today and also an answer to whether this improved design is what you were looking for.
So if we could, what we would like to do is go forward with our presentation, let the opposition speak, take the temperature of council and then come back in two weeks with the two changes that Cathy talked about to which we have no problem.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Why don't you just hold for rebuttal and let's hear what the concerns are right now.
And then we'll go from there.
>>ANDREA ZELMAN: Did you want Joe to walk you through his gnaw design as well?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Not yet.
If it is a density issue, then you may not need to do it.
Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on this item?
Please go ahead and come up.
>>> My name is Anthony Leftware, 302 south Audubon.
I don't support this project of the rezoning because of the density issue.
What they did across the street from where I live on 302 south Audubon is they put in I think too many units, and what's happening is there's already an overflow parking problem.
They have parking up and down the street on Audubon and Platt.
And I think if we go forward with this project for ten units, it's even going to be worse for all the neighborhood.
And it just too bad out there.
There's just a lot of parking on the street as now in South Tampa.
And the density is just too high for the area.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: You understand if they don't get ten they can put in nine and have POLKA dots.
>> Sure.
Across the street, I live at 302 so it's across the street, like 307.
And the parking is just -- it's brutal.
There's all the way up and down Platt and Audubon.
So I do not support it.
>>> Andy Joe Scaglione.
On 5/12/05, just to refresh everybody's memory the issue was density.
I understand the neighborhood has gone multifamily.
I don't have a problem with the multifamily.
What I have a problem with is a developer trying to get one or two extra units for profit motive and not have a good development, that I have to live with, born and raised here, for the next 20 years.
Okay.
It was instructed -- I read 57 pages of the transcription.
But every member of council had a problem, had an issue with the density.
They were told to get back with me.
I never got a phone call from petitioner, the owner out of New York.
I wrote the owner out of New York, never got a response.
And that doesn't surprise me based on, Ms. Saul-Sena, one of the things you asked about, this has been a code enforcement issue, has gone to the board and is apparently $100 a day in fine just to give you a flavor of what I'm dealing with. Again I don't have a problem with nine units. The difference between nine units and ten units means more guest parking, let more guest parking.
I don't have people parking up and down the street.
And we're finding more and more with these multifamily projects everyone wants to get those one or two extra units, and the difference between having a good project or bad project.
I strongly oppose this.
I don't have a problem with the nine units.
Don't have a problem with the design.
I'm not an architect.
I don't want to tell them how to do a good building.
I have a problem with the density being that one extra unit and that's the reason they are here doing a PD.
Thank you very much.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
Anyone else in the audience like to speak on this item?
Petitioner?
You heard the staff concerns.
You have also heard the concerns of the neighborhood.
>>ANDREA ZELMAN: Mr. Scaglione is absolutely right on one account, and the reason we are here is for the extra unit.
Again we can build under current zoning nine units and it does make a financial difference to our client to go to ten.
We also believe there's no competent, substantial evidence in the record that there is a density problem going from nine units to ten.
Let's go back right now, what's on the property is an abandoned church and school with no parking whatsoever.
I think going from that to ten homes has to be a reduction, in density reduction in traffic from what the neighborhood had been dealing with when the church and school were open.
Neither your staff nor the Planning Commission staff had any objection to the density.
Again, even under the comprehensive plan, theoretically, 12 units would have been consistent with if plan.
You all know that case law is clear that the testimony of neighbors can be considered competent substantial evidence but it has to be based in fact.
It can't be conclusiary.
I think what you are hearing today is conclusiary testimony that one extra unit is going to bring, for example, I think they said, four or five extra cars.
I don't know where that number is coming from.
Remember, each of these units has a two-car garage, and in addition there's four guest parking spaces being built.
Also in your quasi-judicial capacity you have to determine how much weight to give to any one person's testimony.
And in that regard I would like you to take into account the fact that Mr. Scaglione, who talked about my client's financial interest, doesn't actually live in the neighborhood.
His homestead property is -- and I don't bring this up as an attack on him.
Again I think you have to look at the weight that you are going to give to his testimony.
He's involved with a corporation, Para Investment Properties, which owns the property across the street which includes an apartment building, as well as I think more than ten properties throughout Tampa, and I did bring the records from the property appraiser and the tax collector on this if you would like me to submit them.
Again I am not trying to discredit him, but I do think that the testimony of a real estate investor should be looked at differently by this council than the testimony of a resident in the neighborhood, particularly when you're talking about issues like how it impacts the people in the neighborhood.
Mr. Scaglione said, you know, -- Joe talked, and I talked to him for about a half hour of a the hearing the other night, we went round and round and round and I'm I told him just what I'm telling you.
We do want to build ten.
I don't know what more there was to say and that's why I didn't talk to him again.
You know, again, we just don't think there's any competent, substantial evidence in the record to suggest that ten is a problem, but nine isn't.
So for all those reasons, we do request that you approve this.
And I did want to show you the design that Joe came up with.
He did respond to your comments and questions, particularly a number of the council members made the suggestion that he break the buildings up, which he did.
And I don't think it's true to say that all the council members had a problem with the density.
I have the transcripts here.
And some of you said you didn't have a problem with density, you had a problem with design, some said you had a problem with density, some said you had a problem with both.
But let me say one thing, if we do build under current code, and again I'm not saying this in a threatening manner but just to explain, if we build nine units under current code, and Joe can explain this to you because he explained to the me better than I can say it, in order to meet all the setback requirements he's going to have to go back to one long building which frankly we don't think is going to look at good as what we are proposing today.
You have so much more control with it being a PD, as evidenced by the fact that ware here today with a redesigned project, in response to your comments.
So again for all those reasons, we hope that you will support this.
And I would like Joe to take a minute to show you what he came up with.
Thank you.
>>> Joe Taffee.
Let me show you.
This was the previous building that turned the corner, where we had the buildings all together as one.
All the units.
And revised plan now, as you probably noticed from your black and white copy, we have moved the driveway from the north end of the property, which is here, and split these buildings into two separate buildings, put the driveway here now which is what created that issue with the radius.
But the buildings, there's two separate buildings now.
And unit number 5, which is that kind of heroic building at the corner before, has now -- we have kind of broken it down, so that we came from kind of the tallest piece down to a lower piece, and did a two-story piece right here to break that scale down that you guys were recommending that we do.
So we have definitely, I think, addressed the issue of the other corner and the density.
What I'd like to show you also is the issue with the -- this is the old site plan.
This is the revised site plan.
And the issue with the driveway, you notice here, this is a 60-foot radius at the intersection which typically they are usually more about ten feet.
So our driveway actually from hear to Platt Street is actually 70 feet.
We are 70 feet from Platt Street.
We're only 10 feet bow B from where the radius starts for that very large radius.
But again we are about 70 feet from the corner.
And what we are recommending doing, if staff wants to maintain that 25 fate to the beginning of the radius, that we could just decrease that radius from 60 down to about 45 feet just by moving the curb out, not changing any of the grading or anything.
So we think that would address that issue.
We thought it was pretty important to keep the driveway here so we can keep the architectural issues addressed that you are concerned about.
The other one was the dumpster which we moved here, so that the truck could come straight in and straight out, to use it.
Solid waste issue was the dumpster being at the property line here.
One of the reasons we did that is we were the architects on this project next door that's under construction, and obviously we are concerned about this.
But this is the driveway, and the garage for these units right here, which is why we thought putting thereto really didn't cause imposition on the neighborhood.
It's not like it's somebody's backyard or swimming pool, so that's why we thought it that might be an appropriate place, besides the fact that it made the issue for the truck getting in and out.
So this is probably something that I think could you address one way or the other to either keep the dumpster or go to the pickup or the garage, either way.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question for staff.
Ms. Zelman has stated a couple of times under the RM-16 that they could do nine units.
I don't recall from the last time if that came up or not.
Maybe it did.
But have you evaluated that?
>>> I did not do the calculation, no.
If I had a calculator, I could do it really quickly.
>> Maybe before we close the public hearing maybe if you could glance at that.
And my other question is, under the RM-16, is there any -- right now they are showing four guest spaces, four guest parking spaces.
Under the RM-16, I think they are required two covered spaces per unit.
Are they required to do any guest parking?
>>> No.
What I think did B doing the nine units on the property, it couldn't be one long building because it only allows you to go up eight in one building, three to eight for single family attached.
At some point had its going to break into two.
But what you're going to wind up with potentially is nine driveways onto Platt and Audubon as opposed to an internal drive.
>> With garages, potentially in the front as opposed to the rear?
>>> Right.
And you probably would get your two guest spaces per unit in front.
But the entire front view of the entire property is going to be concrete.
And that's the reality of what's going to happen if it gets built under the design standards that we've today.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So, Mr. Dingfelder, downtown want us to close the public hearing?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would still like to hear --.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: While she's doing that calculation I'll put in my two cents, which is, I think all of council finds so troubling in this area are the number of multifamily units that are nothing but paving in front.
And what I think is very handsome in this design is the fact that we have buildings in front, and the parking is all hidden from view, and it is two units, two spaces per unit, and it's not using an alley.
It's using an internal capture driveway.
So I'm planning to support this based on the staff approvals and the fact that I think that the trade-off is in terms of the neighborhood impact, we have a much more pleasing multifamily product that is going to have fewer cars negatively impacting the neighborhood, and the attractiveness is that you won't have this --.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: It is nine units.
9.1 or 2.
But we round down.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I wanted to make sure I get testimony from staff.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I have a question for Ms. Calloway.
Do you all incur with the petitioner's suggestion?
Would you still have an objection from transportation standpoint?
>>> Melanie Calloway, transportation. I did look at the suggestion but I can't give a definite answer until I am able to talk to our street design and make sure there's no stormwater impacts.
If they redesign that radius, I don't know the reason why the radius is so large, so I would have to research to find out how large it is.
I think that's why they are asking for the continuance so we can look into that.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Ms. Zelman, now are you asking us for a continuance or do you want us to vote up or down on this project today?
>>ANDREA ZELMAN: Well, I think what staff is saying is that we can't do the radius thing without changing the site plan, which means you can't vote on it today, we'd like a vote today, and we'd like to come back with a new site plan in accordance with that vote.
But the procedure, I'm not sure.
I'll let Mr. Shelby figure out how we can.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: If you have want to vote today you have record objections from our staff.
>>ANDREA ZELMAN: Again, what we would be doing would be coming back to you.
We would like to vote on the site plan as improved according to the staff's recommendations.
In other words, we come back with a site plan that removes the dumpster, and I have the label with me today to put the receptacles there but Cathy said we have to actually take the dumpster off, and then also to change the radius issue.
We are willing to do that.
So we would like to know if that site plan would be approved.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: But we don't know if you change the radius issue, when don't know that that will satisfy all of transportation's objections.
Because they have to look at it.
And then there still may be an objection after they look at it.
I think that's way heard.
>>ANDREA ZELMAN: I think Melanie said she could remove her objections but whether from street whether that could be done, and if that would be done the objections would be removed.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Harrison, to follow what you said, I think both sides have a good point.
Mr. Scaglione's concerns are valid.
And what Ms. Zelman is saying about nine versus ten is something that weighs in or how we ultimately end up with this petition.
But if you're counting heads, Mrs. Zelman, I really would like -- I know you probably want an answer now.
But I would like to support the continuance that transportation is asking for, and at that point to kind of convince me even if we have an additional unit there, that it won't irritate the neighbors as much as it might in today's discussion.
So I'm not as comfortable voting today as I would be in two weeks.
I would like to grant the continuance that transportation asked to look at it even further and decide.
Ultimately nine depending on its configuration might be more burdensome for the neighborhood than ten.
But I think those two weeks of continuances for them would certainly help me in terms of a more solid decision on what my position is.
And I just wanted to put that in the record.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just wanted to say, squaring off that corner might provide some traffic calming in terms of I think right now you can kind of whip around that corner, because it's a nice long curve, and if we square it off, it might actually create more of a stop effect or something like that.
So that might be beneficial to the overall condition of the neighborhood.
But, no, I'm good with a couple weeks.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: All right then.
Do we have a motion?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Motion to continue for two weeks.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Any discussion on that motion?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I just want to be clear that Ms. Zelman as the petitioner's representative has no objection.
I see you ascenting by nodding.
Is that correct?
Okay.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Do we need to close the public hearing before we continue it?
Or leave it open and continue?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe considering you did not have a site plan, you still have staff objections, it's going to take additional testimony to remove those objections, I recommend you leave it open.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion to continue for two weeks and a second.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Question of staff.
Staff, will you be able to take a look at this and come back with a recommendation about the increased radius and stormwater?
>>CATHERINE COYLE: I'll speak for Melanie.
I'm sorry.
I'm sure that Joe will get with Melanie and Calvin on street design.
And I ask in your motion that there be a new site plan submitted, at least by the Monday prior, which would be, I think, the 19th.
Is that correct, Gail?
>>THE CLERK: Yes.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: If I could have a completed site plan submitted by Monday, the 19th.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, Mr. Chair, ask the petitioner's representative would say that's acceptable.
If not, we may need more than two weeks.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Ms. Zelman, is two weeks enough for you?
That would be the 20th, not the 19th.
>>ANDREA ZELMAN: Yes.
20th for the site plan.
Would we be able to do it during the daytime?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes.
Daytime hearing.
>> 10:00.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Everybody know what we are doing here?
We have a motion and second.
Further discussion?
All in favor of that motion signify by saying Aye.
Thank you all for come.
We'll rehear this in two weeks.
Item number 21.
>> Julia Cole, legal department.
I have been sworn.
This hearing needs to be opened and continued until July 21st because the first public hearing was continued until June 23rd.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Continue to July 21st?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
>> Second.
>>JULIA COLE: We do need 10 a.m.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
(Motion carried)
Item 23.
We need to receive and file the report from Cynthia Miller.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We still have the memorandum from Santiago Corrada on item 26 to continue to July 28th.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Probably delete Wendy Ceccherelli off that motion since I don't think she's a city employee anymore.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Item 31.
We have a motion to put this on the pending calendar.
Is there any discussion on that?
Sometimes that's not a popular move.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You read my mind.
I'd like to put a date on that.
What's a meeting in August?
How about the 18th?
Or is that our League of Cities?
August 11th.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: August 11th under unfinished business?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, pleas.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: All those in favor of moving this item to August 11th under unfinish business, say Aye.
Motion carries.
Thank you.
Items 33, 34, and 35, we simply need to vote to transmit those to DCA.
We'll move items 33, 34, 35 to vote to transmit to DCA.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: It carries.
All right.
Committee reports.
Public safety.
Ms. Ferlita.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I move resolutions --.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Item 37, due to my little surgery, I didn't have a chance to call TPD.
If I could ask you to call 37 -- continue 37 until tonight, and I can get my question answered on 37 this afternoon.
>>ROSE FERLITA: No problem.
I would like to move then resolutions 36 and 38.
(Motion carried)
>>ROSE FERLITA: And continue item 37 until tonight's meeting.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Rose.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Parks, recreation, culture, Kevin White, vice chair.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move items 39 through 42.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Public Works Committee, Mr. Dingfelder, chair.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Going back to item 42, I just wanted to let me folks down in Ballast Point know we just approved $400,000 in improvements to Ballast Point park, which I know they have been anxiously waiting for a number of years.
As to my items on public works, move to approve items 43 through 47.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Finance Committee, Kevin White, chair.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move items 48 through 50.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Second.
>>KEVIN WHITE: And like to move 51 waiving the 15-day requirement.
On 52 a one-week continuance.
And I'd like to move 53 and 54.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Second.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
Building, zoning, preservation committee, Linda Saul-Sena, chair.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to move resolutions -- we already moved 55 and 56.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We substituted those already.
>> Move 57 through 62.
>> Second.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Number 63.
Move to set an appeal hearing.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Transportation Committee.
Who is third place on that one?
Ms. Saul-Sena.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'll take it.
I'd like to move resolution 64.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Number 65.
Move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida amending sections 25-74-C-1 and 25-74-C-2 in article 1, chapter 25 of the City of Tampa code, the code, amending the definition of approved roadway improvements and approved right-of-way dedications eligible for transportation impact fee credits to include off-site roadway improvements and right-of-way dedications that provide additional traffic capacity if required pursuant to a rezoning approval or agreement with the City of Tampa pertaining to a large scale development located in transportation concurrency exception area providing for repeal of all ordinances of conflict, providing for severability, providing an effective date.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. White, anyone, please move the new business items.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move items 66 through 81.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>THE CLERK: The resolution from this morning.
>>ROSE FERLITA: So moved.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and discussion.
Second discussion?
(Motion carried)
Information reports.
Start on my left.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I just have one item to report.
I went to the Palmetto Beach civic association meeting on Tuesday, and have a particular issue with the Palmetto Beach daycare, which has been a serious concern down there for the past year, and they have been trying to get some resolution with some city staffers, and Wayne Papy before his retirement was working diligently with them.
They have been working since with Ms. Karen Palus and Jack Rodriguez.
I spoke briefly with Ms. Palus this morning before she exited the chambers.
I would like to make a motion that Karen Palus and Jack Rodriguez appear before us in two weeks.
Ms. Palus said two weeks would be fine because there's an interim meeting, meeting with the association sometime between the upcoming week to see if we can get some sort of resolution.
The current daycare is sitting within 1,000 feet of the gasoline storage facility down in Palmetto Beach which is -- does not allow them to get any more federal funding so they have to relocate and move, and they are attempting -- attempting to move to the new park and recreation site there.
And they have gotten grants of funding and things of that nature to help move and refurbish that building and they are coming against some obstacles.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion to ask them to come in two weeks and give us a report.
Second.
Discussion?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Discussion.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Sorry.
Under department heads.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I just would like to ask Mr. White something.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Let's make it unfinished business.
>>ROSE FERLITA: From time to time I have had some constituents in that area talk about that same location, and operation, from the standpoint of audit.
Is there any kind of tracking done about how the moneys are spent on the grants they get, et cetera?
Or is that something of concern to you, Mr. White, as their representative?
>>KEVIN WHITE: I've never been -- that concern has never been brought up to me.
But all I know is as far as funding is concerned, they did receive title 20 funding for years, and that title funding has since dried up from the federal government.
And the great majority of the residents in Palmetto Beach depend on that daycare facility which houses about 60 to 68 children.
And I believe 90% of the daycare workers that work at the establishment actually live in Palmetto Beach residence dents as well.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I'm wondering if you don't have any question if there's some concern about how the financial is shaking out, can we have somebody also check that?
I don't know if that would be Ms. Palus to make sure that funding is used appropriately.
I don't know anything particularly about it.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Don't have any problem with that at all.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Anything else, Mr. White?
>>KEVIN WHITE: No, that's it.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Harrison, as you know, we have done this annually since the last year to give a commendation to the firefighter of the year and the police officer of the year so I would like to make a motion this commendation be presented to corporal Larry McKinnon, he is the officer of the year.
And I would like for him to be honored here at 6:30 at 9:30 a.m.
6/30 at 9:30.
>> I just shared with my colleagues the public arts breakfast.
It's a really exciting program.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Dingfelder?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.
First in regard -- there's a group, a national group, that's called, I think, the league of Latin American citizens, LOLC, and very concerned with bringing the national convention to Tampa in 2008, and we are working with the convention center, and the TDC to facilitate that.
And in light of that, I'd like City Council -- the mayor is already doing this on her stationary but I would like City Council to do a resolution in support of that proposition and see if we can get that group here.
So that's a motion.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll work with Mr. Shelby on preparing that resolution.
And secondly, I'd like council to consider giving commendation to Sue Lyons, I think it was two years of presidency of T.H.A.N., and her many, many years of presidency on Bayshore Beautiful.
And give her a commendation whenever she feels fit to come and accept it.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's it for today.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: And Ms. Miller asked us that we have a commendation for June 30th for the McDonald training center celebrating their 50 years of service to developmentally disabled adults.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: And I don't have anything.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Move to receive and file any documents.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
(Motion carried)
>>THE CLERK: --
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Legal department.
I was told on Monday the ordinance for WZ 05-82 wet zoning petition by Old Hyde Park properties for the property at 1633 was going to be placed.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance repealing ordinance number 2001-266 making lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol regardless of alcoholic content, beer wine liquor, 4(COP-R), for consumption on the premises only in connection with a restaurant business establishment on that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 1633 snow Avenue, Tampa, Florida as more particularly described in section 3, waiving certain restrictions to distance based upon certain findings providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
>> Second.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
Discussion on the motion?
(Motion carried)
If there's nothing else to come before council we'll go to -- yes, ma'am.
>>THE CLERK: I have one request requesting to come before council on June 30th for five minutes to discuss discrimination in the city regarding treatment of contractors by city employees.
He has been advised that if council does not approve that he can always come for three minutes at the end.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: What's the pleasure of council?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: To just let him come at the end of the meeting.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there they're anyone in the public that would like to speak on any item?
Seeing none, then we will stand adjourned until 5:01 p.m.
(Meeting adjourned at 12:07 p.m.)