Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council

Thursday, March 2, 2006

1:30 p.m. session

DISCLAIMER:

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

13:32:00

13:32:02 [Sounding gavel]

13:32:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.

13:32:09 The chair will yield to Ms. Mary Alvarez.

13:32:11 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Madam Chairman, I would like to

13:32:13 present my legislative aide Desiree Valdez to do the

13:32:18 invocation, and please stand for the invocation and

13:32:22 keep standing for the pledge of allegiance.

13:32:27 >>> Desiree Valdez: Thank you.

13:32:31 Good afternoon.

13:32:32 Let us pray.

13:32:38 As I stop to think of the many blessings bestowed on

13:32:41 us I ask us to stop now and remember the family of the

13:32:45 fallen detective Juan Serrano. Our thoughts and

13:32:49 prayers are with you.

13:32:51 To the knowledge to know right from wrong, to take us

13:32:55 through and make decisions not based on bias feelings

13:32:59 of self but decisions for the goodness of others from

13:33:01 the heart.

13:33:02 Lord, gather here now, we ask that you guide this

13:33:05 council through the proceedings that lay before them

13:33:09 where the strength and conviction of understanding and

13:33:12 reason, all encompassed in the duties we have elected

13:33:15 them here to do.

13:33:17 May everyone who enters this chamber be blessed with

13:33:20 integrity, honesty, and patience.

13:33:22 And for those near and far, standing true for all

13:33:25 freedom, may God be with them always.

13:33:28 For this we pray.

13:33:29 Amen.

13:33:32 (Pledge of Allegiance).




13:33:48 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Desiree.

13:33:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.

13:33:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: (No response.)

13:33:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: (No response.)

13:33:53 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.

13:33:54 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.

13:33:54 >>ROSE FERLITA: Here.

13:33:56 >>KEVIN WHITE: Here.

13:33:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.

13:33:58 At this time, the chair will yield to Kevin White.

13:34:09 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you, Madam Chair, colleagues.

13:34:13 It is indeed my pleasure today to honor some of our

13:34:35 firefighters, the Tampa fire department.

13:34:38 I realize Ms. Rose Ferlita is our public safety chair,

13:34:42 but this is something that happened in my district,

13:34:45 and I take special pride and honor to be able to take

13:34:48 this advantage here today knowing captain Mintzer for

13:34:57 a little over four years, met him when I was first

13:34:59 running for this position and met him when he was an

13:35:02 engineer driver, at station 18.

13:35:04 And through my travels, throughout all the fire

13:35:07 departments, during our budget sessions and through




13:35:12 various times of the year, I've tried to keep up with

13:35:17 station 11 and I haven't ridden with this particular

13:35:21 crew, but when I read in the paper the outstanding job

13:35:24 that he and his crew exemplify every day in the City

13:35:27 of Tampa with our firefighters, and one dispatcher in

13:35:31 particular, that did an outstanding job in helping to

13:35:36 go into a burning building and rescue a paralyzed

13:35:41 victim, and total selfless regard to their own safety

13:35:48 and their lives, I thought it was to be commended.

13:35:51 This some something they do on a daily basis.

13:35:56 Selfless acts of heroism that we take for granted, the

13:36:00 men and women of Tampa Fire Rescue do every day

13:36:02 without thought or regard to their own safety.

13:36:06 What I would like to do first of all is introduce

13:36:08 dispatcher Joyce McCallister and present her with the

13:36:13 accommodation from the Tampa City Council, which

13:36:15 reads: Tampa City Council commendation presented to

13:36:19 Joyce McCallister, the Tampa City Council would like

13:36:22 to take this opportunity to commend you for your

13:36:24 efforts which aided the firefighters and the rescue of

13:36:27 the disabled victim from a home which was fully

13:36:29 engulfed in flames on Saturday, February 18, 2006.




13:36:33 Your common disposition and clear telephone

13:36:36 instructions to the victim assured him that assistance

13:36:40 was soon arriving and prevent further tragedy from

13:36:45 occurring and a loss of life.

13:36:47 We humbly extend to you our thanks and appreciation

13:36:50 for your assistance on a job very well done, presented

13:36:54 to you this day from Tampa City Council.

13:36:59 (Applause).

13:37:00 >>> Joyce McCallister: Thank you.

13:37:04 I would like to accept this on behalf of all the third

13:37:06 shift.

13:37:07 It was a team effort.

13:37:08 It took another dispatcher to relay the information to

13:37:11 the responding firefighters, and a third dispatcher to

13:37:15 carry on the remaining work that needed to be done

13:37:17 that night.

13:37:18 Thank you.

13:37:20 (Applause).

13:37:24 >>KEVIN WHITE: And to the three firefighters which

13:37:28 went on this call, as well as jumping into the burning

13:37:32 building, to rescue someone, one of the things that I

13:37:37 guess a lot of people wouldn't know, that I know from




13:37:42 having time on my hands spend ago lot of time at fire

13:37:45 stations, when fire trucks are manned by three people

13:37:49 normally the driver-engineer stays with the truck.

13:37:53 But I think all three went in to rescue this

13:37:56 particular paralyzed victim, which is kind of unheard

13:37:59 of.

13:38:01 But the great acts of heroism here are just beyond

13:38:05 words.

13:38:08 All three of these are basically say the same,

13:38:10 presented to captain Brian Mintzer, presented to

13:38:12 firefighter Julian Mullis, firefighter Wayne

13:38:19 DeMatthew, Tampa City Council would like to commend

13:38:21 you for your bravery and selfless act you displayed in

13:38:24 entering a home fully engulfed in flames without

13:38:28 regard for your own personal safety.

13:38:30 You assisted the rescue of a disabled victim who was

13:38:32 otherwise unable to flee a burning building or

13:38:35 structure and helping prevent further tragedy, loss of

13:38:38 life, presented to you this day, the Tampa City

13:38:40 Council.

13:38:41 I would like the chief to come forward, chief Dennis

13:38:44 Jones to help me present these awards, if you would.




13:38:48 The first one is to captain Mintzer.

13:38:52 Thank you, sir.

13:38:53 (Applause).

13:38:58 >>> Captain Mintzer: I'm not very big on words,

13:39:04 actually.

13:39:06 Trying to speak the English language correctly is not

13:39:09 very good for me.

13:39:12 This is what we do.

13:39:15 I have a crew that I can depend on.

13:39:17 Everything went -- you couldn't ask for anything to go

13:39:21 any better.

13:39:22 We had no problems.

13:39:23 Everything went like clock work and it was just a good

13:39:26 operation.

13:39:27 It felt good after it was done.

13:39:29 Thank you.

13:39:31 (Applause).

13:39:33 >>KEVIN WHITE: Firefighter Julian Mullis.

13:39:39 >>> Julian Mullis: Not a whole lot to really say.

13:39:44 It's good to be with a crew that you mesh with.

13:39:47 And can work with well.

13:39:50 We all know our job.




13:39:52 We get on scene.

13:39:53 It just makes it that much easier to go in there and

13:39:56 save lives and do the things that we do with a good

13:40:00 crew.

13:40:01 I really appreciate it.

13:40:02 Thank you.

13:40:03 (Applause).

13:40:05 >>KEVIN WHITE: And lastly firefighter Wayne

13:40:07 DeMatthews.

13:40:12 >>> Wayne DeMatthews.

13:40:14 I would like to say thank you.

13:40:15 It's a privilege working with such a great crew, great

13:40:18 captain.

13:40:19 Thanks a lot.

13:40:20 It's great.

13:40:21 (Applause).

13:40:26 >>> Chief Jones: Thank you, council and Mr. White for

13:40:30 this opportunity.

13:40:31 We have about 650 personnel in Tampa fire every single

13:40:34 day, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a

13:40:38 year, that are out providing service to the citizens,

13:40:42 and it really is a team effort, which you heard all




13:40:44 three of these guys say it's great to be a part of the

13:40:47 crew.

13:40:48 When the bell goes off they know exactly what they are

13:40:51 supposed to do and they are out there with one thing

13:40:53 in mind and that is to save a live to help a citizen.

13:40:56 But another part of that crew is our dispatch center.

13:40:59 They are Tampa fire employees.

13:41:02 One of the only accredited centers in the United

13:41:03 States.

13:41:05 And they are so much a part of our team, from the time

13:41:09 the 911 call rings, the first people that any citizen

13:41:12 will talk to are our dispatchers, and the way that

13:41:15 they handle that call determines how quickly we

13:41:18 respond and how efficiently we respond.

13:41:20 So this truly is a tribute to the total team of Tampa

13:41:25 fire and I thank you for the opportunity to stand

13:41:26 before you and recognize these four individuals.

13:41:30 (Applause).

13:41:35 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Chief, thank you.

13:41:36 And Councilman White, thank you for including everyone

13:41:39 on the team including our dispatcher.

13:41:41 I think our dispatchers are some of our biggest unsung




13:41:44 heroes, and you all probably don't get the public

13:41:46 credit that you deserve in a lot of these cases.

13:41:49 So congratulations.

13:41:50 Kevin, thank you for bringing everyone on the team.

13:41:52 Chief, I was just commenting today after Juan's

13:41:55 funeral to chief Gonzalez that it really is amazing

13:41:59 that we don't see more of the same sort of service we

13:42:02 saw today for your personnel.

13:42:05 Think about how dangerous the jobs are that you all

13:42:07 do.

13:42:09 And in all of my years on the council, I think only

13:42:12 one time we had a firefighter pass away.

13:42:16 And I don't even know if that was in the line of duty.

13:42:18 So great testament to your training and to the

13:42:21 professionalism that you all have.

13:42:24 >>> Chief Jones: Thank you.

13:42:25 If I could just say we have a motto with Tampa fire,

13:42:27 and we all wear a pin on our uniform, everyone goes

13:42:31 home.

13:42:31 It is an extremely hazardous profession.

13:42:33 We take the job very seriously.

13:42:35 We take risk every day.




13:42:37 But we try to do them safely and well advised risks.

13:42:41 And we are very fortunate to not have to attend those

13:42:45 line of duty funerals.

13:42:46 I hope I never have to attend another one for Tampa

13:42:49 police, Tampa fire or any other service.

13:42:50 >>ROSE FERLITA: Chief, I had asked our chairman -- I

13:42:56 wasn't sure if I was going to be here at the meeting

13:42:59 because of the conflict and I asked if I could say

13:43:01 something as public safety.

13:43:02 And I actually forgot that this was scheduled this

13:43:04 morning.

13:43:05 I apologize.

13:43:05 But because of the things that we attended this

13:43:08 morning that's understandable.

13:43:09 Kevin, thank you for acknowledging me.

13:43:10 But anytime any of my colleagues or anybody else from

13:43:13 the city wants to do something with public safety and

13:43:18 public safety chairman, I certainly encourage that.

13:43:19 I don't challenge it.

13:43:20 Thank you for being so considerate.

13:43:24 -- considerate.

13:43:24 I had somewhat of a plan, chief, or idea and I was




13:43:28 going to try to work it into a plan.

13:43:30 But the fact that you're here, I'm happy about this.

13:43:36 Obviously, when we all were saddened this morning

13:43:38 about detective Serrano's burial and funeral, I know

13:43:43 that sometimes we come in, and every month with Tampa

13:43:47 Police Department, every quarter with you, and almost

13:43:50 routinely -- Eight On Your Side don't just say it

13:43:52 because of rhetoric, I mean it sincerely -- but

13:43:55 because Madam Chairman has given me the opportunity to

13:43:57 be on your committee and share your Public Safety

13:43:59 Committee, every month and every quarter, I always

13:44:02 talk about, and never hopefully wish, but it was

13:44:05 unfortunate today, of course, that we always take for

13:44:07 granted what the men and women of police and fire do

13:44:09 for us.

13:44:10 And today was certainly exemplary of what happens when

13:44:13 you give up everything that's less important to make

13:44:16 sure that taking care of this city is the most

13:44:18 important thing.

13:44:19 And I don't know how to say that differently than

13:44:21 anybody has said it.

13:44:23 But obviously it is certainly heartfelt.




13:44:26 And I'll tell you where I'm going with this.

13:44:29 Sometimes, we give a commendation to someone or their

13:44:32 family after that person is deceased.

13:44:34 I am thinking, chief, because you were such a

13:44:36 wonderful partner when Mr. Harrison did, and many

13:44:39 people joined him in that effort, to do that

13:44:41 fund-raiser for officer O'Brien, the other morning

13:44:46 some of us attended a function for Al Lopez that Ms.

13:44:55 Alvarez headed, and I would like to do something that

13:44:58 memorializes, perhaps a member of his family to come

13:45:02 pick up.

13:45:02 And all of that only happens because we have two

13:45:06 components of leadership in public safety, and that

13:45:08 would be you, sir, and also Chief Hogue.

13:45:10 So I would like to put that idea together, formulate a

13:45:13 plan, and do perhaps a memorial fund, and also perhaps

13:45:16 a memorial planting, and obviously it goes without

13:45:19 saying that I would ask Mayor Iorio to partner with

13:45:23 us.

13:45:23 So I would ask that you take that with you along with

13:45:27 Chief Hogue, and I know that you would.

13:45:28 That being said, and I'll make it not necessarily in a




13:45:31 motion, Madam Chairman, but if I can work on that and

13:45:33 come back, I'm sure it will be fine.

13:45:36 The second thing is that Mr. Harrison is right again

13:45:40 about the dispatch team.

13:45:41 And Joyce is a particularly dedicated employee of

13:45:44 yours, for two reasons.

13:45:45 It's important as far as what she does, because if she

13:45:48 doesn't get that message and everything going, then we

13:45:50 all know that minutes are a difference as many times

13:45:53 in life and death.

13:45:54 But Joyce has an extra burden in her life and that is

13:45:56 putting up with a very good friend of mine and

13:45:59 somebody that's under your watch, and that would be

13:46:00 captain McCallister.

13:46:02 So it is a family tradition.

13:46:03 By the way, I want to tell you, he was very nice to

13:46:06 his public safety chairman, when he goes down Nebraska

13:46:10 or whatever, he goes, hi, mom, how are you?

13:46:14 It's okay, still a term of endearment.

13:46:16 Captain Mintzer, you may not say much at that podium

13:46:19 but you are getting so many awards in my lifetime it's

13:46:22 like you should claim ownership to that.




13:46:24 And firefighter DeMatthews, obviously again in

13:46:29 closing, thank you for what you do.

13:46:30 This is the most pleasurable part of my City Council

13:46:36 time here, coming to a close soon.

13:46:39 But being many ways connected with Tampa Police

13:46:42 Department, it is my pleasure, gifts me great pleasure

13:46:46 to be able to say I'm part of your team.

13:46:48 So thank you to you.

13:46:50 To you, chief, for the caliber of many men and women

13:46:53 you have and to the rest of you.

13:46:55 We certainly appreciate everything you do and

13:46:56 hopefully it does not appear that we take it for

13:46:59 granted because we do not take it for granted.

13:47:01 Thank you very much.

13:47:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder.

13:47:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just wanted to point out.

13:47:05 Item 6 and item 7, in addition to giving plaques, item

13:47:08 6 and item 7 relate to 911 funding.

13:47:11 And it looks to me like $622,000 to the -- to you guys

13:47:17 for 911 funding and that's what we are doing today.

13:47:20 So we are trying to do our part and we appreciate the

13:47:22 part you do.




13:47:23 Thank you.

13:47:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you all.

13:47:25 Continue the good work that you are doing.

13:47:28 At this time we need a motion to approve the agenda.

13:47:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.

13:47:39 >>GWEN MILLER: First the public comments.

13:47:41 Need a motion.

13:47:42 >> Second.

13:47:42 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.

13:47:44 (Motion carried).

13:47:45 Now any items that we need to move on the agenda?

13:47:50 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Madam Chairman, thank you.

13:47:53 We had planned to have a workshop today between 12:00

13:47:57 and 1:30 on the comp plan but we had to change it

13:47:59 because of the funeral arrangements.

13:48:01 I was looking on our calendar.

13:48:05 Well, it was on the agenda.

13:48:08 I'm talking about scheduling it.

13:48:10 I was looking on our calendar.

13:48:12 And the March 16th, we have no evening meeting,

13:48:17 which is a wonderful thing, and I ask my colleagues,

13:48:23 since this is something that Terry Cullen from the




13:48:26 Planning Commission is urging us to do because we need

13:48:28 to move along with the comp plan, whether we should

13:48:30 reschedule this for noon or 1:30.

13:48:32 >>MARY ALVAREZ: What about the workshop that we have

13:48:35 on the alleys?

13:48:36 Do that one, too?

13:48:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes. The alleys are scheduled for

13:48:41 1:30 so we can either do the comp plan from noon to

13:48:44 1:30 and then do the alleys at 1:30 or do this after

13:48:47 the alleys because I think the alleys are very

13:48:50 important.

13:48:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we have a working lunch?

13:48:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's what I'm thinking because we

13:48:58 don't have a night meeting.

13:48:59 Way would like to do, Madam Chairman, is make a motion

13:49:01 to schedule the Tampa comprehensive plan discussion

13:49:05 which was canceled for today's meeting.

13:49:07 This is a special discussion meeting, for noon, in the

13:49:10 Mascotte room, between 12:00 and 1:30 on Thursday,

13:49:16 March 16th.

13:49:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.

13:49:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.




13:49:22 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I'll go along with that only if I can

13:49:28 get my CRA meeting started at 8:00 in the morning.

13:49:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes, Ms. Alvarez.

13:49:35 >>ROSE FERLITA: It's always when I come in.

13:49:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Is this the time to do that?

13:49:40 We'll do it later.

13:49:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything to pull from the agenda?

13:49:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I need to defer item 19 just for a

13:49:48 little while.

13:49:49 Mr. Smith is going to get me some information on item

13:49:52 19.

13:49:53 Hopefully by the end of the meeting we'll have that.

13:49:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other items need to be pulled from

13:49:58 the agenda?

13:49:59 We go to staff sheet.

13:50:05 Cathy Coyle.

13:50:06 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.

13:50:09 I have a few different items to go over.

13:50:11 The last one being item number 4 on the Kennedy

13:50:14 Boulevard update.

13:50:17 I do have those copies for you to review.

13:50:21 It is just a status update.




13:50:30 It's a 5-minute presentation.

13:50:32 I'll go ahead and do that last, actually.

13:50:34 A couple of the other items are minor.

13:50:37 Item number 28 on the agenda, hurricane boxing club,

13:50:40 it's a temporary wet zoning under the Finance

13:50:42 Committee.

13:50:44 We are asking that the event date on the application

13:50:47 be changed to March 31st.

13:50:50 They did request that the event be tomorrow on March

13:50:53 3rd.

13:50:55 However, they are hiring a band from Cuba and they are

13:50:57 having problems with the Visas so they couldn't

13:50:59 actually get it done until the end of the month.

13:51:01 So when you make the motion if could you have the

13:51:03 event date reflect 3-31-06.

13:51:07 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.

13:51:09 >> Second.

13:51:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

13:51:16 (Motion carried).

13:51:20 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Thank you.

13:51:21 The second item is a two-part item.

13:51:24 It's a walk-on item for the agenda.




13:51:26 I believe many of you have been briefed ahead of time

13:51:30 before me making this request.

13:51:31 There are two zoning cases, Z 06-50 and Z 06-51, two

13:51:37 downtown CDB projects.

13:51:39 The NOVAR group, the ones doing the sky point, they

13:51:43 are proposing to build two more high-rise structures

13:51:46 downtown for mixed use residential and retail.

13:51:49 It is another 805 residential units downtown,

13:51:53 two-block development.

13:51:55 Approximately 24,000 square feet of retail, between

13:51:58 444 feet and 460 in height.

13:52:02 They are providing public parking within the buildings

13:52:04 as well.

13:52:05 And they are requesting -- administration is

13:52:07 requesting an expedited date of April 6th in the

13:52:11 morning at 11 a.m. and 11:15 respectively, if that's

13:52:15 possible.

13:52:16 >> So moved.

13:52:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How about the night issue?

13:52:20 We're starting in the morning, no night meeting?

13:52:23 >>CATHERINE COYLE: With these two in particular.

13:52:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.




13:52:28 I raised that question and Cathy and I talked about it

13:52:31 yesterday.

13:52:31 And the issue is if we schedule it in the evening,

13:52:35 it's going to be out another three months till July.

13:52:37 And this is in an area where there are no height

13:52:42 limits.

13:52:42 So what they are asking, just saying -- I don't

13:52:47 anticipate any controversy, and there are no

13:52:49 neighbors, because there's nothing around there.

13:52:51 So there's no neighborhood organization other than the

13:52:54 downtown partnership.

13:52:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we schedule the first

13:52:58 meeting in the morning, and then the second meeting,

13:53:02 second hearing at night, just so there is a night

13:53:05 meeting?

13:53:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That is unusual.

13:53:12 >> We have done it in the past.

13:53:12 >>GWEN MILLER: If we have no opposition.

13:53:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I am going to caution council to

13:53:19 anticipate whether there is opposition because the

13:53:21 purpose of a public hearing when it's scheduled is to

13:53:24 allow people to come out and voice their concern or




13:53:27 their support.

13:53:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I make a motion to allow discussion

13:53:32 on the motion.

13:53:33 >>CATHERINE COYLE: It would be a waiver of your rules,

13:53:35 I believe, to allow a morning meeting.

13:53:38 >> Move to waive the rules.

13:53:39 >> Second.

13:53:39 (Motion carried).

13:53:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It would not be a waiver of the

13:53:47 rules.

13:53:48 Let me just read to you what the rule is for the

13:53:53 evening meetings before council acts.

13:53:56 Rule 3-C-2, for those evening zoning agenda items that

13:54:00 are required to be rescheduled, continued or set for

13:54:04 consideration.

13:54:05 And I guess this could be considered a reschedule.

13:54:08 It's up to council how we can interpret that.

13:54:09 But council shall schedule these items at a future

13:54:12 agenda at the he end of the agenda consistent with

13:54:15 limitations blah-blah-blah by unanimous vote, these

13:54:18 cases may be place on a future date agenda if deemed

13:54:21 appropriate and without hardship to interested




13:54:22 parties.

13:54:23 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I would argue this is not a

13:54:25 reschedule or a continuance, though, this is a brand

13:54:27 new scheduling.

13:54:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Suggesting just as a matter of

13:54:32 fairness to the community and who knows who is going

13:54:34 to come out?

13:54:35 The bulk of the discussion, the presentation, and

13:54:37 everything else would be during the morning meeting.

13:54:41 And then if it's typical of most of our hearings, if

13:54:44 we had the second reading at night, it would take all

13:54:46 of about 30 seconds to read.

13:54:50 We would open it.

13:54:51 We would close it.

13:54:52 And probably nobody would show up.

13:54:54 At least nobody could ever say they wanted to come but

13:54:58 they couldn't.

13:54:59 That's why I thought we could do the second one at

13:55:01 night.

13:55:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I don't often do this but this is the

13:55:04 first time I have heard this.

13:55:05 I just spoke with Ms. Marshall.




13:55:07 She's not familiar with it.

13:55:08 We meet with the chair once a week to discuss

13:55:10 scheduling issues and this is the first I heard of it

13:55:12 and it's news to me and I'm not prepared frankly to be

13:55:15 able to advice you.

13:55:18 >>ROSE FERLITA: Let me just put a couple things out

13:55:21 here.

13:55:22 It's obviously public record that I supported that

13:55:24 same company's development last time.

13:55:28 So they certainly have made a mark in the community.

13:55:32 I'm kind of mixed about this, because I think that his

13:55:35 client does a good job at coming forward with the

13:55:39 project.

13:55:40 The only thing I am concerned about is that not very

13:55:45 often, if ever in the past, have I been lobbied a

13:55:49 great deal by the administration.

13:55:52 That worries me.

13:55:52 That concerns me.

13:55:54 Because although I think Mr. Truett's client has a

13:55:57 good product, and I agree with the fact that Mrs.

13:56:01 Saul-Sena said there is not a neighborhood downtown,

13:56:04 I'm a little uncomfortable.




13:56:06 All day yesterday I was out of pocket.

13:56:07 I was doing a white coat program with one of the

13:56:10 surgeons at Tampa general and received no calls and I

13:56:13 couldn't so it was late by the time I got home.

13:56:15 But this precedent, Mr. Shelby, concerns me, that a

13:56:20 representative of the administration is calling to say

13:56:24 that they are approving this or requesting that we

13:56:26 walk it through.

13:56:27 That sends a very, very, very dangerous precedent to

13:56:30 me.

13:56:31 And he's caught between a rock and a hard place,

13:56:33 because I think he's come up with a good project.

13:56:37 So I don't know how we get by this and at least use

13:56:41 this as a caution to say I don't believe it is up for

13:56:43 the administration to call us and say walk this on.

13:56:46 Three other people are going to want to do this and

13:56:47 the administration doesn't think it's a good project

13:56:50 or the waiting time is too long, they are not going to

13:56:53 come up and speak on behalf of the petitioner.

13:56:55 So I think Mr. Dingfelder has a good remedial

13:57:01 compromise, if you would.

13:57:02 But I think -- my caution is not so much to Mr.




13:57:05 Gardner.

13:57:06 Now that I have supported this, his projects before,

13:57:08 and spoke most complimentary about them but the point

13:57:13 is I think it is not a good posture for the

13:57:15 administration to tell us about what's walking on and

13:57:18 making great strides and efforts to try to get us when

13:57:20 we are not available.

13:57:21 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I can say we are just asking for a

13:57:25 consideration.

13:57:26 Truly it is up to council.

13:57:27 >>ROSE FERLITA: Of course it is.

13:57:29 But what I am saying is if the administration acts one

13:57:32 way or one development and not that way for another

13:57:34 eight developments, what does that tell the people on

13:57:36 the other side, Mr. Gardner?

13:57:38 So you guys, not you, but the administration, ought to

13:57:40 be careful in the way you present that.

13:57:42 Ultimately, I know that it's our position to decide

13:57:45 yes or no, and at this point, don't want to make any

13:57:48 predisposition about what I'm going to vote for the

13:57:53 support but I was concerned about that, Cathy, and

13:57:55 that's not your fault, or I'm sure you didn't make




13:57:58 that decision.

13:57:58 But it leaves everybody a little bit surprised and not

13:58:02 prepared.

13:58:03 Mr. Shelby is supposed to be our advisor and he's

13:58:06 floating through it because he's not sure.

13:58:08 And that's not a good thing.

13:58:12 >>SHAWN HARRISON: When I first heard about this a

13:58:13 couple days ago, my first response was, I don't know

13:58:15 if we can do it.

13:58:16 Because I've always been under the impression that you

13:58:18 had to have a night meeting for your first one.

13:58:21 I don't ever remember having a first public being a

13:58:25 morning meeting.

13:58:25 I have no problem whatsoever if we can legally do it.

13:58:28 But what Marty said is he hadn't heard about this

13:58:33 before, just now it's been sprung upon him.

13:58:34 He said let me get with the chair and we'll schedule

13:58:37 it F.the chair is comfortable with doing it after he

13:58:39 takes a look at it I'm fine with it, too.

13:58:41 That's what the chair does.

13:58:42 They set the meetings.

13:58:43 So I think at this point we leave to the Marty and the




13:58:45 chair and you guys take a look at it next week and

13:58:48 come back and see if we can do it.

13:58:50 If not we put it on the first available night meeting.

13:58:52 >>ROSE FERLITA: I had a backup question, too. From

13:58:55 your standpoint, Mr. Gardner, I know you want to move

13:58:58 on with. This but was there some extreme urgency that

13:59:01 caused them to lobby for you?

13:59:03 >>> Truett Gardner: There is.

13:59:05 In fairness to the Administration, we met with the

13:59:07 mayor's office as well as TECO.

13:59:09 And basically the developer has a lender lined up,

13:59:11 they would like to start construction in June.

13:59:14 There's two zonings.

13:59:15 One on the Franklin block, one on the Ashley block.

13:59:19 The rendering is set up for Franklin and will be out

13:59:24 of the ground hopefully in June.

13:59:25 And that was the urgency.

13:59:27 In addition to that, TECO is there, and they requested

13:59:30 it as well because 190 parking spaces -- this is one

13:59:33 of the big factors in deciding to stay downtown,

13:59:36 because they will in essence be building and so it is

13:59:41 the funding issue as well as Teco request.




13:59:44 And then secondly, just for whatever my experience is

13:59:47 worth, I have had a hearing that went through on first

13:59:50 reading on the day agenda.

13:59:53 And just for whatever that's worth.

13:59:56 >>ROSE FERLITA: Well, and I think there was another

14:00:01 situation awhile back where the administration got

14:00:05 involved and it caused some hardship and confusion.

14:00:07 You remember that very well.

14:00:09 Either by interruption or intercession of the

14:00:10 administration.

14:00:11 I think it would have been a better way to do the this

14:00:14 if this he they were requesting it, and get right in

14:00:17 the middle of this again, had they maybe -- I suppose

14:00:21 nobody called you.

14:00:22 Okay.

14:00:23 Would they have not known this at the beginning of the

14:00:25 week?

14:00:25 They just found it out yesterday in the middle of the

14:00:27 day or what?

14:00:29 They knew before yesterday that this was --

14:00:33 >>> That we were pushing for the day agenda.

14:00:35 >> So Cathy, my question to you, then I'll close.




14:00:38 Whatever the chairman wants to do, whatever our

14:00:41 attorney advises, is fine.

14:00:42 And if he can do that with some expediency that as

14:00:45 well is fine given that I think the petitioner is

14:00:47 caught in the middle of this.

14:00:48 Just as a message back I really believe that you guys,

14:00:50 if you have any suspicion that there is a particular

14:00:53 incident that needs to be moved on, walked on, for

14:00:55 whatever reason, then courtesies need to be paid to

14:00:59 our attorney, and to our chairman.

14:01:01 I think if the legal department for the City of Tampa

14:01:04 had to move on something and David Smith was not told

14:01:06 till the Tim of -- time of the meeting I bet he

14:01:09 wouldn't like it.

14:01:10 And I'll bet he's being a gentleman.

14:01:12 But I bet if I were sitting over there I wouldn't like

14:01:15 it.

14:01:15 So again it's not that I'm not supportive of this

14:01:19 petition.

14:01:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Alvarez, do you have a question?

14:01:23 >>MARY ALVAREZ: No.

14:01:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I have nothing to say.




14:01:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's a motion and second to

14:01:29 waive the rules to enable us to schedule the zoning

14:01:32 petition for a day meeting.

14:01:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And ask -- can I ask to amend the

14:01:39 motion to at least put the proposed second hearing, if

14:01:42 there is one, at the night meeting?

14:01:44 And it's sort of a compromise.

14:01:49 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I would have to look at the case

14:01:50 but I can honestly say in the five years I have done

14:01:54 rezonings we have done it at least once, I believe it

14:01:57 was the Tampa Palms area where the second meeting was

14:02:00 held at night.

14:02:00 I have to look up at the actual resolution but it is

14:02:03 not unprecedented.

14:02:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: At the end of the day it's our

14:02:06 rules and we can modify them.

14:02:07 And I think that for the 15th time, there's

14:02:11 allowed message that the administration needs to

14:02:14 coordinate with Mr. Shelby, so we don't run into this,

14:02:17 you know, into this situation.

14:02:19 But with all of that said, let's just get through this

14:02:22 and set it.




14:02:24 So that's a friendly amendment to your motion.

14:02:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That is accepted.

14:02:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions on the motion?

14:02:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The second meeting, this is scheduled

14:02:35 for the first meeting, would be what date and time, to

14:02:38 be clear?

14:02:39 >>CATHERINE COYLE: If you would like the second

14:02:42 meeting at night then I would suggest April 13th

14:02:44 and the 27th.

14:02:45 It falls on the regular morning zonings.

14:02:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So the motion would be for 10:00.

14:02:53 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I was suggesting 11 and 11:15

14:02:57 respectively.

14:02:58 I believe that meeting is quite busy, if I recall.

14:03:00 But it's okay if you want to do it at 10.

14:03:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes, 13th.

14:03:07 >>GWEN MILLER: At 11.

14:03:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's do it at 10.

14:03:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Exactly.

14:03:12 >>THE CLERK: You still have a motion on the floor to

14:03:17 waive the rules first.

14:03:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I believe it's one motion, to waive




14:03:20 the rules in order to allow us to schedule this.

14:03:22 >>THE CLERK: A meeting for a daytime but that has

14:03:25 not --

14:03:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, we have a motion and second.

14:03:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry.

14:03:28 Clarification just for the date and times for the

14:03:31 meetings.

14:03:32 >>CATHERINE COYLE: April 13th at 10 a.m.

14:03:40 The night meeting will be three weeks later.

14:03:44 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I thought you mentioned the --

14:03:48 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I was trying to keep it on the

14:03:49 two-week schedule which is normal.

14:03:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Can I get to the motion first?

14:03:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To waive the rules.

14:03:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

14:03:57 (Motion carried).

14:03:58 Now we go to the dates.

14:03:59 >>ROSE FERLITA: And I want to clarify something again.

14:04:03 Mr. Dingfelder, you said, we are sending a strong

14:04:06 message 15 times.

14:04:07 But it's like crying wolf to a kid.

14:04:10 If you don't behave you are going to get punished and




14:04:12 you never do anything and it continues on.

14:04:15 Try to picture what it looks like from that side.

14:04:17 He doesn't know what's going on.

14:04:20 She's asking.

14:04:21 It's like because we don't have things in front of us

14:04:23 earlier we all look like we are most uninformed and in

14:04:26 many cases we are.

14:04:27 So Truett with, all due respect to you and your

14:04:31 client, I have to stay firm to my commitment this is

14:04:34 not the way we need to do business. The second part

14:04:36 is when somebody else wants to come up, Cathy, are you

14:04:39 or Mr. Snelling or somebody else going to kind of

14:04:41 maneuver them to walk on again?

14:04:47 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I think we heard he asked for a week

14:04:50 to take a look at this.

14:04:51 I think we have basically said, sorry.

14:04:57 I think that's the wrong message to send to our city

14:05:00 attorney.

14:05:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: In respect to our city attorney I

14:05:04 withdraw my motion.

14:05:05 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Would you like me to come back next

14:05:07 week?




14:05:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.

14:05:09 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Come back next week and we'll figure

14:05:11 it all out.

14:05:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to withdraw the

14:05:14 motion.

14:05:15 (Motion carried).

14:05:21 >>> I didn't expect that one to take so long.

14:05:23 I apologize.

14:05:24 The chapter 3 changes, it's been mentioned in the past

14:05:27 couple of weeks --

14:05:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 4?

14:05:31 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Item 4 is the last one.

14:05:33 This is a new business item.

14:05:34 There's been some discussion, I think, I believe the

14:05:36 last one was Mr. Dingfelder on a previous wet zoning

14:05:39 case.

14:05:40 We have four interim amendments to chapter 3, wet

14:05:43 zoning, for provisions, definition section, the "R"

14:05:48 classification, restaurant reporting requirements to

14:05:50 clear up some procedural items.

14:05:52 And the reapplication for wet zoning.

14:05:54 Just some clean-up items in that section.




14:05:57 That is the interim change that we are proposing.

14:06:00 And according to chapter 17.5, it is not a land

14:06:04 development regulation, it does not need to follow the

14:06:06 normal process through the Planning Commission so we

14:06:08 would ask that council schedule a workshop at 1:30 on

14:06:12 April 20th to discuss these changes.

14:06:14 I did check with Sandy beforehand to make sure there

14:06:18 were no other 1:30 workshops that day and we would

14:06:21 bring those four changes before you to have an open

14:06:23 discussion for approximately 45 minutes.

14:06:26 There probably will be public discussion.

14:06:28 We are anticipating that.

14:06:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.

14:06:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.

14:06:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

14:06:33 All in favor of the motion say Aye.

14:06:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is that on the --

14:06:39 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Thursday.

14:06:40 >>GWEN MILLER: And we don't have a night meeting.

14:06:41 All in favor of that motion say Aye.

14:06:43 Opposed, Nay.

14:06:44 (Motion carried).




14:06:46 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The chapter 17 interim changes we

14:06:51 finished up the discussions last week.

14:06:53 I plan to speak with the last four of you

14:06:55 individually.

14:06:55 You weren't able to make the special discussions on

14:06:58 the 27 interim changes.

14:07:00 I hope to meet with you guys within the next week to

14:07:03 two weeks.

14:07:05 After the last special discussion meeting, it was

14:07:08 stated that we should request council motion, the

14:07:12 staff to bring back the final draft on April 6th

14:07:15 at 1:30 for a 5-minute discussion to transmit to the

14:07:18 Planning Commission.

14:07:20 If I could have five minutes on the 6th of April.

14:07:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.

14:07:27 >>> 1:30?

14:07:28 >> Could you make sure we have a week?

14:07:30 >>> I'll get you the draft a week in advance.

14:07:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: On April 6th we don't have a

14:07:35 noon meeting.

14:07:35 And you anticipate this is going to be short.

14:07:38 Why don't we just make it 11:00?




14:07:42 And maybe it will be 11:00.

14:07:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Did we get a second?

14:07:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.

14:07:47 (Motion carried).

14:07:48 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Let's see.

14:07:54 And the final, Kennedy Boulevard.

14:07:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's hold it until we get to

14:07:58 unfinished business and come back to you.

14:08:00 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Oh, okay.

14:08:02 Thank you.

14:08:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Eric Cotton.

14:08:07 >>ERIC COTTON: Land Development Coordination. This is

14:08:09 item number 23.

14:08:11 The agenda has it listed as to schedule a public

14:08:16 hearing on April 20th for the list of businesses

14:08:19 that did not comply with the "R" zoning requirements.

14:08:22 We are requesting you basically order staff to forward

14:08:25 this to code enforcement, go through the code

14:08:28 enforcement process, instead of going -- it's part of

14:08:32 the due process requirement to make sure that

14:08:34 everybody gets their day in court, before it comes

14:08:37 back to council, if it's necessary for litigation.




14:08:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is that what we normally do?

14:08:43 >>ERIC COTTON: Previously, a number of years ago, we

14:08:47 went straight to council.

14:08:50 There was a determination by the legal department that

14:08:51 it needed to go to code enforcement.

14:08:53 What happens in the revocation, the business own he's

14:08:57 notified not the property owner so they want to ensure

14:08:59 that the property owner actually is notified of this

14:09:02 whole process, it's not currently required under

14:09:04 chapter 3.

14:09:05 It's probably one of the changes that will be coming

14:09:06 through for the interim changes to the chapter 3.

14:09:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. White, did you get that?

14:09:14 Under your report, number 23.

14:09:17 When you get to 23 you need to make a motion to send

14:09:20 to the code enforcement.

14:09:21 >>ERIC COTTON: Thank you.

14:09:24 >>GWEN MILLER: You're welcome.

14:09:25 We need a motion to approve the agenda.

14:09:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.

14:09:29 >> Second.

14:09:29 (Motion carried).




14:09:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that

14:09:32 would like to speak on any item that is on the agenda

14:09:34 that's not set for a public hearing?

14:09:42 >>> Truett Gardner, 101 Franklin Avenue.

14:09:45 There's separate time for reconsideration.

14:09:47 Is that the time for that?

14:09:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone like to ask for

14:09:52 reconsideration?

14:09:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, first we do the public, then

14:09:55 these.

14:09:56 Nobody wants to?

14:09:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that

14:10:00 wants to speak on any item on the agenda that is not

14:10:02 set for public hearing?

14:10:03 Okay.

14:10:07 Now we have to go to our unfinished business first,

14:10:11 Mr. Gardner.

14:10:12 We'll come back to you.

14:10:13 Unfinished business item number 2.

14:10:16 There is an ordinance that we need to read and vote on

14:10:21 unanimous.

14:10:21 Anyone in the public that wants to speak on item




14:10:24 number 2?

14:10:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.

14:10:26 >> Second.

14:10:27 (Motion carried).

14:10:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to adopt -- I move to just

14:10:36 move this for first reading, an ordinance vacating,

14:10:38 closing, discontinuing, and abandoning a certain

14:10:41 right-of-way, a certain portion of that alley lying

14:10:44 south of west Loughman street, north of Westin Graham

14:10:48 street, east of south Mascotte Street and west of

14:10:50 South Westshore Boulevard in the map of part of Port

14:10:54 Tampa city a subdivision in the City of Tampa,

14:10:56 Hillsborough County Florida the same being more fully

14:10:59 described in section 2 hereof providing an effective

14:11:00 date.

14:11:01 >> Second.

14:11:02 (Motion Carried).

14:11:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 3.

14:11:03 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to send to legal.

14:11:11 Move to approve the resolution.

14:11:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

14:11:14 (Motion carried).




14:11:16 Ms. Cathy Coyle, number 4 now.

14:11:20 Ms. Cathy Coyle, number 4.

14:11:26 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.

14:11:27 This is just a brief status update of Kennedy

14:11:29 Boulevard.

14:11:31 The final draft is done.

14:11:33 You have it before you.

14:11:36 Julia Cole with the legal department has determined it

14:11:38 is not a substantial change from the 2004 version that

14:11:41 we took to the Planning Commission.

14:11:42 So we do not need to return to the Planning

14:11:44 Commission.

14:11:45 We will just proceed with public hearings with City

14:11:47 Council.

14:11:48 And any discussion that you would like to have, of

14:11:50 course.

14:11:50 >>MARY ALVAREZ: From what point to what point at

14:11:54 Kennedy Boulevard are we talking about?

14:11:57 >>CATHERINE COYLE: This is from the bridge on the

14:11:58 river, all the way to Himes Avenue, and then Westshore

14:12:02 overlay is being amended to bump up against Himes.

14:12:05 There's a notch right now on the Westshore overlay.




14:12:08 They are going to butt up against one another.

14:12:10 And the streetscape standards that are called out on

14:12:12 the Kennedy Boulevard overlay are mirrored on the

14:12:15 Westshore.

14:12:15 So we will be taking the Westshore overlay through the

14:12:18 Planning Commission.

14:12:19 There's probably going to be about a four-week delay

14:12:22 in the adoption of the two ordinances but the whole

14:12:24 corridor will be done.

14:12:27 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The whole corridor down to --

14:12:30 >>> To 275, yeah.

14:12:31 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Is there anything in here about

14:12:35 banners?

14:12:36 >>CATHERINE COYLE: There is a contemplation which is a

14:12:41 rendering done by Charlotte Hines, historic

14:12:45 preservation.

14:12:45 The lamp post that we are proposing do have the

14:12:48 ability to have banners added.

14:12:51 >> Tell me again, I'm sorry?

14:12:52 >>> The lamp posts do have the ability to have banners

14:12:55 mounted.

14:12:56 >> From Dale Mabry all the way?




14:12:59 >>> Correct, yes.

14:13:00 From the river to Bay, essentially.

14:13:02 >>MARY ALVAREZ: All right.

14:13:04 Good.

14:13:05 >>> There is fairly exciting news with Kennedy, a

14:13:07 large resurfacing project with D.O.T. that's being

14:13:10 done from the river to woodland Avenue, which is one

14:13:13 block east of MacDill, which is exactly the two

14:13:16 and a half mile mark.

14:13:17 It's dead center of the entire corridor.

14:13:20 That resurfacing project is then redoing the street.

14:13:22 It's also creating landscape mediums in the center and

14:13:27 they have also given us a very large sum of money to

14:13:29 do the sidewalk and the streetscape improvements, a

14:13:32 large portion of it.

14:13:32 The brick detailing that is shown on the last page of

14:13:35 the ordinance.

14:13:37 There will be a -- if you look at the vision, you can

14:13:46 see the entire strip being done. The lights.

14:13:48 And then the street trees with the decorative grade

14:13:52 ago round it.

14:13:54 >> Looks very nice.




14:13:55 >>> There are additional graphics at the end which the

14:13:57 demonstrate a typical streetscape plan view.

14:14:04 It shows exactly how to place the trees.

14:14:07 The trees are 28 feet on center. The lamp posts are

14:14:12 56 feet on center.

14:14:13 They do follow a symmetrical planter. The landscape

14:14:18 medians are what D.O.T. is planting.

14:14:21 The landscape department.

14:14:27 We are working closely with her on the detailing.

14:14:33 There may be others on Kennedy on Kennedy within the

14:14:39 next few years. The good thing about this is we have

14:14:41 the overlay which sets design standards, and we also

14:14:45 have a very large governmental buy-in into it in the

14:14:48 form of actually paying for a lot of the streetscape

14:14:51 improvements up front.

14:14:52 You will see this being done within the next couple of

14:14:54 years.

14:14:54 It will be a massive improvement as to what's out

14:14:57 there now.

14:14:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to thank the staff for

14:15:00 bringing this draft before us.

14:15:02 This is an overnight miracle that we have been working




14:15:04 on for 18 years.

14:15:06 And I'm really happy that we're finally at this point.

14:15:10 It takes three entities to make this happen.

14:15:13 It takes public dollars.

14:15:15 It takes public regulation.

14:15:17 And it takes private sector involvement.

14:15:19 We have had wonderful support from the private sector

14:15:23 who have adopted a lot of these overlay standards in

14:15:26 their redevelopment projects, even though we haven't

14:15:28 yet adopted this.

14:15:29 But as we have all seen as council members on these

14:15:32 rezonings, we had a number of projects coming to us,

14:15:35 and really eager to move ahead and adopt these

14:15:38 standards so that we will have uniformity.

14:15:40 So, Catherine, my question to you would be, what is

14:15:44 the next appropriate thing for council to do?

14:15:46 I know it has to go to the Planning Commission, and it

14:15:48 takes awhile.

14:15:50 >>> It does not.

14:15:51 Remember that --

14:15:52 >>: Oh, because this is just a minor thing.

14:15:53 So the next thing would be for us to set autopsy




14:15:56 public workshop?

14:15:57 I have to tell you I have had a number of private

14:15:59 workshops along the street.

14:16:00 >>> It's up to you how to proceed.

14:16:02 We did have the four public workshops on the outside

14:16:05 in late 2004, early 2005.

14:16:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We have copies of this available

14:16:10 for the public, right?

14:16:11 >>> Correct.

14:16:12 >> I'd like to go ahead then and set a public hearing,

14:16:14 maybe a month in advance, which would allow everybody

14:16:16 to have a chance to go ahead and read the standards

14:16:21 and council members to get comfortable with it and I'm

14:16:23 sure you will be available to meet with council

14:16:25 members.

14:16:25 But I have been out talking to people on the street,

14:16:29 and they like this.

14:16:30 Especially because there's a lost public investment.

14:16:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Are you just walking up and down

14:16:37 the street with this in your hands?

14:16:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You know it!

14:16:41 Actually the plasma center on street walk.




14:16:44 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I did come up with some dates if

14:16:46 would you like to move forward.

14:16:48 Asking staff to return with a resolution on 3-16.

14:16:51 March 16th, to set the public hearings for April

14:16:54 27th and May 11th.

14:16:56 April 27th is a night meeting so we could have it

14:16:59 at 5:30 if there's any public discussion.

14:17:01 And the second meeting at May 11th at 9:30 a.m.

14:17:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move that.

14:17:07 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Second.

14:17:12 >>CATHERINE COYLE: To have the resolution return on

14:17:14 March 16th setting those public hearing dates.

14:17:16 So a couple of weeks from today.

14:17:18 That gives legal staff time to actually draft the

14:17:21 resolution.

14:17:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.

14:17:25 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I'm happy to support this.

14:17:26 I know Ms. Saul-Sena has done Yeoman's work to get

14:17:30 this.

14:17:33 The next step will be just insert Busch.

14:17:40 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I think this is the best overlay we

14:17:42 have.




14:17:42 And the graphic that we have is phenomenal.

14:17:45 Thanks to Jimmy Cook.

14:17:55 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I congratulate Linda Saul-Sena for her

14:17:57 tenacity because she really worked hard on this and

14:18:00 this has really been her pet project and I want to

14:18:03 congratulate her.

14:18:03 >>ROSE FERLITA: Just be careful about that walking and

14:18:06 talking.

14:18:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Did we get a motion?

14:18:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's a motion.

14:18:09 >>GWEN MILLER: To bring the resolution back.

14:18:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.

14:18:13 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor?

14:18:16 Opposed?

14:18:18 (Motion Carried)

14:18:21 Item number 5.

14:18:22 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move an ordinance rezoning property at

14:18:51 108 south Willow Avenue from RM-24 to PD, single

14:18:58 family attached residential, providing an effective

14:18:59 date.

14:18:59 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.

14:19:01 All in favor of the motion say Aye.




14:19:02 Opposed, Nay.

14:19:05 (Motion carried)

14:19:06 At this time would anyone like to request

14:19:07 reconsideration?

14:19:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Before we do this I would like to

14:19:14 ask Mr. Shelby to clarify what our rules say about

14:19:16 reconsideration, what are the appropriate grounds for

14:19:18 reconsideration?

14:19:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Rule 6-F of council's rules of

14:19:31 procedure say when entertaining request for

14:19:34 reconsideration of a quasi-judicial matter decided at

14:19:36 a previous meeting council should consider the

14:19:39 following as grounds for reconsideration.

14:19:41 1, whether there was procedural error that deprived a

14:19:45 party of due process.

14:19:47 Or, 2, that there exists evidence relevant to

14:19:50 council's determination that was not reasonably

14:19:53 available to be known and presented at the time of the

14:19:55 hearing.

14:20:05 >>> Truett Gardner, here to ask reconsideration of

14:20:09 2907 west Bay to Bay.

14:20:11 Jay Taggart the property owner is here with me.




14:20:15 In addition, Vicki Pollyea was attending the funeral

14:20:22 today. This is a letter that resulted from that

14:20:24 meeting

14:20:24 Dear council members, Board of Directors support the

14:20:31 petitioner's request for reconsideration, the

14:20:33 neighborhood with traffic mitigation.

14:20:40 Neighborhood development.

14:20:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Would you hone in on which of those

14:21:03 two you are coming under?

14:21:06 >>> Under the new evidence which basically is

14:21:08 three-fold.

14:21:09 One, I think point of clarification from the meeting,

14:21:12 I believe it was you, Mr. Dingfelder, noted a

14:21:15 reference that the property has been stagnant since

14:21:18 1986, and as a point of clarification, Mr. Taggart and

14:21:23 his partner purchased the property in 2002.

14:21:27 So I believe that's a correction of information --

14:21:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Wasn't that stated during the

14:21:35 original meeting?

14:21:36 >>> It actually was not.

14:21:37 Secondly, the neighborhood meeting that occurred on

14:21:39 Tuesday night, the neighborhood would like to look at




14:21:43 this further.

14:21:44 And I was asked by them when the letter was delivered

14:21:47 to plead with you for the reconsideration.

14:21:51 And again, reiterate that by no means were they forced

14:21:55 into their support, which I know was mentioned before.

14:21:58 And then thirdly, which I believe is probably the

14:22:03 newest information, the developers along with the

14:22:08 architect Gerry Curts have agreed to work with the

14:22:12 neighborhood to revisit the site plan and see what can

14:22:15 be done.

14:22:19 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Gardner, the last time I was

14:22:21 against you. This time I'm for you.

14:22:23 I don't know if I can help you in either one.

14:22:25 I believe I was the only supportive vote cast for Mr.

14:22:29 Taggart's project.

14:22:31 I don't know if constitutes new evidence or not but I

14:22:33 want to throw this out.

14:22:34 Obviously I'm not on the prevailing side, I would like

14:22:38 to put this into the record.

14:22:40 As I submitted Thursday night, to meet with some of

14:22:43 the residents, one particular resident couldn't meet

14:22:47 me on Sunday but Mr. Kevin herein did, and that I did




14:22:52 speak 3 or 4 times oops 50s about position of

14:22:56 leadership versus what the people on Palm Drive, is

14:22:59 it?

14:23:01 >>> Palm Avenue, I believe.

14:23:04 >> Anyway, I went out there and looked at it and it

14:23:07 seemed to me there were a lot of issues that maybe

14:23:10 persuaded them not to like this project so much.

14:23:12 They had stagnated more from a manhole that maybe was

14:23:16 responsible, maybe Verizon, maybe the responsibility

14:23:18 of stormwater department.

14:23:20 The fact that they didn't have any signs.

14:23:22 All of those things we talked about before.

14:23:24 And we did contact Mr. LaMotte's office to try to get

14:23:28 that done.

14:23:29 And to also try to see what they could do with that

14:23:31 manhole.

14:23:32 We talked about the situation with the -- at one time

14:23:37 they said they couldn't have a smaller bus because the

14:23:40 ridership was heavy.

14:23:42 But Mr. Dingfelder did get that done.

14:23:45 I think where I am trying to go, colleagues -- and

14:23:48 again I am not able to bring this up but I am trying




14:23:49 to influence you, that's obvious -- because I think

14:23:53 some of their concerns were all of that.

14:23:56 And if you look at what they put up with from Howard

14:23:59 onto Isabella on palm, it's a mess.

14:24:02 Because it's an area that people have to go through.

14:24:07 I used to speed once when I was a kid.

14:24:09 Go around that curve and you think they are going to

14:24:11 try to hug the side and all of a sudden it's all

14:24:15 flooded so you have less traction.

14:24:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You are out there chasing

14:24:19 criminals, is that right?

14:24:23 >>ROSE FERLITA: Anyway, but way want to say is there

14:24:26 were a lot of extenuating circumstances that have

14:24:28 caused them some frustration.

14:24:30 And if you look at what was proposed or denied, yeah,

14:24:33 maybe that can frustrate then.

14:24:35 But I think in the scheme of things, they didn't say

14:24:37 this but their demeanor and the way they were talking

14:24:40 it's almost like the leadership went out of their way

14:24:42 to pick the best.

14:24:44 I will say the best thing of all of them is -- I

14:24:50 understand Mr. Taggart bought it because it had an




14:24:53 existing PD and he can do either-or and Vicki was very

14:24:58 forthcoming in complementing your compliant, that he

14:25:00 had to do something to justify the purchase cost of

14:25:03 the property.

14:25:04 All of those things, I don't know if that would be

14:25:06 considered by any of my colleagues but it appears to

14:25:11 me that not everybody -- now that everybody had some

14:25:13 dialogue that very neighborhood that was perhaps

14:25:15 against this has perhaps maybe as we go forward found

14:25:18 a reason to be more involved in their neighborhood.

14:25:20 And it may fail.

14:25:22 Mr. Taggart, that's the price you pay maybe if that

14:25:25 happens.

14:25:25 But I have a real gut feeling sense that once we talk

14:25:28 about some of the other issues that they had that they

14:25:30 might consider this.

14:25:31 And that's my two cents.

14:25:35 >>> Gardner: Karen Crawford delivered --

14:25:38 >>: I spoke to her, too. Sorry.

14:25:40 >>> She wanted to reiterate that same point that she

14:25:43 was glad to have the opportunity to meet with the

14:25:45 people that had objected before.




14:25:46 She wanted to clarify, to the people that were

14:25:51 objecting, by no means were they objecting to the

14:25:55 development, they were objecting to the traffic issues

14:25:57 in general, and I believe the meeting with Mr. LaMotte

14:26:00 was a very healthy meeting.

14:26:01 Unfortunately they learned that as far as any speed

14:26:04 mitigation devices such as speed bumps they are about

14:26:06 number 112 on the list.

14:26:08 So I think they further realized that with what this

14:26:12 developer is proposing is their best shot for some

14:26:14 sort of mitigating the traffic situation in their

14:26:16 neighborhood.

14:26:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm not going to be long on this.

14:26:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Oh?

14:26:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Five of us were here that night.

14:26:35 We heard this petition for at least an hour.

14:26:41 And four of us, I think in my motion to deny, or

14:26:46 whoever made the motion to deny, I think clearly the

14:26:49 height was the big issue.

14:26:52 That's way recall the best.

14:26:53 But Mr. Gardner has mentioned three pieces of

14:27:00 evidence, frankly none of which I think are




14:27:03 particularly knew, and none of which deal with the

14:27:08 issue of height R so I can't support any

14:27:11 reconsideration.

14:27:12 I

14:27:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I agree.

14:27:19 I won't bring it up for reconsideration.

14:27:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, mine was a height issue, and

14:27:26 that I thought it was going to set a precedent for

14:27:28 that area there, putting in a 26-story building, that

14:27:33 people down the street would see that, and then there

14:27:36 would be another Bayshore Boulevard in there, and

14:27:39 that's what I was afraid of.

14:27:41 So I can't support that either.

14:27:43 >>KEVIN WHITE: Madam Chair, I listened to the

14:27:49 hour-long discussion last week, listening to Mr.

14:27:52 Gardner's plea for reconsideration now.

14:27:56 I have some sympathy towards the things that you said.

14:27:58 But the thing that strikes me is the due process part,

14:28:04 even though you didn't mention it, I don't think you

14:28:06 had the benefit of a full council.

14:28:08 And I think that's a part of the due process,

14:28:11 especially something this contentious.




14:28:14 And I will make a motion for reconsideration, only --

14:28:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.

14:28:18 I'm sorry.

14:28:19 Were you here that night?

14:28:21 >>KEVIN WHITE: I was here.

14:28:22 I was on the prevailing side.

14:28:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm asking you a question.

14:28:25 I didn't remember if you were here.

14:28:26 >>KEVIN WHITE: Please, let me finish.

14:28:30 I was here.

14:28:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Let him finish.

14:28:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You were in and out that night.

14:28:34 >>KEVIN WHITE: I was here.

14:28:36 I was one of the five.

14:28:37 Right here.

14:28:37 This seat.

14:28:39 This microphone.

14:28:40 I was here.

14:28:41 >>GWEN MILLER: All right, Mr. White, continue.

14:28:42 >>KEVIN WHITE: I would like to make a motion for

14:28:45 reconsideration based on the fact that I don't think

14:28:46 Mr. Gardner was able to get due process without having




14:28:51 the benefit of full council.

14:28:53 And that's my motion.

14:28:54 >>ROSE FERLITA: Anyone can second that?

14:28:57 Second.

14:28:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

14:29:00 Question on the motion.

14:29:00 Mrs. Saul-Sena.

14:29:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to ask our attorney if --

14:29:05 I'm not a lawyer.

14:29:06 But is not having a full council a legitimate ground

14:29:09 for requesting reconsideration?

14:29:12 Because if there were four negative votes, then even

14:29:17 if seven people had been here if you got four negative

14:29:21 votes it's still a majority of four negative votes so

14:29:23 I don't see where that logically, reasonably was

14:29:27 reason for consideration.

14:29:28 I don't know if I ask you, Mr. Shelby, oh if I ask the

14:29:31 city zoning attorneys.

14:29:32 But I would like somebody legal to answer.

14:29:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: As a matter of law, I would say that

14:29:40 that due pro was afforded by the number of council

14:29:44 members present.




14:29:45 I would say that there is no rule that says a full

14:29:49 council must be present and voting on rezoning.

14:29:53 I would say that Mr. Gardner and the petition der not

14:29:57 object or request a continuance at the time the

14:30:01 presentation was made.

14:30:01 So therefore the due process issue was not even raised

14:30:06 at the time of the first hearing.

14:30:09 >>KEVIN WHITE: He wasn't raising it.

14:30:11 I was raising it.

14:30:12 Also with the new evidence with the testimony from Ms.

14:30:19 Pollyea and some of the others.

14:30:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I want to thank the attorneys from

14:30:26 legal department.

14:30:26 I also want to bring to the council's attention

14:30:30 section 27-395, the text of that, says denial of a

14:30:35 site plan controlled rezoning application by the City

14:30:37 Council shall preclude consideration of a rezoning

14:30:40 application which has a substantially similar request

14:30:45 as described in the application on any site plan

14:30:48 involved in the same lands or any portion thereof for

14:30:50 a period of 12 months from the date of denial of the

14:30:53 previous application.




14:30:55 And this is the text I want to bring to your

14:30:57 attention.

14:30:57 The City Council may determine that this time period

14:31:00 does not apply if the new site plan zoning request has

14:31:03 addressed the grounds for denial identified during the

14:31:06 public hearing.

14:31:08 So that was another issue that I was pointing out to

14:31:13 you.

14:31:14 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Having not been here last week, I

14:31:17 had an opportunity to meet with Mr. Gardner yesterday

14:31:22 and was advised about this meeting that took place on

14:31:25 Tuesday night where it does sound to me like that

14:31:28 does -- that meeting in and of itself probably rises

14:31:33 to the level of new evidence, whether we want to treat

14:31:36 that, we assess whatever value to that evidence.

14:31:40 But I think it is new evidence.

14:31:43 It sounds to me like it's -- it sounds to me like this

14:31:47 neighborhood is making a choice of the lesser two of

14:31:49 evils.

14:31:49 They may not like the height but they don't like the

14:31:51 alternative.

14:31:52 And it sounds like they have spoken clearly and I'm




14:31:55 willing to let them have another shot at the hearing

14:31:58 and see what can happen.

14:32:02 >>ROSE FERLITA: I would call for the question but I

14:32:04 think she has a comment.

14:32:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to comment, Mr. Harrison, at

14:32:07 the two previous meetings on this the neighborhood

14:32:09 spoke on Mr. Gardner's behalf saying that the lesser

14:32:13 two of evils.

14:32:14 They already said that on the record.

14:32:15 The 2002 office purchase was on the record.

14:32:19 All that was already known.

14:32:20 The reason that we sent you back after the first

14:32:22 meeting was to see if you would address the question

14:32:25 of height, which the planning staff had as an issue

14:32:30 and you failed to do that when you came back again.

14:32:32 So to me that was the sticking point.

14:32:34 And in your coming up today you are still not

14:32:37 addressing it.

14:32:38 And because of that, and because of what the legal

14:32:43 staff cited, is this a significant change?

14:32:45 No, it's absolutely no change.

14:32:46 I don't support a reconsideration.




14:32:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder, Ms. Ferlita.

14:32:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: First I want to apologize to Mr.

14:32:55 White.

14:32:55 No insult intended.

14:32:57 I honestly forgot that you were one of the five and I

14:33:00 apologize.

14:33:04 The second thing I wanted to say is, and it sound like

14:33:07 we are not just under the motion for reconsideration

14:33:09 is not just about due process.

14:33:11 Because I think that's a dangerous and slippery slope.

14:33:14 We don't want to be -- unless we are going to change

14:33:16 our rules, we don't want to be bound by having five,

14:33:19 six, or seven members.

14:33:21 Right now we can have five members.

14:33:23 We can have four members and hear a petition.

14:33:25 Unless we want to change our rules, we don't want to

14:33:27 go down that slippery slope.

14:33:29 Otherwise every single petitioner could come back and

14:33:31 say you didn't have seven.

14:33:32 And I think that's a risky thing.

14:33:34 If there's other grounds, as has been stated by Mr.

14:33:36 White and Mr. Harrison, that's fine.




14:33:38 And the last thing I wanted to say as to the merits, I

14:33:42 wanted to remind -- and Ms. Saul-Sena reminded us --

14:33:45 that the Planning Commission staff and the zoning

14:33:47 staff both recommended denial because they said this

14:33:50 project and this height were inconsistent with the

14:33:52 surrounding area.

14:33:53 So I think it's extremely important that we remember

14:33:55 that staff recommended denial.

14:33:58 That's all.

14:33:59 >>GWEN MILLER: We are going to call for the question.

14:34:01 We have a motion and second on the floor.

14:34:03 All in favor of the motion say Aye.

14:34:04 Opposed, Nay.

14:34:20 >>CLERK: (Off microphone).

14:34:22 >>CHAIRMAN: Set a date?

14:34:32 >>> On this issue do we need to send notice out again?

14:34:56 >>MARTY BOYLE: Can I ask legal a question first?

14:34:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Sure.

14:34:59 Marty?

14:35:02 >>MARTY BOYLE: I need to find out if

14:35:04 reconsideration -- would that be considered new or a

14:35:07 continuance?




14:35:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Be considered new.

14:35:16 >>> Thank you.

14:35:16 Being said it's new the first available slot we have

14:35:18 open would be June 8th of '06 at 6 p.m.

14:35:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

14:35:25 (Motion carried)

14:35:27 Okay.

14:35:28 June 8th at 6 p.m

14:35:31 Would anyone else like to ask for reconsideration?

14:35:35 Mr. Shelby?

14:35:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just that I wanted to show that Ms.

14:35:40 Cole stated something I should have said and I just

14:35:43 want council to know, that if they fail to raise that

14:35:47 issue of due process, for what Mr. White's basis was,

14:35:57 if it isn't raised it's waived as an objection.

14:36:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I ask a question?

14:36:02 Does the affected party need to be the person who

14:36:04 raises the question of reconsideration?

14:36:10 An interested party raised the question of

14:36:12 reconsideration.

14:36:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Section 27-398 of the code states

14:36:22 that the City Council may consider its vote or action




14:36:25 on rezoning or special use applications.

14:36:28 The motion to reconsider may only be made at the same

14:36:31 meeting or by the first subsequent regular meeting

14:36:33 after the original action.

14:36:34 The City Council shall require notification of a

14:36:36 public hearing which notification shall be in the same

14:36:38 manner as the original public hearing.

14:36:41 This is where it answers your question. The party

14:36:45 seeking reconsideration shall pay an amendment fee and

14:36:48 any special associated costs relating to that

14:36:50 notification.

14:36:51 The amendment fee and costs shall be paid within ten

14:36:54 days of the reconsideration vote, and upon failure to

14:36:57 pay such fees and cost it is original vote shall

14:37:00 become final and the matter shall not be reconsidered.

14:37:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That isn't my question.

14:37:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, anybody can ask for

14:37:07 reconsidering.

14:37:07 Well, any interest party.

14:37:09 >> Any interested party can ask for reconsideration.

14:37:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's correct.

14:37:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.




14:37:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Grandoff.

14:37:14 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza.

14:37:23 I have the privilege of being co-counsel to Doran

14:37:29 Jason and also Kress square project which was brought

14:37:32 to you last week.

14:37:33 I'm joined this afternoon by my friend Jim Shimberg

14:37:36 and also by Janett Jason of the Dorian Jason company.

14:37:40 This request for reconsideration is different from

14:37:43 what you just heard in that this is not a rezoning

14:37:46 application that was considered last week.

14:37:49 The action you took last week was a vote to designate

14:37:51 the facade of the Newberry building and the

14:37:55 Woolworth's building and the reason we're here this

14:37:58 afternoon is we are asking you to reconsider your

14:38:01 vote, and to pass the vote rescinding your action of

14:38:06 last week for several reasons.

14:38:08 Let me explain.

14:38:09 First of all, the two criteria that Mr. Shelby

14:38:12 explained to you just a moment ago, there is due

14:38:18 process error and number two evidence not available

14:38:25 last week that has since become available.

14:38:27 As you are considering these issues here, these are




14:38:29 the two facades that are planned to be preserved by my

14:38:33 client.

14:38:34 And here is the Kress building.

14:38:38 But the Kress building is not at issue at all.

14:38:40 It's been designated.

14:38:42 We are talking about the designation of the two

14:38:44 facades.

14:38:45 As of the procedural error issue, the properties were

14:38:49 rezoned under the CBD zoning district in the fall with

14:38:53 three specific conditions which spelled out the

14:38:57 preservation of the facades, and that our client would

14:39:00 preserve these facades with oversight by the urban

14:39:03 design manager, Wilson Stair.

14:39:07 On both buildings.

14:39:09 Your action last week conflicts with that, because now

14:39:11 you are designating the project which now puts my

14:39:14 clients into the A.R.C. approval certificate of

14:39:20 appropriate process that. Conflicts with your zoning

14:39:22 ordinance, of the specific site plan.

14:39:24 You have got an inherent conflict this -- in what you

14:39:27 rezoned last fall and the action you took last week.

14:39:30 Second, it conflicts with the motion you took on




14:39:34 February 2 regarding the cigar factories in which I

14:39:37 was representing five cigar factories, where you

14:39:40 adopted a motion to amend the code to require owners'

14:39:45 consent on any designation process.

14:39:49 That ordinance is underway and yesterday I filed an

14:39:53 amendment to the ordinance with the city clerk's

14:39:55 office, and that is beginning the process of coming to

14:39:58 you for final adoption.

14:40:00 So that was filed yesterday, which is new evidence

14:40:02 that came after last week's decision.

14:40:07 We would like you to honor our client's conditions in

14:40:10 the rezoning that were approved by you and allow them,

14:40:13 with their architect and their engineer, to handle the

14:40:17 restoration of the facades, with the oversight of Mr.

14:40:20 Wilson Stair, but not to designate their properties

14:40:23 and put them into the long, laborious, tedious,

14:40:26 extremely expensive process of designation.

14:40:30 All parties would be served by that.

14:40:32 Your action would be consistent with the rezoning.

14:40:34 And the facade would be preserved as I have shown here

14:40:38 on these renderings.

14:40:41 As a footnote, my clients have consistently objected




14:40:44 throughout the entire process to the designation of

14:40:46 the facades.

14:40:47 (Bell sounds).

14:40:50 And that objection was not expected last week.

14:40:53 We respectfully request that you rescind your action

14:40:55 of last week.

14:40:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Time is up.

14:40:57 >>> I'll answer any questions.

14:40:58 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Grandoff, we were under -- I was

14:41:06 under the impression that they had asked for the

14:41:08 initiation of the process.

14:41:11 That's the reason why I went ahead and voted for the

14:41:17 designation.

14:41:18 And I understand that it was at one of the first

14:41:22 hearings that we had on that.

14:41:23 So I would like to ask Cathy Coyle, or one of the

14:41:29 zoning people, to come back and let us know what it is

14:41:33 that it was said at the time, because I don't think we

14:41:36 would have done that without that.

14:41:38 You know what my position is.

14:41:40 You come voluntarily, and you will get the

14:41:43 designation, as far as I'm concerned.




14:41:48 So that's way want to see.

14:41:50 I want to see what the records showed in the very

14:41:52 beginning when we had this discussion.

14:41:56 >>> We have a chronology of events at the

14:42:00 reconsideration.

14:42:02 The Kress was always going to be designated.

14:42:04 >> I know that.

14:42:05 >>> They have been steadfast in their designation.

14:42:08 >> I would like to listen to Mr. Fernandez.

14:42:19 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: Manager of historic preservation.

14:42:23 The designation process was initiated in response to a

14:42:31 condemnation order placed on the buildings by City of

14:42:33 Tampa code enforcement.

14:42:36 At that point the developer's representative came

14:42:38 forth in January of '05 and stated that there was a

14:42:42 development proposal that was pending and asked for

14:42:44 cooperation of the HPC in working towards a solution

14:42:48 that seated both the development objectives and the

14:42:51 preservation goals.

14:42:52 That setting -- set forth a series of public hearings

14:42:57 which spanned from January '05, February, March,

14:43:01 April, and then concluded in May of '05.




14:43:05 During that process the development group agreed to

14:43:08 the designation of the entire Kress building, as it's

14:43:14 referred.

14:43:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is that written down somewhere?

14:43:17 I mean, were they at the hearings and they verbally

14:43:19 agreed to the designation process?

14:43:23 >>> That's correct.

14:43:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me.

14:43:24 I'm sorry.

14:43:24 They were just talking about the Kress building?

14:43:27 >>> In that particular -- in that phase, which would

14:43:30 have been in April, during that process, during the

14:43:34 public hearing, the item on the agenda was the

14:43:36 designation of the Kress building in its entirety.

14:43:39 They consented to that designation.

14:43:41 The next two items on that particular agenda were the

14:43:44 designations of the J.J. Newberry building in its

14:43:47 entirety, and the F.W. Woolworth building in its

14:43:51 entirety.

14:43:52 During that hearing, the owners' representative stated

14:43:55 weighs in objection to the designation of those

14:43:57 buildings in their entirety.




14:44:00 That set forth in motion a request to the HPC by legal

14:44:04 to research the possibility of designating the facade

14:44:08 of those buildings, which was in coordination with the

14:44:12 plans that were being presented to this council during

14:44:15 the rezoning process.

14:44:17 The goal was to be able to come to this council with a

14:44:24 favorable recommendation on their project from the

14:44:26 HPC.

14:44:27 That was also the HPC's goal, to protect the facades

14:44:31 and also revitalize the block which is in need of

14:44:34 revitalization.

14:44:36 As a result, that hearing was continued to March of

14:44:40 '05.

14:44:42 At that hearing, it was presented that the facades

14:44:46 should be designated.

14:44:47 That was the recommendation of the HPC.

14:44:50 At that time, the own der not object to that

14:44:53 designation.

14:44:55 In fact, they asked for that designation as it

14:44:59 pertained to the Woolworth and Newberry facades.

14:45:02 They felt that was compatible with the development

14:45:04 they were doing.




14:45:06 Okay.

14:45:07 Subsequent to that, they came to this council for

14:45:10 rezoning.

14:45:11 Cathy Coyle, I believe, can speak on that.

14:45:13 But there were references made to the preservation of

14:45:16 those facades during the rezoning process, and their

14:45:20 attempts to come to a favorable agreement with the

14:45:23 HPC, which they had by the vote.

14:45:28 >> Mr. Fernandez, at that point was there any

14:45:30 objection?

14:45:31 >>> No.

14:45:32 >> To the two buildings that we are talking in

14:45:34 question, right?

14:45:35 >>> The two facades.

14:45:36 >> The two facades.

14:45:38 >>> Unequivocally no objection.

14:45:41 >> From the petitioner.

14:45:42 >>> That's correct.

14:45:43 This came to you again in September for the opening,

14:45:54 the initiating of the local landmark process.

14:45:57 At that time the owners' representative was present.

14:46:00 There was an opportunity for the owner's




14:46:03 representative at that time to object to the

14:46:04 initiation of designation.

14:46:05 If they had chose tone do that, that would have set in

14:46:08 forth the economic feasibility determination, which

14:46:12 was specified in the preservation ordinances of

14:46:14 chapter 27.

14:46:16 They did not choose to initiate that feasibility

14:46:19 termination at that time.

14:46:22 >> Were they told about the economic feasibility

14:46:27 designation, that they could do that, at that time?

14:46:30 >>> At that point no one had objected to these

14:46:32 designations so there was not a discussion on how

14:46:35 to --

14:46:35 >> But then there was an objection at that time?

14:46:38 >>> No, not at that time.

14:46:39 >> Not in September.

14:46:40 >>> No.

14:46:40 That came through.

14:46:41 That objection and this council voted to forward that

14:46:44 to the Planning Commission for their recommendation.

14:46:47 >> Okay.

14:46:47 >>> Okay.




14:46:48 Then on November 14th, this is scheduled at the

14:46:51 Planning Commission.

14:46:52 At that time, the owner's representative stated that

14:46:56 they were not in favor of the designation of the

14:46:58 facades.

14:46:59 That's the first time that was placed on the record

14:47:02 was in November.

14:47:03 Therefore, when this came to you for a recommendation,

14:47:09 for the recommendation a week ago, it came forth with

14:47:11 that thought being stated, solely during the Planning

14:47:15 Commission recommendation phase, which they

14:47:16 recommended not to designate the facades as they were

14:47:23 not compatible with the Tampa comprehensive plan in

14:47:23 their opinion.

14:47:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Clarification?

14:47:29 The Planning Commission staff recommended designation,

14:47:32 but the Planning Commission by, I think, a 6-4 vote

14:47:35 didn't.

14:47:36 And I think it was in deference to the request to the

14:47:39 property owner having smelled what was in the wind and

14:47:42 wanted to change their own minds.

14:47:43 >>> That's correct.




14:47:43 >>GWEN MILLER: A question?

14:47:48 >>ROSE FERLITA: Not this second.

14:47:50 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Was there a commitment on the site

14:47:52 plan when we rezoned this property that the facades

14:47:57 would be preserved?

14:48:03 I think there's an actual note on the site plan.

14:48:05 >>CATHERINE COYLE: There are two that address the

14:48:07 issue.

14:48:11 Note number 1 -- Catherine Coyle, land development.

14:48:15 Note number 1 says preservation/treatment for facades,

14:48:20 applying during the rezoning process.

14:48:22 The note number 9 says this section shall be in

14:48:25 compliance with 27, article 18, central business

14:48:28 district guidelines and all final building designs

14:48:31 shall be subject to the approval of the urban design

14:48:34 manager or the architectural review commission.

14:48:36 We have to go to the A.R.C. once it's designated.

14:48:40 I missed the first part of this.

14:48:47 >> The question is, is there something on the site

14:48:49 plan?

14:48:50 >>> This book was also attached to the site plan.

14:48:52 This was the elevation packet.




14:48:56 Given the time Lyme line, May 2005, the HPC

14:48:59 recommendation, I was in discussion with Jim Shimberg

14:49:02 at that time, and John LaRocca.

14:49:04 I was under the impression with the understanding that

14:49:06 the facades were being designated.

14:49:09 That was the progression of everything.

14:49:11 They gave up on the buildings.

14:49:12 It was an HPC compromise.

14:49:14 When they came through with the final elevation

14:49:16 booklet, which the note was attached to the site plan,

14:49:21 the final elevation, if you note on the Cass Street

14:49:29 elevation -- it's difficult, I apologize.

14:49:36 The Cass Street elevation shows the full facade from

14:49:41 Florida to Franklin being preserved.

14:49:44 This gave an indication to us that it is.

14:49:47 How that is being done because it's not directly

14:49:49 stated on the site plan, whether or not it's through a

14:49:51 local landmark or whatever the means would need to be

14:49:55 worked out through construction services through the

14:49:57 review of the plan. The issue before you at this

14:49:59 point for us is that it's in designation process.

14:50:02 So that follows under that procedure.




14:50:05 >>SHAWN HARRISON: But if everyone agrees that the

14:50:07 commitment on the site plan is that the facades will

14:50:10 be preserved, and my understanding that they are not

14:50:15 going to get a C.O. if that's not true.

14:50:19 That's part of the development review, construction

14:50:21 review, that's gotta be done before anyone moves into

14:50:25 these buildings.

14:50:26 Otherwise it's a violation of the PD zoning on the

14:50:29 site plan.

14:50:30 So what is the practical difference between, say, if

14:50:36 we are going to do it on the site plan being part of

14:50:37 the rezoning versus the designation process?

14:50:42 It seems to me the practical difference is that you

14:50:45 have got to go through A.R.C. review versus probably

14:50:49 Wilson Stair review, and it sounds to me like that's

14:50:54 what the petitioners are asking for.

14:50:56 Don't send this to the A.R.C., we'll let Wilson make

14:51:00 that call.

14:51:01 >>> That's what was stated on the record at the last

14:51:02 hearing, correct.

14:51:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I could chime in.

14:51:05 Just a concern that I want to express, to be careful




14:51:11 as to taking testimony or taking something that has

14:51:15 the weight of testimony at this point.

14:51:17 Obviously you're not in that posture now of having

14:51:20 public hearing.

14:51:21 You don't have sworn witnesses.

14:51:22 And you're listening to the basis for reconsideration.

14:51:26 If I may make a suggestion -- and I understand, Mr.

14:51:29 Grandoff representing his clients in order to preserve

14:51:31 the record and to preserve his position, I don't

14:51:37 disagree with his request for reconsideration.

14:51:38 I should point out, council, that this is a first

14:51:42 reading, and the vote was to move it on for second

14:51:46 reading in public hearing which was scheduled for next

14:51:48 week.

14:51:50 During which time council would have the opportunity

14:51:52 to vent those issues that maybe Mr. Grandoff is

14:51:55 addressing, and, therefore, if council wishes to

14:51:59 address that, that would serve as his remedy in lieu

14:52:02 of a reconsideration.

14:52:03 As a matter of fact, one might argue that it would be

14:52:04 even better because there would -- it would be

14:52:07 scheduled for next week.




14:52:07 >>SHAWN HARRISON: But we could also just say we are

14:52:10 going to reconsider it and just vote it down.

14:52:12 We could do that right now.

14:52:14 We don't have to go to a second public hearing, do we?

14:52:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe that you do.

14:52:20 >>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Legal department.

14:52:20 I would caution council against making a substantive

14:52:23 decision today on whether or not this facade meets the

14:52:26 criteria in the code.

14:52:28 I think if you were to vote it down that's the exact

14:52:30 decision would you be making.

14:52:31 But this is not a public hearing in which to make that

14:52:33 decision. The only request before you as I understand

14:52:36 it is a request for reconsideration.

14:52:38 And I question whether that's even appropriate at this

14:52:42 point given that second reading is scheduled next

14:52:42 week.

14:52:44 >>GWEN MILLER: So what you are saying we should wait

14:52:46 till the second reading for the reconsideration?

14:52:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's a public hearing.

14:52:50 >>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: What is before saw request for

14:52:54 reconsideration.




14:52:55 Procedurally I question the appropriateness of that

14:52:57 request given that second reading is scheduled next

14:52:59 week.

14:52:59 I understand Mr. Shelby's comment that Mr. Grandoff is

14:53:02 making that request to preserve his client's rights,

14:53:06 and that's fine.

14:53:07 But I would ask that instead of having that discussion

14:53:10 today, when you're not in a public hearing, that you

14:53:13 instead continue that discussion to the second reading

14:53:16 next week.

14:53:19 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, I appreciate counsel's

14:53:24 advice, and yours as well, Mr. Shelby.

14:53:26 But this is kind of a different dilemma.

14:53:28 I agree with what you are saying.

14:53:30 You caution us not going into testimony.

14:53:33 But I think because this process has been in the works

14:53:36 for so long, many of us are confused, and I think some

14:53:39 of us are confused and we're confused, and that was

14:53:42 the basis perhaps of our position last time.

14:53:45 You know, just as a matter of a comment, sometimes I

14:53:47 agree with editorials and sometimes I don't, but when I

14:53:50 read the editorial this morning from the Tribune that




14:53:55 said the City Council mixed signals on property rights

14:53:58 versus preservation, that we should drop our plan to

14:54:01 make historic preservation optional, a better

14:54:02 alternative is to make regulatory review less onerous

14:54:06 while making sure we protect our historic gems.

14:54:10 Then the issue that Mr. Harrison brought up about do

14:54:13 they want to do this based on what the designation

14:54:13 requires or on what Wilson Stair requires, that I had

14:54:20 conversation very openly with Janet Zink of the Times

14:54:24 because she said, you know, it looks like you're

14:54:26 flipping.

14:54:26 I'm pretty consistent if it's on the same policy but

14:54:28 because it's been so long in coming, at first it was

14:54:30 my assumption or my recollection that they always

14:54:35 wanted the designation.

14:54:36 And I thought this council gets jerked around between

14:54:41 new data or old data, incomplete information, and I

14:54:44 thought the whole way the petitioner wanted it, and

14:54:48 then didn't, and it appears that it isn't the case

14:54:51 now, so, you know, I just -- I just think there's a

14:54:55 lot of merit to what the Tribune said today.

14:54:57 And I think it could be a middle of the road for us




14:55:01 ongoing not particularly for this particular hearing,

14:55:03 but I think that the requirements and the A.R.C.

14:55:07 regulation and the rules and everything that people go

14:55:09 through, they don't want to mess with that.

14:55:11 They run away from it because it is too onerous.

14:55:15 And that being said I don't know exactly what we're

14:55:18 doing, but I think it's my understanding from seeing

14:55:20 Mr. Shimberg going no, and we are saying yes, you

14:55:23 required it, and he and his client saying no, it

14:55:27 appears to me that somewhere, I particularly -- I

14:55:29 can't speak for anybody else -- I particularly assumed

14:55:32 or recollected that your client, Mr. Shimberg, Mr.

14:55:37 Grandoff, want this all the time and they just

14:55:39 changed.

14:55:40 Evidently when we were talking about that November

14:55:42 meeting at Planning Commission that wasn't the case.

14:55:44 So I certainly think that this warrants at least the

14:55:46 attention of going through next week and

14:55:49 reconsidering, if in fact at the time you're saying

14:55:52 it's appropriate for us to consider.

14:55:57 >>> I'm just here asking procedurally for

14:55:59 reconsideration.




14:56:03 >>ROSE FERLITA: That's what she said you were doing,

14:56:05 simply protecting your right to be able to do that at

14:56:07 the appropriate time. Although we are not asking for

14:56:09 any new testimony -- Mr. Shimberg, I don't want to

14:56:12 slight you.

14:56:13 I don't know if you want to say something.

14:56:15 >>JIM SHIMBERG: We did talk to the city attorney's

14:56:18 office about then yesterday and whether it wags

14:56:19 appropriate to stand up here today or not.

14:56:21 And their comment to me was they are not going to

14:56:24 advise me not to be here, even though everybody agrees

14:56:26 that we have a hearing scheduled for next week.

14:56:28 We just wanted to protect our record.

14:56:30 >>ROSE FERLITA: Then my point in saying way said was

14:56:33 simply to let you know it's not going on deaf ears,

14:56:38 and I think we'll take this concern next weekend and

14:56:40 revisit it.

14:56:44 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Hold your thought right there. We'll

14:56:45 be back next week.

14:56:46 Stay with us.

14:56:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sure Mr. Grandoff -- I'm sorry,

14:56:53 council.




14:56:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to say it would be

14:56:56 helpful for myself and the other council members I'm

14:56:59 sure if both Mr. Fernandez and the attorneys who are

14:57:03 before us would provide their chronologies to us in

14:57:06 advance of next Thursday so we have a chance to look

14:57:09 at them, refresh our memories, and what I would

14:57:12 particularly like from the city clerk's office is a

14:57:14 transcript of some of the conversation during the

14:57:16 zoning meeting, because I seem -- I think it would be

14:57:21 helpful to have all of this data before us.

14:57:23 But when we have the second reading next Thursday.

14:57:28 >>> Janett prepared a chronology, and also on your

14:57:32 desk by now on some of those issues.

14:57:34 Be glad to do that.

14:57:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I was watching you all on the back.

14:57:40 And the only thing I want to say is a general

14:57:43 statement.

14:57:43 And I think the newspaper kind of reminded us of this

14:57:45 today, is I think one thing we are not very good about

14:57:50 is finality.

14:57:51 I think -- regardless of what side of the issue

14:57:55 anybody is on, I think we are starting to look like




14:57:57 flip-floppers, and we can't make up our mind, we have

14:58:00 public hearings that go on for hours and hours, which

14:58:04 is good, because all the discussion gets out.

14:58:06 And then two weeks later, we're all over the map and

14:58:11 flip flopping and deciding this and deciding that.

14:58:13 Regardless of which way the issues go, let's just try

14:58:17 and get some finality to our decisions over the next

14:58:19 year, and be done with them, and get away from all

14:58:22 this reconsideration.

14:58:24 And I don't mean that targeted to one side or the

14:58:27 other or any particular issue.

14:58:28 Just as a matter of principle.

14:58:32 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Grandoff, let me complete my

14:58:35 thought, not -- kind of in response to him although I

14:58:38 know he's not directing it to just me.

14:58:40 But one person's definition of flip-flop might be

14:58:43 another person's definition of taking things case by

14:58:45 case.

14:58:46 And obviously I supported to this point.

14:58:50 It's not a done deal yet.

14:58:51 But to this point I supported the cigar petition.

14:58:54 And in this case, I supported the other side.




14:58:56 So, I mean, we just have to look at all the facts.

14:59:00 I think the problem here is not necessarily, just

14:59:02 speaking for me, I did not flip-flop.

14:59:05 I based my decision on way thought was the evidence.

14:59:07 And there is just some benefit, much benefit to be

14:59:11 said about looking at something a second time.

14:59:13 So I think Ms. Saul-Sena is asking you to send in that

14:59:18 information and we'll look at it, and, you know, vote

14:59:22 on its own merits.

14:59:23 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: We didn't want to be too late so we

14:59:26 came this morning.

14:59:27 Thank you much.

14:59:28 Thanks for your time.

14:59:29 >>GWEN MILLER: All right.

14:59:30 Is there anyone else that would like to ask for

14:59:31 reconsideration?

14:59:32 Mr. Shelby, do you want to ask for reconsideration?

14:59:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: No.

14:59:37 Well, yes.

14:59:37 I just want to ask you, just a reminder, and I know

14:59:42 it's difficult but in a Quays judicial setting you

14:59:44 have to put on your judicial hats sometimes that what




14:59:48 you heard today is not evidence and not to be

14:59:50 considered as evidence and it is not repeated or put

14:59:53 into evidence as a public hearing, it has no weight or

14:59:56 effect.

14:59:56 Just to keep that in mind.

14:59:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, thank you.

14:59:59 We now go to our committee reports.

15:00:01 Public safety, Ms. Rose Ferlita.

15:00:16 Mr. Shelby cut you off.

15:00:17 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I understood this issue came up

15:00:20 earlier.

15:00:21 >> Put your name on the record.

15:00:22 >>> Steve Michelini. This is item 23 regarding the

15:00:26 referring of businesses who filed late, to the Code

15:00:30 Enforcement Board.

15:00:31 Currently, you have a semiannual report that's due

15:00:35 within 15 days.

15:00:36 It's extremely difficult to get those reports done for

15:00:40 half a year in 15 days.

15:00:43 That criteria needs to be looked at and perhaps

15:00:46 changed to 30 or 45 days to prepare.

15:00:48 If anything happens, an accountant is out sick, a




15:00:52 business owner is out sick, the records are being

15:00:54 compiled, this is a very hard standard to meet.

15:00:59 In addition to that, your code says that they come

15:01:03 before City Council.

15:01:04 It doesn't say anything about going to the standards

15:01:07 Code Enforcement Board.

15:01:08 And that again is another hardship.

15:01:11 You have remembered -- referred, I guess, about 40 or

15:01:15 50 cases pending now that are in sort of in limb Box

15:01:18 they have no place to government another reporting

15:01:20 period has come and gone since those folks have been

15:01:23 told that they can't come in here and file the -- pay

15:01:27 their fine, and then you all decide whether or not

15:01:30 they were in violation or not to be sent to code

15:01:34 board.

15:01:34 I would respectfully request that they at least, for

15:01:37 the first or second time, before you go to the code

15:01:40 board, that that they come to City Council, explain

15:01:43 why they were late, do something about the notice, or

15:01:47 the filing date, and not send them to code board. The

15:01:51 code board isn't set up to do this.

15:01:53 And these people, these different businesses, deserve




15:01:56 the right to come before you and petition the

15:01:58 legislative body for relief.

15:02:02 In addition to coming to you, they are paying the fee.

15:02:04 They need to explain what their hardships are.

15:02:06 And that's for you to consider.

15:02:08 You can revoke their wet zoning if they are

15:02:11 egregiously violating this portion of the code and if

15:02:16 not then it goes to code board and comes back to you.

15:02:19 You are in a ping-pong ball match here and the own

15:02:22 verse to take time off from work to address these

15:02:25 different issues.

15:02:25 It's a hardship and I respectfully request you not

15:02:30 send them to the code board, that they come to the

15:02:30 City Council.

15:02:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

15:02:33 >>STEVE MICHELINI: You can make a motion sometime.

15:02:37 Anyway it's item 23.

15:02:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.

15:02:41 Public safety.

15:02:41 Ms. Rose Ferlita.

15:02:44 >>ROSE FERLITA: I would like to move resolutions 6

15:02:46 through 8, please.




15:02:48 >> I have a motion and second.

15:02:48 (Motion carried).

15:02:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Parks, recreation, vice chair Mr. Kevin

15:02:54 White.

15:02:55 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move number 9 through 11.

15:03:01 >> Second.

15:03:01 (Motion carried).

15:03:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Public works, Mr. John Dingfelder.

15:03:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move items 12 through 14.

15:03:07 >> Second.

15:03:07 (Motion carried).

15:03:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Finance Committee, Kevin White.

15:03:12 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move 15 through 29 and request send 23

15:03:27 to code board.

15:03:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

15:03:29 (Motion carried).

15:03:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Building and zoning, Mrs. Linda

15:03:37 Saul-Sena.

15:03:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to move resolutions 30

15:03:51 through 43.

15:03:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.

15:03:56 (Motion carried).




15:03:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Number 44.

15:04:00 Move an ordinance authorizing installation and

15:04:03 maintenance of an encroachment existing canopies and

15:04:06 architectural features by 514 Franklin LLC over a

15:04:10 portion of the public right-of-way known as Franklin

15:04:11 Street and Twiggs Street as more particularly

15:04:14 described herein subject to certain terms, covenants,

15:04:18 conditions and agreements, as more particularly

15:04:19 described herein, providing an effective date.

15:04:20 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.

15:04:24 >> Second.

15:04:24 (Motion carried).

15:04:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Transportation.

15:04:34 Shawn Harrison.

15:04:34 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I would like to move items 45

15:04:37 through 51.

15:04:42 He.

15:04:42 >> Second.

15:04:42 (Motion carried).

15:04:43 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Like to set item 52 for public

15:04:47 hearing.

15:04:47 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.




15:04:49 (Motion carried).

15:04:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public going to

15:04:55 speak on item 53 and 54 through 56?

15:04:59 Would you please stand and raise your right hand?

15:05:01 (Oath administered by Clerk).

15:05:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Please when you state your name

15:05:17 reaffirm that you have been sworn.

15:05:18 Ski that all communications relative to today's

15:05:21 hearings that have been available -- I see the clerk

15:05:23 shaking her head that they have not received any,

15:05:26 therefore not requesting a motion.

15:05:27 In addition if any member of City Council has any

15:05:29 verbal communication was any petitioner, his or her

15:05:33 representative or any members of the public in

15:05:34 connection with any of the petitions that will be

15:05:36 heard please disclose the identity of the group,

15:05:39 person or entity with whom it occurred and the

15:05:41 substance of that verbal communication.

15:05:43 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open items 53 to 56.

15:05:46 We have a motion and second.

15:05:47 (Motion carried)

15:05:49 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak




15:05:51 on item 53?

15:05:53 >> Move to close.

15:05:53 >> Second.

15:05:54 (Motion carried)

15:05:58 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance upon second reading,

15:06:04 move an ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing,

15:06:09 and abandoning a certain right-of-way all that alley

15:06:13 lying south of Ivy street north of CORDELIA street

15:06:20 east of Matanzas Avenue and west of MacDill Avenue

15:06:23 map of John drew's first extension to northwest Tampa

15:06:27 a subdivision in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough

15:06:28 County Florida the same being more fully described

15:06:31 herein in section 2 providing an effective date.

15:06:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Roll call vote.

15:06:37 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder and

15:06:39 Saul-Sena voting no.

15:06:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that

15:06:43 would like to speak on item 54?

15:06:46 >> Move to close.

15:06:46 >> Second.

15:06:47 (Motion carried).

15:06:47 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move to adopt the following ordinance




15:06:51 upon second reading, an ordinance vacating, closing,

15:06:53 discontinuing, and abandoning a certain right-of-way

15:06:56 all that alleyway located south of Cypress Street west

15:06:59 of 19th Avenue north of orange street and east of

15:07:02 20th Avenue in Benjamin's 5th addition a

15:07:07 subdivision in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County

15:07:10 Florida the same being more fully described in section

15:07:13 2 hereof providing an effective date.

15:07:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

15:07:17 Voice vote.

15:07:20 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder voting no,

15:07:22 Alvarez being absent.

15:07:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that

15:07:24 would like to speak on item 55?

15:07:27 >> Move to close.

15:07:28 >> Second.

15:07:28 (Motion carried).

15:07:28 >>SHAWN HARRISON: .

15:07:41 FROM THE FLOOR: Did you say 55?

15:07:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Did you want to speak on 55?

15:07:45 >> Yes.

15:07:46 >>GWEN MILLER: You need to make a motion.




15:07:48 >> So moved.

15:07:48 >> Second.

15:07:49 >> Motion and second to reopen the public hearing.

15:07:52 >> Yes.

15:07:53 Sonya Larson, 3825 east Boulevard and I'm here on

15:07:57 behalf of several of the residents that live adjacent

15:08:02 to the petitioner.

15:08:03 And we have actually reached a compromise with the

15:08:07 petitioner.

15:08:08 We had some issues with respect to the parking.

15:08:10 And we have met.

15:08:12 And I think we have reached a compromise.

15:08:15 And I just wanted to make sure that the petitioner was

15:08:17 going to go on the record and confirm what we agreed

15:08:20 to.

15:08:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Is the petitioner here?

15:08:24 >>> Yes.

15:08:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Would you like to tell us?

15:08:28 >>> Yes.

15:08:30 So one thing that we agreed to is that the hours of

15:08:32 operation during the week would be till 10:00 at

15:08:35 night, and on the weekends no later than midnight.




15:08:39 And with respect to the parking, they needed to use a

15:08:44 lot that was adjacent to Mrs. McGriff and they have

15:08:48 agreed they would not use that lot past 10 p.m. on any

15:08:52 given night, and that they would use their best

15:08:54 efforts to use that parking lot primarily for their

15:08:58 employees, but certainly under several occasions they

15:09:01 may need to use it for general parking but they have

15:09:03 agreed to use their best effort to use that for

15:09:05 employee parking.

15:09:07 And that they will also maintain some fencing in the

15:09:12 area that's adjacent between Mrs. McGriff's property

15:09:16 and the lot that they need to use.

15:09:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, come up.

15:09:20 Do you agree to that?

15:09:22 Wait till you get to the mike.

15:09:23 Come to the mike.

15:09:24 Come to the mike.

15:09:26 Put your name on the record.

15:09:28 >>> Steven Finelly.

15:09:30 I have been sworn. I did not agree to anything

15:09:32 concerning hours of operation in the restaurant.

15:09:34 What I did agree to was that the lot that is adjacent




15:09:37 to the person that she represents would not be used

15:09:41 past 10:00 and would be primarily used for employee

15:09:44 parking where possible.

15:09:45 But I did not agree to committing to any hours of

15:09:48 operation.

15:09:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just for clarification, right now,

15:09:54 the motion, or I guess the ordinance that was approved

15:09:57 for first read diagnosis not include any limitation on

15:10:00 hours?

15:10:00 Is that correct, madam counsel?

15:10:03 >>> Rebecca Curt, legal department.

15:10:05 No, the ordinance that went to first reading before

15:10:08 you today has no additional conditions relating to the

15:10:10 hours of operation.

15:10:11 And I just would also like to advise council that as

15:10:14 far as any other parking regulations, parking will be

15:10:18 reviewed by city staff, because this use will require

15:10:22 a change of use permit.

15:10:23 But it's not necessarily a condition that would be

15:10:25 appropriate to tie to the wet zoning today.

15:10:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

15:10:29 Would anyone else like to speak?




15:10:32 You can't speak again.

15:10:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question of the petitioner.

15:10:36 >>GWEN MILLER: You can come up again.

15:10:44 He has a question.

15:10:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Of the petitioner.

15:10:46 Sir, you have heard, I guess, the neighbor, some

15:10:49 adjacent neighbors' request for hours.

15:10:51 You are saying you don't necessarily agree with that

15:10:54 10 and 12.

15:10:55 Are there any hour limitation that is you all would

15:10:57 agree to as a compromise?

15:10:59 >>> Yes.

15:11:00 Normally what we try to do is we set a time frame for

15:11:03 hours initially, and then we adjust it.

15:11:05 Usually adjust it backward based upon our flow.

15:11:09 I mean, I have three restaurants that are currently

15:11:12 open.

15:11:12 None of them are open past ten during the week or past

15:11:15 eleven on the weekends.

15:11:16 I was considering keeping this restaurant at least

15:11:18 initially open perhaps to eleven on certain days

15:11:22 during the week, and no later than midnight on Friday




15:11:25 and Saturday.

15:11:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we as council put that as

15:11:29 a condition, at least that might -- if that's good

15:11:32 with you, and then if that works with the

15:11:35 neighborhood.

15:11:35 It's not exactly what they wanted but it's close.

15:11:38 >>> It is close.

15:11:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Has to go back to first reading.

15:11:42 But we can do that next week, in seven days.

15:11:48 >>> I'm fine with that.

15:11:52 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I move to send to the legal with the

15:11:55 hours of operation being midnight.

15:11:57 What did you say, midnight on weekends, and eleven

15:12:00 through the week.

15:12:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.

15:12:02 (Motion carried).

15:12:03 >>THE CLERK: Has to come back next week?

15:12:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Come back next week, yes.

15:12:10 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak

15:12:12 on item 56?

15:12:13 >> Move to close.

15:12:14 >> Second.




15:12:14 (Motion carried)

15:12:18 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to adopt the following

15:12:20 ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance making

15:12:23 lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol of

15:12:25 more than 1% by weight and not more than 14% by weight

15:12:28 and wines regardless of alcoholic content, beer and

15:12:30 wine, 2(COP), for consumption on premises and in

15:12:33 sealed containers for consumption off premises at or

15:12:35 from that certain lot, plot or tract of land located

15:12:38 at 2223 Westshore Boulevard, unit B-216 and 217,

15:12:44 Tampa, Florida, as more particularly described in

15:12:46 section 2 hereof, waiving certain restrictions as to

15:12:48 distance based upon certain findings, providing for

15:12:51 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an

15:12:54 effective date.

15:12:54 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion ad and second.

15:12:58 Voice roll call.

15:13:06 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Alvarez being absent.

15:13:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 57.

15:13:12 We need to open it.

15:13:14 It's already closed.

15:13:15 >>THE CLERK: You need to open the public hearing.




15:13:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.

15:13:20 >> Second.

15:13:20 (Motion carried).

15:13:21 >>CHAIRMAN: You will have to swear.

15:13:26 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Can we open 57 through 63 all at

15:13:31 once?

15:13:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.

15:13:32 We have a motion to open items 57 through 63.

15:13:35 (Motion carried).

15:13:38 Item number 57.

15:13:40 Mrs. Saul-Sena, would you read that one?

15:13:43 Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on

15:13:44 item number 57?

15:13:46 >> Move to close.

15:13:47 >> Second.

15:13:47 (Motion carried)

15:13:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move an ordinance upon -- for

15:13:56 second reading, adoption upon second reading, an

15:13:58 ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive plan,

15:14:00 future land use element, future land use map for

15:14:03 property located in the general vicinity of North

15:14:04 Armenia Avenue and ALVA drive from residential 10 to




15:14:10 community mixed use 35 providing for repeal of all

15:14:12 ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,

15:14:14 providing an effective date.

15:14:15 >> I have a motion and second.

15:14:17 Voice roll call.

15:14:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You indicate that I had voted for

15:14:23 this.

15:14:23 Are you sure of that, madam clerk?

15:14:34 This is the one that is adjacent to Wishart.

15:14:37 I'm good with this.

15:14:38 I just had to refresh my memory.

15:14:41 Yes, yes.

15:14:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.

15:14:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.

15:14:45 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes.

15:14:47 >>ROSE FERLITA: Yes.

15:14:48 >>KEVIN WHITE: Yes.

15:14:49 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Alvarez being absent.

15:14:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that

15:14:52 would like to speak on 58?

15:14:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 58 I think we need to continue.

15:14:57 >>THE CLERK: Continue to March 9th at 9:30.




15:15:01 >> So moved.

15:15:02 >> Second.

15:15:02 (Motion carried).

15:15:02 >>GWEN MILLER: On number 59, we need to open.

15:15:07 Does anyone in the public want to speak on 59?

15:15:11 >> Move to close.

15:15:13 >> Second.

15:15:13 (Motion carried)

15:15:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to adopt the following

15:15:19 ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance amending

15:15:22 Tampa comprehensive plan, future land use element,

15:15:24 future land use map for property located at 3802 north

15:15:28 Glen Avenue within northeast MacFarlane Avenue of West

15:15:32 Tampa from residential 10 to residential 20, providing

15:15:35 for severability, providing an effective date.

15:15:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Voice roll call.

15:15:40 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Alvarez being absent.

15:15:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that

15:15:48 would like to speak on item number 60?

15:15:50 >>ROSE PETRUCHA: Planning Commission staff.

15:15:54 When you heard this at the first public hearing on

15:15:57 February 16th, the petitioner was not available to




15:15:59 attend that public hearing.

15:16:01 He is here in case you have any questions.

15:16:04 This is the cigar factory in Palmetto Beach, the

15:16:10 Guillera cigar factory.

15:16:13 >> Move to close.

15:16:14 >> Second.

15:16:14 (Motion carried)

15:16:17 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to adopt an ordinance on second

15:16:22 reading, move to approve a small scale amendment of

15:16:26 the Tampa comprehensive plan, future land use element,

15:16:29 future land use map in the general vicinity of north

15:16:31 26th street, Marconi street, and Clark street in

15:16:35 Palmetto Beach from residential 10 to residential 20

15:16:38 to residential 35.

15:16:40 >> I have a motion and second.

15:16:41 >>THE CLERK: Read the rest.

15:16:47 >>> Providing for repeal of all ordinances in

15:16:50 conflict, providing for severability, providing an

15:16:51 effective date.

15:16:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Voice roll call.

15:16:58 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Alvarez being absent.

15:17:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that




15:17:05 would like to speak on item 61?

15:17:07 >> Move to close.

15:17:08 >> Second.

15:17:08 (Motion carried)

15:17:12 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move an ordinance upon second reading,

15:17:16 amending Tampa comprehensive plan, future land use,

15:17:19 future land use map for the property located near the

15:17:22 vicinity of west Woodlawn Avenue and MacDill

15:17:24 Avenue from residential 10 to res 20 providing for

15:17:27 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for

15:17:29 severability, providing an effective date.

15:17:31 >> Second.

15:17:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Voice roll call.

15:17:35 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Alvarez being absent.

15:17:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone in the public like to

15:17:48 speak on item 62?

15:17:50 >>THE CLERK: 62, that needs to be removed from the

15:17:54 agenda.

15:17:57 Amendment was denied.

15:17:58 >> So moved.

15:17:58 >> Second.

15:17:59 (Motion carried).




15:17:59 >>GWEN MILLER: 63.

15:18:01 Anyone want to speak on item 63?

15:18:04 >> Move to close.

15:18:05 >> Second.

15:18:05 (Motion carried)

15:18:08 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to adopt the following

15:18:10 ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance amending

15:18:12 the Tampa comprehensive plan, future land use element,

15:18:15 future land use map, for the property located at

15:18:17 2701-2703, and 2705-2707 west Mississippi Avenue from

15:18:22 residential 10 to residential 20 providing for repeal

15:18:24 of all ordinances in conflict, providing for

15:18:27 severability, providing an effective date.

15:18:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

15:18:29 Roll call vote.

15:18:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Alvarez being absent.

15:18:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 64 is a continued public

15:18:42 hearing.

15:18:44 Anyone in the public that's going to speak, would you

15:18:45 please stand and raise your right hand?

15:18:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I thought they were just here.

15:18:53 They must have stepped out.




15:18:54 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Done yet?

15:19:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Almost done.

15:19:08 Last one.

15:19:22 >>JAMES COOK: Land Development Coordination.

15:19:24 I have not been sworn.

15:19:27 (Oath administered by Clerk).

15:19:33 >>JAMES COOK: This is a continued public hearing from

15:19:35 last week.

15:19:41 Petitioner is requesting --

15:19:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What's the basis for the

15:19:50 continuance?

15:19:51 >>> Abutting property owner represented by Mr.

15:19:53 Grandoff, right here.

15:19:55 This is the strip center facing Kennedy, a Hungry

15:19:57 Howie's located in there.

15:20:01 They objected to the vacating based on an alley they

15:20:08 deliver pizza to the site.

15:20:09 However petitioner amended the petition not to vacate

15:20:12 the alley, they are going to provide access to Dakota.

15:20:19 The alley runs through the middle of the property.

15:20:22 They have plans to build a building that will straddle

15:20:26 that alley.




15:20:29 This is the alley looking north from Cleveland.

15:20:31 Petitioner owns property on both sides.

15:20:39 The alley looking south from Kennedy.

15:20:41 There's a McDonald on the west side of the alley.

15:20:43 Hungry Howie's here on the east side of the alley.

15:20:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The tire tracks look pretty old.

15:20:58 I apologize for not being here last week on this

15:21:00 discussion.

15:21:00 >>JAMES COOK: I'll let Christine from transportation

15:21:09 speak to the.

15:21:10 She had someone go out and speak to the manager of

15:21:13 Hungry Howie's.

15:21:14 In fact the truck backs in.

15:21:17 They are not going all the way through.

15:21:19 However, there's a church mid-block.

15:21:21 And you can see from the photos -- I have one

15:21:25 here -- .

15:21:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have received a letter from the

15:21:29 church?

15:21:31 >>> Yes.

15:21:32 >> Objecting or asking for something or other?

15:21:37 >>> This is the back of the church property.




15:21:38 It actually faces Oregon.

15:21:40 They park here in the back.

15:21:45 With the petitioner wanting to provide an east-west

15:21:48 access going off of Dakota this will not be affected.

15:21:51 They will still be able to come in north off of

15:21:54 Kennedy, or come in off Dakota and go to the rear of

15:21:58 the property.

15:21:58 So that is not affected.

15:22:03 Just face it is forgot front of the property going

15:22:06 north.

15:22:06 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Cook, there was a "not approve" on

15:22:11 this thing.

15:22:12 Did you change your mind?

15:22:14 >>> What they required was a letter from all the

15:22:16 abutting property owners but they didn't have a

15:22:18 problem with the vacating as petitioned for.

15:22:20 However, they removed their objection with the amended

15:22:23 vacating request to only do the south part and provide

15:22:26 an east-west access.

15:22:28 That way it would not affect the access right now.

15:22:31 They would still have access.

15:22:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Saul-Sena has a question for you.




15:22:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: At the last hearing, I asked what

15:22:39 the city's responsibility was in terms of providing

15:22:42 access for trucks of the scale and how the people were

15:22:49 talking about.

15:22:50 Because I really didn't know.

15:22:51 I think you said that you weren't sure and you wanted

15:22:53 to go back and take a look at that.

15:22:56 >>> Christine Bruno, transportation.

15:22:59 I have been sworn.

15:22:59 I went back and did a little research.

15:23:01 And the alleys are not designed to accommodate tractor

15:23:05 trailers.

15:23:06 Most of the existing alleys were platted 50 to 100

15:23:09 yourself ago so tractor trailers weren't an usual you

15:23:13 then.

15:23:13 The majority of the existing alleys within the City of

15:23:15 Tampa are on average about 10 feet wide.

15:23:19 So we do not recommend that tractor trailers go down

15:23:25 the alleys.

15:23:26 >> So it's not our responsibility to make sure the

15:23:28 tractor trailers have alley access?

15:23:31 >>> No.




15:23:31 Our only responsibility is if there's solid waste

15:23:34 pickup in the alley, that it is adequately designed

15:23:37 for solid waste vehicle to maneuver.

15:23:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.

15:23:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?

15:23:43 Is there any -- Mr. Dingfelder?

15:23:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just to Mr. Santiago.

15:23:47 We had an issue recently in West Tampa from where I

15:23:53 thought you gave us legal advice looking at our code

15:23:56 that said we weren't supposed to vacate half of the

15:24:00 alley.

15:24:00 >>ROLANDO SANTIAGO: City code, I cited to you, I may

15:24:04 still have it here.

15:24:06 >> Didn't change, did it?

15:24:07 >>> No, sir.

15:24:08 City code has not.

15:24:10 Give me one second.

15:24:13 Chapter 22-36-A states that if the vacating, closing,

15:24:19 discontinuing and abandoning of a park or portion of

15:24:23 an alleyway desired by the petitioner to be vacated,

15:24:26 closed, discontinued and abandoned, will result in the

15:24:29 creation of a dead-end alleyway, then the petitioner




15:24:34 is required to petition the vacate, close,

15:24:37 discontinue, abandon the entire alleyway or such part

15:24:40 or portion thereof, as will preclude the creation of a

15:24:44 dead-end alleyway, unless the petitioner provides an

15:24:47 adequate turn-around and cul-de-sac.

15:24:50 So by code, you may vacate, partially vacate an alley

15:24:54 provided that you follow that condition, and that is

15:24:57 that the petitioner provides an adequate turn-around

15:24:59 and cul-de-sac.

15:25:01 >> In this case the mitigation is to go out that side

15:25:04 street.

15:25:04 >>> In this case as I understand it they are

15:25:06 effectively turning a straight up and down alley,

15:25:08 north-south alley into an L-shaped alley, yes, sir.

15:25:12 >> And what legal -- are they going to replat and give

15:25:17 us that new segment as an alley, as a legal alley?

15:25:25 >>> That specific condition, has been in discussion.

15:25:28 As I understand now it's supposed to be a

15:25:30 transportation easement.

15:25:31 >> Is that equally acceptable to transportation

15:25:34 department?

15:25:34 >>> I defer to transportation.




15:25:37 >>> Christine Bruno: Transportation is fine with the

15:25:43 transportation easement.

15:25:46 However, if the petitioner does decide to dedicate it

15:25:49 to the city, it's a little bit easier for the city to

15:25:53 control later on.

15:25:55 With the transportation easement, they can always come

15:25:57 back in and request for release of that easement.

15:26:01 >> And when the petitioner comes up -- and I think

15:26:04 he's coming up soon -- I would ask about improvements

15:26:06 to the alley, as well as you got a big project.

15:26:11 There might be some consideration for that.

15:26:14 >>> Yes.

15:26:14 And I have spoken to the legal representative for the

15:26:16 petitioner and they have agreed to pave the alley.

15:26:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?

15:26:27 >>> Hamilton Jones with Gaspar properties, and I have

15:26:30 not been sworn in.

15:26:33 (Oath administered by Clerk) for those who weren't

15:26:47 here last week I'll try to be brief and go through it.

15:26:51 On the Elmo, you will see the site.

15:26:55 This is the property that's in question.

15:26:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You can make it as short as you




15:27:06 want for my benefit.

15:27:07 >>> The only issue from last week was to try was this

15:27:12 transportation issue.

15:27:13 You heard from transportation Christine Bruno.

15:27:17 We were going to try to accommodate that I think the

15:27:21 neighborhood has talked to Hungry Howie's and they can

15:27:24 actually deliver in a smaller truck.

15:27:25 I think they did get that and John Grandoff can

15:27:30 confirm that.

15:27:31 If need be, we can always accommodate a reserve spot

15:27:35 on the Oregon side for deliveries if that needs to

15:27:38 be -- so we simply ask for your approval.

15:27:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that

15:27:43 would like to speak on item 64?

15:27:49 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza.

15:27:53 I represent winter holdings, which owns the commercial

15:27:56 building up on Kennedy Boulevard and the corner of the

15:27:58 alley where Hungry Howie's is.

15:28:01 We resolved the Hungry Howie's I shall.

15:28:04 They can make deliveries.

15:28:05 That's out of the way.

15:28:06 At this point David would ask that you vacate the




15:28:09 entire alley.

15:28:10 His rationale is if you are going to vacate part of

15:28:13 the alley, you just may as well vacate all of it

15:28:17 complete onto Kennedy.

15:28:19 He would obtain the east 7.5 feet of it and McDonald

15:28:23 would obtain the east 7.5 feet of it.

15:28:28 I'll stay with the aerial.

15:28:31 Can you all see that?

15:28:33 David's property is right there.

15:28:35 Here's McDonald.

15:28:36 Right now you're here agreeing.

15:28:38 The proposal is to vacate up to here, this portion.

15:28:43 Then the access would come this way.

15:28:44 We can make that turn.

15:28:46 I just think if they are vacating alleys today, why

15:28:53 not vacate all of it?

15:28:54 I'll get half, McDonald will get half, Hamilton will

15:28:59 have his full both sides of the alley and we will do a

15:29:01 transportation easement to allow the church -- here's

15:29:04 the church -- to gain an alley.

15:29:08 Hamilton's tenants to get in an alley.

15:29:12 And the precedent for that is just north of that,




15:29:14 about 12 years ago, I handled a petition to vacate

15:29:23 Fourth Street for the Ferman Motor Car Company, you

15:29:27 wouldn't know it's vacated but the Ferman Motor Car

15:29:29 Company owns that property.

15:29:31 They vacated all of it. Because all of the property

15:29:32 owners wanted to do it. Ferman took over maintenance,

15:29:34 insurance and responsibility for the property.

15:27:14

15:29:59 >> It also has the benefit of the property.

15:30:01 There's a transportation easement that allows the

15:30:03 public to come back and forth on Fuller Avenue between

15:30:05 Willow and Oregon.

15:30:07 Seems to me, that's the better public policy reason,

15:30:09 and that's our request.

15:30:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison.

15:30:13 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Grandoff, are you willing to

15:30:16 have a transportation easement for the public in

15:30:18 general, not just for certain parties along there?

15:30:21 >> Yes, yes, which is how we did the Fuller Street

15:30:23 deal.

15:30:24 So everyone can come in and out, you would be coming

15:30:28 south from Kennedy, and you would be on what you think




15:30:32 is an alley.

15:30:33 David would own the left half.

15:30:35 McDonald's own the right half.

15:30:37 Then you would turn as you proceed into Hamilton's

15:30:40 project.

15:30:40 >> You are going to pave that part of it?

15:30:42 >> Well, Mr. Jones will pave that.

15:30:45 >>GWEN MILLER: It would be on his part.

15:30:49 >> He wants to do that.

15:30:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's hear Mr. Jones say.

15:30:54 >> Actually, as a concession and kind of an olive

15:30:56 branch, we offered to pave the entire alley all the

15:30:59 way from Kennedy south.

15:31:03 >>MARY ALVAREZ: How about bricking it?

15:31:04 [ Laughter ]

15:31:08 >> If I may comment on that, this brings up a concern

15:31:15 that McDonald's and the church needs to be

15:31:17 contacted.

15:31:18 Also be presented to them and they need to agree to

15:31:20 the proposed vacating of all of the alley.

15:31:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there a second reading?

15:31:31 >> There's no ordinance yet.




15:31:32 There's still time to work on that.

15:31:36 That's up to the discretion of Council if they want to

15:31:39 do that.

15:31:39 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Can you tell me again where the church

15:31:42 is?

15:31:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That other picture might show it.

15:31:46 >> On the Elmo, the church is right here.

15:31:50 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So it abuts the alley, too.

15:31:52 >> Yes.

15:31:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder.

15:31:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.

15:31:56 The only other issue that nobody has spoken to yet and

15:32:01 it's really a zoning issue is if you vacate the alley

15:32:06 and then they own to the middle of the alley, that

15:32:08 means that their side yard setback shifts over.

15:32:15 Everybody get me on that?

15:32:16 >> That's correct.

15:32:16 But if they are asking for a transportation easement

15:32:19 over a public access transportation easement over it,

15:32:22 they cannot build --

15:32:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On the easement.

15:32:27 >> On the easement.




15:32:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But their property line shifts

15:32:29 over, therefore they take up more of the existing

15:32:33 property.

15:32:36 The easement -- sure, the easement gets counted

15:32:38 because they move their actual property line over.

15:32:41 Therefore their setback line moves over accordingly.

15:32:44 Now, you know, it's not a big deal, but it's something

15:32:47 that, you know, we should take into consideration.

15:32:52 >> If I may add, Mr. Grandoff was a little more

15:32:54 familiar with some of the zoning in that area.

15:32:56 He just advised me it's CG zone and therefore they

15:32:59 have a zero setback.

15:33:00 We can look into that and come back to you.

15:33:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.

15:33:03 I wasn't aware of that.

15:33:04 That's interesting too.

15:33:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison, are you going to make a

15:33:08 motion?

15:33:08 Need to close the public hearing first.

15:33:11 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to close the public hearing.

15:33:12 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.

15:33:14 All in favor of the motion, aye.




15:33:15 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to send this to legal to vacate

15:33:19 the entire alley, but preserving a nonexclusive

15:33:23 easement over the northern section, whatever that

15:33:26 section was.

15:33:28 You know what we're talking about Roland.

15:33:30 >> Yes, sir, I know.

15:33:31 We'll work on that, and we'll also contact all the

15:33:34 abutting property owners to get their input.

15:33:36 I think this might have changed.

15:33:38 As I understand it, some of them -- some of the

15:33:40 abutting affected property owners did not object so

15:33:44 long as that top portion remained in its current

15:33:47 condition.

15:33:47 I think once you vacate it, you've now extended their

15:33:51 property boundaries, created certain tax implications

15:33:54 for them.

15:33:55 Liability implications.

15:33:56 So it -- we may come back to revisit this, but

15:33:59 certainly we'll work through those bugs between now --

15:34:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Bring back two ordinances.

15:34:06 >> We'll work on it.

15:34:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And Mr. Grandoff paves the whole




15:34:10 thing himself, personally?

15:34:14 >> If I may, there's a representative from the church

15:34:16 here.

15:34:17 >>GWEN MILLER: You can't speak.

15:34:18 We closed the public hearing.

15:34:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to reopen.

15:34:22 >>SHAWN HARRISON: If he has an objection, I want to

15:34:24 hear it now.

15:34:25 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion to reopen the public

15:34:26 hearing.

15:34:27 All in favor, aye.

15:34:28 You may speak, sir.

15:34:29 Put your name on the record.

15:34:30 >> My name is Dwight Baker, Pastor of the Church of

15:34:33 God of Prophecy, 107 South Oregon Avenue.

15:34:37 I have not yet been sworn.

15:34:38 (Oath administered by the clerk).

15:34:47 >> I do.

15:34:48 I would like to say on the matter, I am fully in

15:34:51 support of Gaspar's request to just vacate the

15:34:56 southern half of the alley.

15:34:57 From our standpoint, when we were first approached by




15:35:00 Gaspar and we discussed it as a church body, we wanted

15:35:04 not to have a dead-end alley.

15:35:05 We didn't want to be locked into one way in and out in

15:35:08 case of an emergency or anything.

15:35:10 So we asked, can we get another way to go in and out

15:35:13 of the property?

15:35:14 And Gaspar was more than willing to provide that.

15:35:18 We looked at their proposals, all the conditions that

15:35:20 they said they would meet, and it seemed acceptable to

15:35:24 us.

15:35:24 For us, in our best interest, we would rather that

15:35:27 just the southern half of the alley be vacated.

15:35:29 The northern half remains in the city's control.

15:35:31 It's better for us, I think, better for everyone, but,

15:35:35 of course, I know other folk have their opinions.

15:35:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison, you made a motion.

15:35:41 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Well, you understand that you would

15:35:43 still have every right that you now have to access

15:35:45 that.

15:35:46 Is it going to be a nonexclusive easement, which

15:35:48 anyone's in the public can still keep using that

15:35:51 alley.




15:35:51 It's just going to mean the ownership is going to

15:35:53 change.

15:35:54 And do you all own up to -- do you own a portion of

15:35:57 that, too?

15:35:58 >> Well, there's the area that is immediately South of

15:36:01 Hungry Howie's falls on our property.

15:36:04 So our property goes right up to where Gaspar's ends.

15:36:08 There was no mention made of us, of course, because

15:36:10 the whole issue seems to be between Hungry Howie's and

15:36:13 Gaspar.

15:36:14 But that extra seven and a half feet of easement, we

15:36:18 gain that also, but we really don't want it.

15:36:21 I mean, I don't see any benefit in having it.

15:36:23 We're quite happy where things are for us.

15:36:27 >>GWEN MILLER: All right.

15:36:29 So you agree with half, but not all.

15:36:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question.

15:36:34 Pastor, I'm going to assume that you don't pay taxes

15:36:39 as a church, either local, real estate taxes or any

15:36:44 other kind of taxes, correct?

15:36:46 >> Correct.

15:36:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Because one of the things I might




15:36:48 be concerned about is, in adding to your property, if

15:36:50 you were a private property owner, we would add to

15:36:53 your tax base, but if you're not being taxed and we

15:36:56 add to your property, it won't increase your tax roll.

15:37:00 So I don't know.

15:37:02 I don't know if there's -- are there any other

15:37:03 concerns that you would have concern about?

15:37:06 >> We really don't need the extra seven and a half

15:37:08 feet.

15:37:09 I mean, it's not going to do anything for us.

15:37:12 And we do need the alleyway there to remain open for

15:37:15 the garbage truck to pick up, because the garbage is

15:37:18 picked up from behind there.

15:37:20 I like things the way it is.

15:37:21 I like the proposal that was put forward originally,

15:37:24 vacate the southern half, leave the northern half as

15:37:27 it is, in city control.

15:37:28 It's better for us.

15:37:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

15:37:32 Anyone else like to speak?

15:37:34 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.

15:37:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Have a motion and second to --




15:37:38 >> I'm sorry, Council.

15:37:39 I just want to clarify that a transportation easement

15:37:42 would not be needed on the southern part of the alley

15:37:44 because the property owner will be providing access to

15:37:51 Dakota.

15:37:52 So the transportation easement would just be on the

15:37:54 northern part of the alley, and onto the access to

15:37:57 Dakota.

15:38:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, do you want to rebuttal?

15:38:05 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Does it matter?

15:38:07 I mean, does it matter whether it's --

15:38:11 >> In my opinion, I don't --

15:38:12 >>SHAWN HARRISON: City to take it out of city

15:38:14 responsibility.

15:38:18 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I think it's our call.

15:38:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Let the petitioner rebuttal.

15:38:25 >> We're open to either proposal.

15:38:26 I mean, it solves our issue one way or the other.

15:38:29 We're trying to make all the neighbors happy.

15:38:31 We did talk to McDonald's.

15:38:34 That store is actually owned by McDonald's

15:38:37 corporate, and we talked with their local attorney.




15:38:41 They initially did have concerns if they did take

15:38:44 title didn't get to use it for their exclusive use and

15:38:47 liability issues.

15:38:48 They initially said that's not their first choice.

15:38:50 I just want to put that on record.

15:38:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's see what legal is going to say.

15:39:09 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chair, in the interest of

15:39:10 time, I'm going to withdraw my motion to vacate the

15:39:13 entire thing and just stick with the Gaspar section.

15:39:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.

15:39:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Have a motion and second to withdraw.

15:39:21 >> The public hearing needs to be closed.

15:39:24 >> I wanted to clarify for a moment, Council,

15:39:27 effectively what would be happening.

15:39:29 If you vacate the entire alleyway, and just basically

15:39:32 you just have an L-shaped easement, each party is

15:39:36 going to be responsible to maintain that.

15:39:38 So now you created by doing that, the church is not

15:39:41 going to be responsible to maintain that small

15:39:44 portion.

15:39:46 Each respective owner will be responsible to maintain

15:39:49 out to the center half.




15:39:50 That's effectively what is created.

15:39:52 Everybody else will have the ability to go over it.

15:39:54 If you go back to your original motion, the northern

15:39:56 half remains a public right-of-way.

15:39:58 This portion here, the Gaspar property is going to

15:40:01 dedicate, the public will have access to it, but

15:40:05 Gaspar will be responsible to maintain that.

15:40:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is that your motion, Mr. Harrison?

15:40:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, we have to close.

15:40:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.

15:40:13 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Second.

15:40:14 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.

15:40:16 All in favor of the motion, aye.

15:40:17 What's the pleasure of the Council?

15:40:19 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chair, because we don't have

15:40:20 buy-in from everybody on that northern section, I

15:40:23 would rather just stick with this original proposal

15:40:25 that's before us here today.

15:40:29 I'll withdraw my original motion.

15:40:32 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to

15:40:33 withdraw.

15:40:34 All in favor of the motion, aye.




15:40:35 [motion Carried]

15:40:36 Need another motion.

15:40:37 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to --

15:40:39 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Second.

15:40:40 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to send it to legal whatever

15:40:42 the proposal is that's before us right now.

15:40:45 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.

15:40:46 All in favor of the motion, aye.

15:40:48 Opposed, nay.

15:40:51 Now we go to information from Council members.

15:40:56 Mr. White, do you have anything?

15:40:59 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you, Madam Chair.

15:41:00 Just one thing.

15:41:03 In light -- make a motion for a couple of

15:41:06 commendations, please.

15:41:08 In light of detective Juan Serrano whose funeral was

15:41:14 today, I would like to make a motion we bring Sheriff

15:41:18 Gee in and give his department a commendation for

15:41:20 their expeditious work in helping to solve and capture

15:41:24 the hit-and-run victim that killed Detective Serrano

15:41:30 as well as the two canine officers, Deputy Jimmy

15:41:33 Pearre and his canine Bud, and Deputy Chris Grecco and




15:41:38 his canine Cazan.

15:41:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Have a motion and second.

15:41:42 All in favor, aye.

15:41:43 >>KEVIN WHITE: I would like to make that for the

15:41:46 16th, unless I get verification from them otherwise

15:41:51 that it won't be available that day.

15:42:02 >>GWEN MILLER: We don't want to have too many.

15:42:04 We have a long agenda.

15:42:05 >>KEVIN WHITE: I agree with that.

15:42:07 If I may just for maybe argument sake, I think that

15:42:10 would be a wonderful time to have it that week.

15:42:13 Chief Hogue could be here with the sheriff and

15:42:15 wouldn't have to --

15:42:17 >>GWEN MILLER: You won't go on and on and on.

15:42:19 >>KEVIN WHITE: No, ma'am.

15:42:20 Be real quick.

15:42:21 And like I said --

15:42:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Before we had two and we went on and

15:42:26 on.

15:42:26 >>KEVIN WHITE: And I haven't checked to see if that

15:42:28 date is available either.

15:42:29 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.




15:42:31 All in favor, aye.

15:42:31 [motion Carried]

15:42:32 Anything else?

15:42:33 >>KEVIN WHITE: That's it.

15:42:33 >>ROSE FERLITA: I have one question, with or without

15:42:37 his professional hat on, how long is the being sworn

15:42:40 in good for when somebody comes up here?

15:42:47 Is it morning to night, the week?

15:42:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Frankly, each case is in and of it to

15:42:57 itself.

15:43:01 >>MARY ALVAREZ: A couple, but a little comment first.

15:43:07 Council, we have a serious problem.

15:43:11 We are having these special discussion meetings where

15:43:13 the only two show up for these things are Linda --

15:43:16 excuse me, Ms. Saul-Sena and I.

15:43:18 Sometimes every once in a while you come.

15:43:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I was there at the one before.

15:43:22 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a serious problem where we

15:43:25 have to make these special discussion meetings,

15:43:28 especially when the Channel District plan is coming

15:43:31 up.

15:43:31 This is the future of that district, and we've got to




15:43:35 listen to everything that is being said about it.

15:43:37 It's huge.

15:43:40 And if you're not up to speed with it, we're going to

15:43:43 make some very serious decision on it.

15:43:45 So be it as it may, that's all I'm going to say about

15:43:48 that.

15:43:50 But now I need a motion that the CRA start at 8:00 on

15:43:56 March the 16th because the Ybor City marketing and

15:44:03 branding campaign is coming over to do a presentation.

15:44:06 They have been working very, very hard and very

15:44:08 seriously about this.

15:44:11 This campaign, we asked for it.

15:44:12 We wanted them to come over and talk to us about it.

15:44:15 I've been going to the meetings for this campaign.

15:44:19 And it behooves us to be there to listen to them.

15:44:23 I mean, 8:00, I don't mean 8:30 or 9:00, I mean 8:00.

15:44:30 Because it's going to take 45 minutes for them to put

15:44:32 this thing on.

15:44:35 March the 16th.

15:44:36 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion, aye.

15:44:39 [motion Carried]

15:44:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: The other one is that I want to




15:44:42 request legal to prepare the resolution honoring

15:44:45 women's history month to be placed on our March 9th

15:44:50 agenda for approval.

15:44:53 Women's history month is March 10th.

15:44:55 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.

15:44:56 All in favor, aye.

15:44:57 [motion Carried]

15:45:00 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Madam Chair.

15:45:02 We all, I think, have been contacted by members of the

15:45:04 Seminole Heights Civic Association about the

15:45:08 line-of-sight issues that exist along Florida.

15:45:10 And I know that the administration is working

15:45:12 diligently to try to resolve those.

15:45:14 So I would like to ask that code enforcement come in

15:45:16 in two weeks along with traffic and just update us on

15:45:19 those issues.

15:45:22 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion, aye.

15:45:24 [motion Carried]

15:45:27 >>ROSE FERLITA: I just want to tell Mr. Harrison we

15:45:30 have been in touch with Mr. LaMotte and Mr. Lane.

15:45:33 We got a call yesterday from a reporter that went out

15:45:36 there with inspector Amos.




15:45:39 And what has happened is -- I -- it has been an outcry

15:45:44 from that community.

15:45:45 They, he feel, asked -- evidently asked some of those

15:45:49 property owners that had cars to move them back

15:45:52 12 feet.

15:45:52 They did.

15:45:53 The next time they went out there with code

15:45:54 enforcement and with a reporter and they moved them

15:45:56 all back again.

15:45:57 It's what our frustration always is.

15:46:00 Enforcement.

15:46:01 >> This is an enforcement issue.

15:46:02 It's not a legislative issue.

15:46:03 >> We need to have them come.

15:46:03 You are absolutely right.

15:46:04 I just wanted to give you that update.

15:46:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Briefly, for those of you on Sunday

15:46:10 afternoon who would like to witness the debate between

15:46:12 Mr. Grandoff and myself about historic preservation,

15:46:16 it's going to be aired on ABC.

15:46:18 It will be pretty interesting.

15:46:19 We taped it last week.




15:46:21 Secondly, the Gasparilla festival of the Arts is this

15:46:25 weekend, and it will be a wonderful event for our

15:46:27 community.

15:46:28 And lastly, to tie into what Mary -- Ms. Alvarez said

15:46:32 about the Channel District, I am proposing a walking

15:46:36 tour, and I know that it's not convenient for some

15:46:39 Council members and I talked to Michael Chen about it,

15:46:43 he said he would be happy to provide individual ones

15:46:45 or collective ones but there's nothing like being on

15:46:48 the streets of the Channel District to see what is

15:46:50 being proposed.

15:46:51 So I have Ronda pulling together everybody's schedule

15:46:58 to see who might be proposal.

15:46:59 I'm proposing this Tuesday, and I don't have the

15:47:03 results.

15:47:03 But what time would be convenient --

15:47:05 >>MARY ALVAREZ: For me, it's 12:00.

15:47:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.

15:47:08 12:00 this coming Tuesday.

15:47:09 If you can't make that, then Mr. Chen will schedule

15:47:13 individual ones for other Council members.

15:47:16 That's it.




15:47:16 Do I need to make a motion to set that as a special

15:47:19 discussion walking tour, Tuesday at 12:00?

15:47:22 And we're going to meet at the Port Authority

15:47:25 building.

15:47:25 We're going to get a little van and cover as much as

15:47:28 we can in an hour.

15:47:30 Walking and riding.

15:47:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Giving you heads up, on that kind

15:47:34 of short notice --

15:47:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It would be nice to do that.

15:47:37 And with all due respect to Council, just to get a

15:47:40 sense of how many people are going to be there, just

15:47:43 knowing on the notice that you have now.

15:47:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, I sent a memo about this on

15:47:47 Monday so the other Council members were aware I was

15:47:50 looking at dates.

15:47:50 I know everybody has very difficult scheduling issues.

15:47:54 If you cannot come to this, then Mr. Chen said he

15:47:56 would create custom tours for people.

15:48:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I think we need a motion to set up a

15:48:05 special discussion date.

15:48:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Special discussion walking/driving




15:48:09 tour for this Tuesday which is the 7th at noon.

15:48:17 We're meeting in front of the Tampa Port Authority

15:48:20 building at Channelside and Kennedy.

15:48:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Public and the press are invited.

15:48:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Public and press are invited.

15:48:25 Put on comfortable shoes.

15:48:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

15:48:30 All in favor, aye.

15:48:30 [motion Carried]

15:48:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair.

15:48:36 This morning was very difficult for all of us with

15:48:41 detective Serrano's funeral, and what a great guy.

15:48:47 We'll all miss him dearly.

15:48:50 I wanted to mention another member of our community

15:48:53 that we're going to miss dearly is Mel Zach.

15:48:57 And I don't know -- we haven't seen Mr. Zach for a

15:49:00 while because he's been sick.

15:49:01 And unfortunately he passed away last week.

15:49:03 Mr. Zach, as you may recall was the former

15:49:06 president -- he was one of the founders of Palma Ceia

15:49:09 West.

15:49:09 He was in the wheelchair, really, from the beginning




15:49:12 when he was organizing the group, he had lost some

15:49:19 limbs.

15:49:19 Couple of years ago he organized with a few of his

15:49:22 neighbors, Palma Ceia West.

15:49:23 Worked really, really hard to get the group going.

15:49:26 Was very vocal on a number of issues.

15:49:28 Unfortunately, Mel passed away last week.

15:49:30 So I'd like to draft a commendation and perhaps just

15:49:35 give it to the neighborhood or give it to his family

15:49:38 posthumously.

15:49:40 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.

15:49:42 All in favor of the motion, aye.

15:49:44 [motion Carried]

15:49:46 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Madam Chairman, I was talking to Madam

15:49:50 Chairman this morning about the City Council as a body

15:49:54 should think about something to do for detective

15:49:57 Serrano.

15:49:57 And I don't mean a commendation or anything like that.

15:50:05 >>ROSE FERLITA: I think sometimes we have

15:50:06 commendations to friends or relatives of someone who

15:50:09 deceased who we have a lot of respect for.

15:50:11 What I thought I might do is report back to you, try




15:50:14 to figure something, take it from an idea to a plan,

15:50:17 see if we could do something like you did for Al Lopez

15:50:20 and do something like that, do something like a

15:50:22 memorial with a plaque there.

15:50:24 And then try to do some sort of a memorial fund and

15:50:28 ask the Mayor and the administration to partner with

15:50:30 us.

15:50:30 So it really -- I don't have it formalized enough.

15:50:33 If you give me enough time to do something, we'll come

15:50:36 back and kick it around a bit.

15:50:37 >> I mentioned that Tuesday when we had lunch.

15:50:41 It was a very sad day this morning.

15:50:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else, Mr. Dingfelder?

15:50:46 >> Move to receive and file all documents.

15:50:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Could you do that motion then.

15:50:52 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to receive

15:50:54 and file.

15:50:54 All in favor, aye.

15:50:55 [motion Carried]

15:50:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: In regard to the special discussion

15:50:58 meeting this past Monday, it was relayed to those

15:51:06 present that Wilson Miller, those are the standing




15:51:11 recommendations and they will not be changing, and the

15:51:14 direction from Mr. Chen was that if Council had any

15:51:17 issues with those recommendations, that they wish

15:51:20 staff to address when it comes to time to

15:51:23 implementation, that it should be in the form of a

15:51:26 consensus, which -- which I take to be official

15:51:30 action.

15:51:31 Therefore a workshop should be scheduled to do that,

15:51:33 and I've been talking with members of Council to see

15:51:36 what time of day works well.

15:51:39 The consensus that I get is a Thursday when Council

15:51:42 members are present.

15:51:45 One of the days that was suggested was March 30th,

15:51:48 and I believe we do have a meeting scheduled, but I

15:51:51 don't see anything in particular on there.

15:51:54 Is -- would that be a good day?

15:51:58 And the question -- my suggestion would be that it

15:52:00 be -- my sense is that based on the comments that were

15:52:06 made, I would suspect that the people who made them as

15:52:09 well as any others would wish to have those repeated

15:52:12 for the benefit of the full Council.

15:52:13 If Council does not have an opportunity to hear the




15:52:16 tape of the special discussion meeting, but I suspect

15:52:19 at a minimum it would probably be an hour.

15:52:22 And if Council as a body wishes to direct staff to

15:52:25 make any changes or issues with the plan, that they

15:52:28 communicate it in the form of official action as a

15:52:30 result of that workshop.

15:52:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion to set that for the

15:52:35 March 30th at 1:30.

15:52:37 And last time after our Monday meeting, I heard from a

15:52:41 number of neighbors who weren't sure that the other

15:52:43 meeting had been set, so I would like to request that

15:52:46 Mr. Chen's staff communicate with everyone who has

15:52:49 shown up at all the previous, to let them know the

15:52:53 date and time of the workshop and the fact that we

15:52:55 would receive public comment at this workshop on the

15:52:59 30th.

15:53:00 Is that a run-on sentence?

15:53:02 I'm sorry.

15:53:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a reminder that the

15:53:09 administration is looking to Council, if it so

15:53:12 chooses, to make direction at that time.

15:53:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.




15:53:20 Question on the motion, Mr. Harrison.

15:53:21 >>SHAWN HARRISON: How many dais in March do we have --

15:53:24 how many days in March do we have special discussion

15:53:27 or coming back after lunch or night meetings?

15:53:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Harrison, the 30th is

15:53:34 remarkably empty.

15:53:37 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Well, it's nice to have a remarkably

15:53:39 empty day once in a while.

15:53:41 We've added some things today.

15:53:43 So does anyone have the latest count on what every

15:53:46 third day in March looks like.

15:53:51 >>CLERK: Currently your calendar shows on March 9th,

15:53:57 you will be recessing at 11:45, coming back in at

15:54:00 1:30.

15:54:02 And at 1:30 you have a presentation of the ordinance

15:54:04 for first reading of the tree issue.

15:54:07 That night, you have your 5:30 CDBG public hearing.

15:54:11 You have five continued land rezonings at 6:00, five

15:54:15 rezonings at 6:00 and three are in the Channel

15:54:18 District area.

15:54:19 On the 16th, you have your CRA now set for 8:00.

15:54:23 You have your presentation of the commendation at 9:00




15:54:26 for the police officer of the month plus the

15:54:28 presentation for the sheriff Gee.

15:54:32 10:00 you have four wet zoning public hearings.

15:54:34 Also at 10:00, two closures.

15:54:36 You have a 1:30 workshop on the alleys.

15:54:38 I believe you also set something for 11:00 that day.

15:54:43 And the comp plan.

15:54:45 And the 23rd, you have so far one ordinance being

15:54:48 presented for a second reading at 10:00.

15:54:51 One closure at 10:00.

15:54:53 One DRI at 10:00.

15:54:55 And at 5:30 you have an ordinance on chapter 27, also

15:54:59 an areawide rezoning on the Adamo area, which is

15:55:04 supposed to be lengthy.

15:55:05 You also have one continued land rezoning at six and

15:55:08 ten land rezoning at 6 and the 30th as of right now,

15:55:12 nothing on it.

15:55:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that the 30th is an

15:55:16 admirable date.

15:55:18 Given it has so little on it, should we do it at 1:30

15:55:21 or earlier in the day.

15:55:24 At the end of the meeting?




15:55:29 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mary, this is -- I'm going to just

15:55:32 put my foot down and say, I think that we're doing

15:55:35 enough.

15:55:37 And I think if this is a priority for the

15:55:39 administration or this Council, we ought to figure out

15:55:41 a way to do it on a Thursday morning.

15:55:43 If that means we have to work a little bit through

15:55:45 lunch, then we'll do that.

15:55:46 But I for one am not going to come back after lunch on

15:55:50 the 30th.

15:55:50 Because we're coming back after lunch on every other

15:55:53 meeting in March it looks like.

15:55:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Then I'll change my motion to be

15:55:58 for 11:00 with the understanding, though, are we going

15:56:00 to stop our other business at 11:00 and take this up?

15:56:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If that's part of your motion, time

15:56:06 certain.

15:56:07 >>MARY ALVAREZ: And then we may just have to go

15:56:09 through lunch.

15:56:10 11:00 and then instead of going to lunch, we just go

15:56:14 forward.

15:56:17 Have a working lunch or whatever you call it.




15:56:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I want to inform Council just so

15:56:21 everybody is aware per its own rules that when you

15:56:25 approve the agenda, you can make a motion relative to

15:56:30 lunch and it doesn't have to be a unanimous vote.

15:56:34 A vote to approve the agenda or amend the agenda is

15:56:37 majority vote.

15:56:39 If after it is approved you want to make changes, it

15:56:41 has to be a majority vote.

15:56:43 If the Council on the 30th decides to forgo lunch,

15:56:46 the time to do it would be at the approval of the

15:56:49 agenda if you don't want to have to require unanimous

15:56:51 vote.

15:56:54 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I hate these rules.

15:56:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Setting it for 11:00 on March the

15:57:00 30th, Ms. Saul-Sena.

15:57:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to put it at 10:30 on

15:57:07 the 30th.

15:57:08 It appears that we're going to have a light agenda.

15:57:10 And I think that this is so tremendously important --

15:57:14 and with the understanding that we stop at 10:30 and

15:57:17 consider the CRA plan.

15:57:20 So my motion would be to set up for the 30th at




15:57:22 10:30.

15:57:24 Channel District.

15:57:26 I meant the Channel District CRA plan.

15:57:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Second.

15:57:30 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.

15:57:31 All in favor of the motion, aye.

15:57:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Bringing up the Channel District, I

15:57:39 need to mention this one thing.

15:57:40 I was extremely, extremely disturbed to read in the

15:57:44 newspaper -- I can't remember which one, that our

15:57:47 contractor that we paid $300,000 to develop that plan

15:57:51 has now disclosed during this public hearing process

15:57:54 that he has 15 clients in the district --

15:57:58 >> I thought it was ten.

15:57:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 10, whatever, 10, 15 clients in

15:58:01 that district.

15:58:02 Now, whether or not that's an issue I'm not going to

15:58:07 wrestle with today.

15:58:08 What is an issue is we are just hearing about it now,

15:58:11 which disclose a big flaw in our process.

15:58:13 That type of potential conflict needs to be disclosed

15:58:18 at the front end when someone is making a bid to us,




15:58:21 providing an RFP response to us --

15:58:25 >> It's not us.

15:58:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, it is us.

15:58:28 We approved -- it has to be in the bid documents.

15:58:30 I'm not saying we would decline to deal with them, but

15:58:34 it's a disclosure up front.

15:58:36 As Mr. Harrison and I know, when attorneys have

15:58:38 conflicts, we have to disclose it to everybody and

15:58:41 anybody, including the court and the Florida bar or we

15:58:46 get in big trouble.

15:58:48 And that type of ethical concept should apply to these

15:58:52 type of vendor situations.

15:58:53 So with that, I'm just going to initiate this

15:58:56 discussion, I'm going to ask legal to come back to us

15:58:59 in 30 days to look at our ethics code and see how we

15:59:02 might plug in that issue within the ethics code to

15:59:05 make sure that vendors, RFP responders, and any other

15:59:10 scenario that they might come up with disclose

15:59:13 potential conflicts in their documents.

15:59:20 >>MARY ALVAREZ: And I'll agree with that, except in

15:59:22 this case, we had no idea of that.

15:59:27 I didn't know -- and besides that, we didn't get all




15:59:29 the RFPs.

15:59:30 It went through purchasing or wherever they went

15:59:33 through.

15:59:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But we should be told that stuff.

15:59:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yeah, if it was in the application,

15:59:39 you have a conflict.

15:59:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Then we can still decide.

15:59:43 If we say, we'll waive the conflict, don't care about

15:59:45 the conflict, at least we're informed.

15:59:48 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the

15:59:49 floor.

15:59:50 All in favor, aye.

15:59:50 [motion Carried]

15:59:51 Clerk?

15:59:52 >>CLERK: I have two items.

15:59:54 We have received a request from Lynn Merenda, Planning

15:59:58 Commission, she would like to make a presentation to

16:00:01 Council, five-minutes, on the Transportation

16:00:04 Disadvantaged Coordinating Board ride guide.

16:00:07 And she would like Council to set it for a five-minute

16:00:10 presentation.

16:00:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Three-minutes.




16:00:13 >>CLERK: She didn't provide a date, but as soon as

16:00:15 possible.

16:00:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Three-minutes should suffice.

16:00:20 >>SHAWN HARRISON: And in April too.

16:00:29 April the 6th.

16:00:31 >>GWEN MILLER: For three-minutes.

16:00:32 What time?

16:00:34 We have a motion and second.

16:00:35 All in favor of the motion, aye.

16:00:37 [motion Carried]

16:00:38 >>CLERK: The only other item is that we have provided

16:00:41 Council with a memorandum regarding your upcoming

16:00:44 Council calendar.

16:00:45 And we will be putting that on next Thursday's agenda

16:00:47 for Council consideration and adoption.

16:00:49 It's pertaining to the meetings from July through the

16:00:53 end of the year.

16:00:53 And we have provided that to Council.

16:00:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else?

16:00:57 Anything else to come before Council?

16:00:59 We go to our audience portion.

16:01:01 Anyone in the audience like to speak?




16:01:14 (The meeting was adjourned at 4 p.m.)

16:01:15