Tampa City Council
Thursday, June 8, 2006
09:07:23 Tampa City Council.
09:08:41 Tampa City Council.
09:08:43 Tampa City Council.
09:14:10 [Sounding gavel]
09:14:11 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Tampa City Council is called to
09:14:14 Roll call, please.
09:14:17 Oh, we do the invocation first.
09:14:19 Chair will yield to -- who is doing our invocation
09:14:23 this morning?
09:14:23 Mr. Dingfelder.
09:14:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and this
09:14:26 morning it's my pleasure and honor to introduce my aid
09:14:32 Jim Reese hole give our invocation.
09:14:35 A little known fact about Jim Reese, he's the former
09:14:38 quarterback of the university of Minnesota golden
09:14:42 He's the proud father, grandfather, of many, and
09:14:46 wonderful addition to our community.
09:14:49 I want to give thanks for the fact that Jim was
09:14:53 recently a little bit under the weather over at TGH
09:14:57 and he's come back, and fighting for him and we are
09:14:59 glad to have you here.
09:15:00 Jim will give the invocation.
09:15:02 All stand and continue with the pledge of allegiance.
09:15:08 >>> We ask your help, Lord, as our City Council meets
09:15:11 today on deliberation on so many important issues
09:15:13 affecting our citizens.
09:15:15 We ask that you provide council invoke the wisdom
09:15:19 that's necessary for the needs of the people as well
09:15:22 as providing our elected officials with the strength.
09:15:27 We ask also for the continued safety of our brave men
09:15:30 and women in the police and fire departments of our
09:15:32 city, who stand up and protecting us from harm.
09:15:36 Guide also our city employees in their dealings with
09:15:40 our citizenry and with each other so that the end
09:15:42 results of their work will be a better place, for all
09:15:44 of us to live within.
09:15:46 We ask this in your name.
09:15:51 (Pledge of Allegiance).
09:16:04 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Roll call.
09:16:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
09:16:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:16:10 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
09:16:12 >>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
09:16:13 >>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
09:16:15 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
09:16:15 >>KEVIN WHITE: Before we move the approval of the
09:16:21 agenda, recognize again one of our colleagues from the
09:16:24 county commission, commissioner Thomas Scott.
09:16:26 I would like to make a motion that we move the public
09:16:29 comment agenda up giving deference to him to have an
09:16:33 opportunity to speak.
09:16:34 He has three other meetings to go to this afternoon,
09:16:37 or this morning.
09:16:40 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Shelby works that be
09:16:44 >>> The approval of the agenda is the point where you
09:16:46 can move.
09:16:48 Do you wish to do it or for the entire public?
09:16:52 >>KEVIN WHITE: For Mr. Scott and then go on to the Reb
09:16:56 regular public comment.
09:17:01 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. White has a motion.
09:17:02 >>KEVIN WHITE: I would like to do it for Commissioner
09:17:05 Scott at this point in time in deference to a fellow
09:17:08 colleague because he has other meetings to go to and
09:17:11 then go back to the regular agenda.
09:17:14 >>ROSE FERLITA: He hasn't gotten a second yet.
09:17:17 That is something we are going to have to deal with
09:17:18 anyway in terms of public comment.
09:17:20 And I think certainly in deference to our colleague
09:17:23 Mr. Scott, but at the same time as a courtesy to our
09:17:27 audience, if we are going to do public comments, we
09:17:29 ought to do public comments for everybody.
09:17:33 >>KEVIN WHITE: So the motion --
09:17:36 >>SHAWN HARRISON: So part of the ceremonies or after
09:17:40 the ceremonies?
09:17:43 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
09:17:45 Motion carries.
09:17:46 Mr. Shelby.
09:17:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you want to do approval of the
09:17:50 agenda or do you wish to come back to that?
09:17:52 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Why don't we leave it as it is for
09:17:55 Public comment.
09:17:55 Is there anyone in the audience who would like to
09:17:59 speak to any item on the agenda not set for public
09:18:02 If so this is your opportunity to come up and speak
09:18:04 and everyone has three minutes.
09:18:11 >>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to this august body.
09:18:14 Thank you for the opportunity to be able to address
09:18:19 Thank you for the opportunity to address.
09:18:22 I have a 9:00 board of county commission.
09:18:24 I would say today that the Central Park issue is a
09:18:27 very important issue, as you very well know, for not
09:18:30 only Central Park but for the entire community.
09:18:32 But Tampa and for Hillsborough County.
09:18:35 I would suggest to you that you explore all
09:18:39 opportunity for to us work together from a legal
09:18:44 There are several recommendations that I made,
09:18:46 forwarded over to the CRA board in regards to Central
09:18:49 Central Park is a critical issue.
09:18:52 But at the same time we must protect people in that
09:18:56 community and make sure that they have an opportunity
09:18:59 to raise their quality of life for the opportunity to
09:19:06 have an affordable house.
09:19:08 If you look at the recommendation, the only difference
09:19:12 in my recommendation that was not included in the
09:19:16 Civitas was two commissioners on the CRA board with
09:19:20 Under the law we can do that as of July 1.
09:19:28 I think it's appropriate the county would give to
09:19:30 the -- the ski would give to the county 11.5 million
09:19:34 next year in the budget for CRA.
09:19:37 It's appropriate if you want to be able to sit down he
09:19:43 together, let's work together.
09:19:46 There's a Biblical text I often quote, you have not
09:19:48 because you ask not.
09:19:51 Ask you shall receive.
09:19:52 Knock and the door shall open.
09:19:54 Seek and ye shall find.
09:19:56 I'm here today asking for opportunity for to us work
09:19:58 together, that's all.
09:20:01 And I hope that you will realize that, and it can be
09:20:04 done legally.
09:20:08 Our county attorney was going to be here.
09:20:10 I don't see them so I guess they are not here but it's
09:20:13 our opportunity to work together, an opportunity for
09:20:15 us to protect the interest of the poor people in
09:20:19 Central Park.
09:20:20 That's what this is all about.
09:20:21 If you look at item 2, all of those concessions were
09:20:26 given by the Civitas group, in making sure poor people
09:20:31 have an opportunity to be able to own their own home.
09:20:35 That's what this is about.
09:20:36 An opportunity for minority participation,
09:20:40 particularly African-American and Hispanic, to be able
09:20:43 to sit at the table and have a piece of the pie.
09:20:46 That's what this is about.
09:20:47 I think it's right.
09:20:49 I think it's wrong to say we are going to move you out
09:20:52 but not provide you the opportunity to work and make a
09:20:57 living wage so you can continue to take care of your
09:20:59 family and your home.
09:21:04 Mr. Chairman, to this board, again, I stress the
09:21:07 importance, take your time to review that.
09:21:09 I think the board of county commission will meet again
09:21:13 the 21st or 22nd.
09:21:15 Off meeting on the 15th.
09:21:16 And I would trust that you would do the right thing
09:21:21 for the people of Central Park.
09:21:23 That's what this is about.
09:21:24 It's not about Tom Scott.
09:21:25 It's not about my political future.
09:21:27 It's about hope for people to stand up for them.
09:21:32 I am the representative of that area.
09:21:34 It is not about trying to throw a monkey wrench in
09:21:36 this deal.
09:21:37 It's about asking for what's right, protecting poor
09:21:42 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:21:43 I hope that this board will be meeting as a CRA will
09:21:46 highly consider the legal ramifications and
09:21:48 opportunity for us to work together in the future.
09:21:50 Thank you very much.
09:21:52 >>KEVIN WHITE: Commissioner Scott, thank you for
09:21:54 coming down this morning.
09:21:55 I would like to let you know that this particular
09:21:57 board's representative for the Central Park area,
09:21:59 specifically, as well as three other at-large council
09:22:02 members, I can honestly say that I think this board
09:22:06 sitting as a body has nothing but the best interests
09:22:09 of the Central Park, and the residents of Central Park
09:22:11 Village, at heart, and I think we are going to do our
09:22:18 due diligence, and I think at this point in time it's
09:22:20 in our best interest as to listen to our legal advice,
09:22:25 and come up with the best alternative.
09:22:28 And once our legal department, legal staff, has had
09:22:32 the opportunity to digest some of the recommendations
09:22:35 that were made at yesterday's commission meeting, they
09:22:38 will bring their recommendations back to us and give
09:22:41 us an opportunity to digest it, and then as a board be
09:22:45 able to move forward from there.
09:22:46 But I don't think anyone -- I can't speak for
09:22:49 everyone, but the sentiment is on this board, from
09:22:53 what we have had in the past, is just that, doing the
09:22:57 very best for the residents of Central Park, raising
09:23:01 their quality of life from a situation they are in
09:23:04 now, and helping those residents move forward
09:23:09 economically, and by the way they live, as well as not
09:23:13 displacing but making sure that the residents there
09:23:16 have a quality home to go to, as well as an economic
09:23:21 benefit in the future.
09:23:22 But thank you for coming down and thank you for taking
09:23:24 your time to address this board and your comments.
09:23:31 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Well said, Mr. White.
09:23:35 Thank you.
09:23:35 The other Mr. White.
09:23:38 >>KEVIN WHITE: Resident of the City of Tampa and I'm
09:23:40 also a Tampa housing authority commissioner appointed
09:23:45 by the mayor, Pam Iorio. This issue has been going on
09:23:50 for quite awhile for several years.
09:23:52 And everyone, the housing authority, the Tampa City
09:23:54 Council, the mayor of the city, Pam Iorio, the board
09:23:59 of county commission, has been working to rid the
09:24:03 folks over at Central Park of the horrible conditions.
09:24:07 And I'm here this morning as a commissioner of the
09:24:10 Tampa housing authority asking that the City Council
09:24:13 and the county commission work together.
09:24:16 I believe we are one community.
09:24:18 And I believe we can rise above our differences for
09:24:22 the benefit of the citizens of this community.
09:24:25 And I'm asking you, as a resident and a housing
09:24:29 commission, to take the necessary time, to do the
09:24:35 right thing on behalf of the residents.
09:24:37 I believe in the end it's all going to work out.
09:24:40 I trust the council.
09:24:44 I trust my commissioner reverend Scott.
09:24:46 I voted for him.
09:24:47 I voted for you all.
09:24:49 And so I know that you all are acting on the best
09:24:53 interests of the citizens of this community.
09:24:57 That's all we as residents can ask for.
09:25:00 But in the end, in the very end, I'm asking you as a
09:25:03 voter, and as a commissioner, to come together as one
09:25:10 and produce a solid plan for this entire community,
09:25:14 and get our folks from these horrible living
09:25:20 That's all I can ask.
09:25:21 I pray to God today that we can put aside any
09:25:26 differences that we have, and we can come together as
09:25:29 one community.
09:25:30 May God bless you all.
09:25:32 Thank you for hearing my concerns.
09:25:34 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
09:25:42 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: I reside at 2902 East Ellicott
09:25:47 And I just thank God for his grace and his mercy.
09:25:52 I believe in that grace and mercy.
09:25:55 And that's the only way you should be saved, by
09:26:00 Belief brings on faith.
09:26:01 But this issue here about this, I was sick last week
09:26:06 and couldn't make it, the week before last, I got a
09:26:09 job and couldn't be here but I thank God to be here
09:26:12 this morning to speak on this issue.
09:26:13 Let me tell you all something.
09:26:17 I heard you all awhile ago say do the right thing.
09:26:21 When it comes to kicking poor people out -- I
09:26:24 represent poor peoples.
09:26:25 And I'm going to till I die.
09:26:29 But you all got a legend of kicking poor peoples
09:26:34 And they got a worldwide survey now, that Hillsborough
09:26:40 County got the most -- 20,000 plus, and people still
09:26:48 coming here.
09:26:49 And now kick these poor peoples out.
09:26:52 That's what you gonna do.
09:26:54 You know, I just thought in this town, they got the
09:26:58 middle class.
09:26:58 The middle class is poor people's worst enemy.
09:27:04 You kick poor people out every over there in that
09:27:08 I go down to all the black peoples in town, and you
09:27:11 all kick them outdoors.
09:27:13 And let me tell you something.
09:27:15 I wish you all would do like Hillsborough County did
09:27:18 when they did midland school.
09:27:20 I use them for a prop.
09:27:23 I sit in the meeting when they said they going to kick
09:27:25 all the people out and everything.
09:27:28 But Hillsborough County schools, Hillsborough County
09:27:30 schools give all the people's money, so right now, if
09:27:35 you are going to kick the peoples out, give them
09:27:37 enough money where they can go somewhere and do better
09:27:40 for themselves.
09:27:41 Even the people that rent.
09:27:42 Hillsborough County schools did.
09:27:45 Right now, they go move up.
09:27:48 I tell you all the time.
09:27:51 Throwing people outdoors or tearing their house down,
09:27:55 calling them crack houses.
09:27:57 Give them money to go do better for themselves.
09:28:00 But some of the people and bought a house.
09:28:05 But I say I know you all gonna do.
09:28:10 I'm glad you can't go there and kick people out
09:28:16 because they raise the price ten times where you all
09:28:18 can't get that.
09:28:19 Thank you very much.
09:28:20 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
09:28:24 >>> Elizabeth Johnson.
09:28:26 I have already made clear I'm speaking on item number
09:28:28 2 which is not a public hearing.
09:28:31 The reason why I'm here is we are trying to -- and I
09:28:33 represent importantly P. J. summerville, a neighbor to
09:28:38 the 1814.
09:28:40 And the reason I am here we have listened to what
09:28:44 parks and recreation has to say at 1814 hill.
09:28:47 But we also want to preserve our objections for the
09:28:51 record as to what we believe were errors, quite
09:28:56 frankly by the city attorney's office in how they
09:28:58 instructed you all two weeks ago as to what you could
09:29:02 and could not consider and how the instructions were
09:29:04 conveyed to the A.R.C.
09:29:07 The irony of this situation is that this is a very
09:29:11 small, nonconforming, 48-foot wide lot.
09:29:17 And the evidence including before and after pictures
09:29:22 suggest that is a limb of the grand tree was severed
09:29:28 on the neighboring tree next door.
09:29:30 Under the A.R.C. jurisdiction under 27-213 of the
09:29:33 code, they considered variances to the grand tree
09:29:38 So it was our position before the A.R.C. below, when I
09:29:42 also represented Mr. Token and Mr. Williams, that the
09:29:47 A.R.C. should have considered the limb that would have
09:29:49 been there but for the cutting.
09:29:53 When they considered whether or not a new 3800 square
09:29:58 foot primary structure ought to be built in front of
09:30:00 an existing primary structure.
09:30:02 But what happened was, when we got to the A.R.C., and
09:30:07 I have a lot of respect for the city attorney's
09:30:09 office, I call them a lot and I realize that people
09:30:12 are living right and left.
09:30:13 You might think about paying them a little more but
09:30:15 that's a different story.
09:30:16 But when we got there, I was very surprised to find
09:30:20 out that the tree issue could not be considered at all
09:30:23 by the A.R.C.
09:30:25 And that is a ruling that we need to make the
09:30:32 objection on because I believe under 27-213 of the
09:30:34 code the A.R.C. was charged with the duty of acting as
09:30:39 if that limb was still there. I realize this is one
09:30:42 piece of property, downtown have a room full of
09:30:44 people, it may not seem to be a big issue.
09:30:47 But for him to argue, maybe I didn't trim it or
09:30:50 whatever, you have to look at the facts.
09:30:55 Who is to gain?
09:30:56 This tree was actually on Mr. Williams' and Mr.
09:31:00 Token's property.
09:31:01 I think procedurally that was a problem.
09:31:03 That problem was then perpetuated procedurally when it
09:31:06 was appealed to City Council.
09:31:07 We have the right to appeal that decision to City
09:31:10 But if you recall what happened again, I think, Mr.
09:31:13 Dingfelder, you told Mr. Token, you said, well, we are
09:31:16 not really here to discuss the tree issue.
09:31:19 Well, that was perpetuated.
09:31:22 In what forum are we supposed to hear that issue?
09:31:24 And if we can't hear that issue, then all the talk you
09:31:30 make about trees is really moot because that M. O. in
09:31:32 South Tampa is go cut it, and figure it out, maybe
09:31:37 there will be a little fine later.
09:31:39 There's another issue that I need to put on the record
09:31:41 procedurally, and this is the ability to build what
09:31:44 amounted to a second primary structure in front of an
09:31:47 existing primary structure.
09:31:49 Again, let's put all the legal issues aside and the
09:31:52 fancy arguments from Mr. Mechanik aside.
09:31:55 How can you get two primary structures on a 48-foot
09:31:58 wide lot?
09:31:59 And why isn't there a venue for that issue to be
09:32:02 discussed, either before the A.R.C. or City Council?
09:32:06 Thank you so much for your time and your patience.
09:32:08 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
09:32:10 Ms. Saul-Sena?
09:32:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:32:14 This is complicated.
09:32:16 And I think way would like to do is set up a special
09:32:19 discussion meeting on a Wednesday morning with legal,
09:32:25 inviting the community to look at both these issues,
09:32:27 because I think they are important, and I don't know
09:32:30 that council wants to commit the time today to do
09:32:33 I will look at my calendar, and I'll find the time to
09:32:35 have a special discussion meeting on this.
09:32:37 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
09:32:39 Thank you.
09:32:39 Is there anyone else in the public that would like to
09:32:41 speak to any item on the agenda not set for public
09:32:45 Seeing none, then we will move on to ceremonial
09:32:49 Mr. White?
09:32:49 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and colleagues.
09:33:16 I would like to do a special presentation this morning
09:33:18 to the friends of the Ada Payne Library.
09:33:28 The three recipients at the library, children that
09:33:33 received computers for attending the program.
09:33:35 And I will read the commendation as presented.
09:33:38 The Tampa City Council would like to take this
09:33:40 opportunity to commend the efforts of this
09:33:41 organization for their mentoring and tutoring programs
09:33:45 and for the donation of computers to the Robert W.
09:33:50 Saunders library.
09:33:51 We want to thank you for your involvement over the
09:33:52 years, for all of your support, and for contributing
09:33:54 to the development and enhancement of the youth in our
09:33:58 Your services are appreciated, and we offer our
09:34:01 heartfelt thanks and gratitude for your commitment and
09:34:04 dedication to the residents of Tampa and for the
09:34:07 betterment of our neighborhoods.
09:34:09 One of the things that Mr. Harris is definitely
09:34:11 involved in, and is the mentoring of the youth in our
09:34:19 community, and it's a wonderful opportunity.
09:34:20 I have had the opportunity to go over and visit during
09:34:23 one of the mentoring sessions, if it had a group of
09:34:26 young children, but not only that but we have a group
09:34:29 of volunteers that are dedicated to making sure each
09:34:32 and every one of our young people have the proper
09:34:36 education, and the ones that are struggling, they are
09:34:39 mentoring out and reaching out to them, helping bring
09:34:43 each and every one of them that are willing to learn
09:34:46 along, and bring them up, and making sure that they
09:34:50 tried to get the best quality education possible.
09:34:53 And for that, Mr. Harrison, I completely commend you.
09:34:57 And I would like to make the comments and then have
09:35:00 the presentation to each one of the children.
09:35:04 >>> Thank you very much.
09:35:05 We operate with no funds.
09:35:10 The library board, Hillsborough County library board,
09:35:13 was kind enough to keep the library open an extra half
09:35:19 hour for us to tutor.
09:35:21 We tutor from 4:30 to 7:00, two days a week.
09:35:25 We concentrate on grades 1 through 5.
09:35:29 We also, this coming year, we will be tutoring.
09:35:33 We have a retired college professor who is coming in,
09:35:37 and will be tutoring algebra, geometry, trigonometry,
09:35:45 Our goals, in case you don't know it, 53% of minority
09:35:50 students entering the 9th grade do not graduate
09:35:53 from high school.
09:35:56 85% of African-American prisoners do not have high
09:36:03 school diplomas.
09:36:05 We want to change those statistics and get to the
09:36:07 point where we will not be incarcerating, but we will
09:36:11 be educating.
09:36:13 Thank you very much for letting us come down, and that
09:36:16 you know about what we are doing here in the City of
09:36:20 We have a presentation we are making to our students.
09:36:30 They won these computers.
09:36:31 They go to three different schools.
09:36:38 McMurray goes to -- I'm sorry.
09:36:49 Cabrella goes to C high.
09:36:55 And Shane going to Lockhart.
09:36:57 These are three winners of our computers.
09:36:59 We are looking for additional tutors for this year.
09:37:03 We are looking for any and everybody, City Council
09:37:08 members, to come in and donate an hour and a half of
09:37:11 your time a week.
09:37:13 That hour and a half can make a difference in the
09:37:15 lives of these children.
09:37:17 Thank you very much.
09:37:24 [ Applause ]
09:37:28 >>SHAWN HARRISON: let me first say I would be very
09:37:34 judicious about what council members you ask to come
09:37:37 in and tutor.
09:37:38 I don't even remember what trigonometry was.
09:37:44 >>> Will you repeat that, please?
09:37:45 I'm deaf in one ear.
09:37:50 >> It's not important.
09:37:52 >> I want to thank you for putting energy into these
09:37:55 This is such a worthwhile program.
09:37:57 I can't do the math but I can help a little in
09:38:00 English, though.
09:38:04 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you all.
09:38:05 All right.
09:38:06 Now we have approval of the agenda.
09:38:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Defer number 11, waiting for
09:38:19 comments from staff.
09:38:19 Just defer till the end of the meeting.
09:38:23 >>ROSE FERLITA: While we are waiting, I guess for Mr.
09:38:26 Shelby and Mr. White to come in, I have some questions
09:38:28 and concerns about number 27.
09:38:30 Rather than receive and file, I would like the
09:38:33 opportunity to ask at that point in time.
09:38:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Number 35 under your committee.
09:38:41 I would just like staff to come and clarify what this
09:38:44 means about the relocation.
09:38:53 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We will try to get that done by the
09:38:55 end of the meeting.
09:38:55 If not, he we might have to push it back for a week.
09:38:58 That's fine.
09:39:09 Let's have a motion and second to approve the agenda.
09:39:13 >> So moved.
09:39:13 >> Second.
09:39:13 (Motion carried).
09:39:14 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Staff reports.
09:39:15 Parks and recreation, number 2.
09:39:29 >>> Steve Graham, natural resources, Parks and
09:39:32 Recreation Department.
09:39:34 I was asked to provide a report on 1814 Hills
09:39:40 regarding a violation of grand tree violation.
09:39:44 And I have a packet that I would like to hand out for
09:39:52 For the clerk and for the city attorney.
09:40:32 >>> We have some information to share with you.
09:40:33 I revisited the site where the violation occurred.
09:40:36 The violation was reported in March.
09:40:40 March 6th.
09:40:40 And there was a limb removed from a grand tree without
09:40:44 a permit.
09:40:45 So we made our recommendation to construction
09:40:49 services, be applied.
09:40:55 It was not a substantive limb but that is a typical
09:41:01 remedy for violation of that nature.
09:41:05 And I'll put that on the Elmo.
09:41:30 In any event, you have that in your packet.
09:41:32 And what I would like to show you now are pictures of
09:41:35 the tree that was pruned.
09:41:40 You can see in green, that's the limb in question.
09:41:59 That's the grand tree in the foreground.
09:42:01 And I'll show you the tree afterwards.
09:42:13 Again, not a dramatic change in the character of the
09:42:18 But still technically a violation.
09:42:20 Are there any questions?
09:42:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:42:26 What's most dramatic that you didn't do was show the
09:42:29 two pictures next to each other, one with the limb and
09:42:32 one without the limb.
09:42:33 My question is several-fold.
09:42:36 Has the petitioner -- was the property owner charged
09:42:39 for the removal three times the normal fee, the
09:42:47 >>> That, of course, is handled by construction
09:42:49 services, and our recommendation on the permitting
09:42:53 system was to apply the triple permit fee.
09:42:58 >> Because there's a note on one of the papers from
09:43:00 permitting that says "did not charge three-time fee."
09:43:05 >>> That appears to be the condition.
09:43:07 They did go in and pay the permit fee after we brought
09:43:12 to their attention.
09:43:13 We had noted that should be a triple permit fee, and
09:43:16 for whatever reason that wasn't applied.
09:43:18 I suspect it was an oversight.
09:43:21 We do have a site plan if you want to see that.
09:43:24 >> Well, this is really a question for legal.
09:43:27 You have given us the tree information.
09:43:30 We currently in, our new tree code, say that if
09:43:36 something is removed -- it's the one that would
09:43:42 preclude the site plan that was approved.
09:43:44 And I guess that's what's unclear.
09:43:47 Well, the thing that is clear is this was removed
09:43:51 And you all went out and found it after the fact.
09:43:53 So what is the penalty if they were to follow your
09:43:57 Triple the $29 permit fee?
09:44:02 >>> It's really nominal.
09:44:03 I think it's around $98, $99.
09:44:07 >> Right.
09:44:07 And that's not enough to make a hill of beans of
09:44:10 difference in somebody's behavior.
09:44:11 I guess my question would be for legal, if there is an
09:44:16 illegal limb removal, do we have -- and it does change
09:44:21 the character of the tree.
09:44:22 Do we have the power to do something other than charge
09:44:26 them triple fee which is less than $100 which is not
09:44:49 There are some people in the administration.
09:44:50 I know Karen Palus.
09:44:53 I know that you are working with Cindy Miller to try
09:44:55 to get better communication between what you all do
09:44:57 and what -- whoa!
09:45:00 That's pretty magical.
09:45:04 There's a triple fee that was supposed to be paid.
09:45:13 >> Cindy Miller, director of business -- I was
09:45:16 watching council on TV.
09:45:18 Give me one second here.
09:45:20 For this item at 1814 Hills Avenue, it is correct, it
09:45:24 was recommended to be paid on March 5th and on May
09:45:27 19th, 2006, three times the fee was paid.
09:45:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So there is communication between
09:45:33 the parks people and you all in terms of making
09:45:36 sure -- --
09:45:41 >> But the bigger question is, this is less than $100.
09:45:44 If somebody wants to have the limb off, this $100
09:45:49 triple fee is not going to defer them K. we do
09:45:52 something more Draconian?
09:45:54 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
09:45:55 What I understand from Mr. Graham in any given
09:45:58 situation where a tree limb is removed and it was done
09:46:01 illegally, they reviewed it to determine whether or
09:46:03 not that removal causes any substantial damage to the
09:46:08 There are greater penalties that can be imposed up to
09:46:10 an effectively removal, which I believe is $15,000.
09:46:13 And it's been determined by Mr. Graham that it was
09:46:17 So his recommendation was triple permit fee because I
09:46:21 think what Mr. Graham is saying if they had applied to
09:46:23 remove this, he would have approved it.
09:46:30 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Dingfelder.
09:46:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Graham, just generically, not
09:46:35 related to this, if somebody violates the provisions
09:46:39 of the grand tree ordinance, you have the ability --
09:46:42 and I think this is what legal counsel alluded to-you
09:46:48 have you can take them to code enforcement process?
09:46:52 >>> That's correct.
09:46:52 It depends on the severity of the violation.
09:46:54 And if it's to the point of being effective removal
09:46:59 then of course we go for the maximum fine of $15,000.
09:47:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So I guess in this particular case,
09:47:08 you just made a decision that it wasn't egregious
09:47:12 enough to go that route.
09:47:14 >>> That's correct.
09:47:14 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Any other questions on this item?
09:47:17 Thank you, sir.
09:47:19 We are going to move on.
09:47:20 I missed the department-head sign-in sheet.
09:47:25 Item number 1 is Julia Cole, legal.
09:47:31 >>JULIA COLE: I signed up for two items.
09:47:33 If you want I can take them both at the same time.
09:47:34 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
09:47:36 >>JULIA COLE: First is agenda item number 35.
09:47:39 I provided you with a substitute agreement in which I
09:47:42 have clarified that construction that the structure
09:47:48 will occur within 90 days, after clearing which permit
09:47:53 is being replaced.
09:47:56 I'm substituting that.
09:47:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That is something I had a question
09:48:01 If you could tell us a little more clearly what's
09:48:04 going on.
09:48:06 >>JULIA COLE: I'm just substituting the agreement
09:48:13 Item number 35 in front of you is an agreement
09:48:16 pursuant to Florida statute 70.20, which requires, if
09:48:20 there is a situation that FDOT or another entity is
09:48:24 taking a billboard -- a condemnation, then the
09:48:29 government needs to provide opportunity, about that
09:48:34 billboard, it is sent to an agreement process, and
09:48:36 this is an agreement to allow the relocation of an
09:48:38 existing billboard, which is an existing billboard, in
09:48:45 order to provide replacement.
09:48:52 And just so you know, there's another one coming in
09:48:54 next week, you approved a few other ones.
09:48:59 >>MARY ALVAREZ: it says State Road 60 but where?
09:49:04 >>> Close to the airport.
09:49:05 Memorial, I believe.
09:49:08 >> Oh, on the west side.
09:49:09 Thank you.
09:49:11 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mrs. Saul-Sena.
09:49:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:49:14 My understanding was that we had a seven year
09:49:16 amortization plan for getting rid of billboards along
09:49:19 scenic corridors.
09:49:20 I remember this.
09:49:21 It was 15 years ago but we are still working on it.
09:49:24 And staid State Road 60 is one of our scenic
09:49:27 So how does the status of that affect this?
09:49:31 And are we making any progress?
09:49:36 >>JULIA COLE: We are in the process of litigation.
09:49:38 And under that issue, I don't believe this particular
09:49:40 billboard -- there's a portion of Kennedy which is
09:49:44 part of the view corridor, which we are alluding to.
09:49:47 And that is the portion, we remain in litigation on
09:49:53 that issue.
09:49:54 And --
09:49:56 >> And that --
09:49:58 >>> That is not impacted.
09:49:59 By further explanation, it puts local governments in
09:50:07 an unfortunate position.
09:50:08 According to 7020 if there's a condemnation action,
09:50:11 which is legally approved, even if it is a billboard,
09:50:14 you no longer can have billboards in your
09:50:17 jurisdiction, the local government is placed in the
09:50:21 position of either allowing this to be relocated or
09:50:23 paying for the billboard, even if the local government
09:50:26 is not the entity under which is proceeding with the
09:50:31 con dem dem nation.
09:50:32 It puts local governments in a bad position.
09:50:34 However it is in law for several years and we have to
09:50:37 deal with it.
09:50:38 And these come through and our staff looks at it and
09:50:40 determines whether or not it's an appropriate
09:50:41 location, whether or not it has any impact, and deals
09:50:48 with that under that process.
09:50:49 We do the best we can but understanding that we are in
09:50:51 the situation where if we don't agree to relocation,
09:50:54 we could be paying for the billboard.
09:50:58 >> Thank you.
09:50:58 You're doing the best you can under the circumstances.
09:51:00 This is why I want the City of Tampa to have our own
09:51:03 lobbyist next year in Tallahassee, to join with other
09:51:06 communities lobbyists to help give municipalities some
09:51:09 teeth when it comes to this signage.
09:51:13 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Cole, didn't the state do
09:51:15 something about the amortization this year?
09:51:21 I thought I read something that they were trying to
09:51:25 put more teeth into that.
09:51:27 In other words, they didn't want to abolish, they
09:51:31 wanted the -- they wanted to abolish the seven year,
09:51:36 they just didn't want any of that.Dy read that wrong?
09:51:39 >>JULIA COLE: I don't understand that the legislature
09:51:40 has adopted any new legislation related to
09:51:43 amortization, period.
09:51:44 They did adopt legislation as it relates to
09:51:46 billboards, but it was -- provide that if local
09:51:51 governmental entity allows treess, et cetera, to grow
09:51:55 up around billboards then the local government has to
09:51:57 either remove the foliage or potentially pay for the
09:52:01 So that was really what was impacted.
09:52:05 But nothing that I'm aware of on the amortization.
09:52:09 >> Okay.
09:52:09 I misunderstood.
09:52:10 Thank you very much.
09:52:10 >>JULIA COLE: The other item I have is item number 38,
09:52:15 which is to substitute the resolution scheduling a
09:52:20 public hearing changing the dates from June 26th
09:52:26 to June 22nd and July 13th.
09:52:29 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We'll take that up when we get to
09:52:31 >>JULIA COLE: And item 41 is a tree appeal hearing.
09:52:35 Mr. Graf, it turns out, is the applicant.
09:52:39 I am not sure that was properly noticed.
09:52:41 However, I have been trying to speak with Mr. Graf.
09:52:43 I'm not sure who he is, or if he's in the audience.
09:52:46 I would like to have the opportunity to speak with him
09:52:48 before that hearing.
09:52:49 >>SHAWN HARRISON: There's been a motion.
09:52:53 He's withdrawing item number 41.
09:52:55 >>JULIA COLE: Thank you very much.
09:53:00 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Sal Territo.
09:53:03 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.
09:53:04 I was going to speak on one item.
09:53:05 And item number 26 is a bond issue that's on your
09:53:10 consent agenda dealing with university of Tampa bonds.
09:53:14 Once again, these are bonds that the city will be
09:53:17 issuing and the money will belong to the university --
09:53:21 loaned to the university of Tampa to help them with
09:53:23 building dormitories.
09:53:24 I don't know.
09:53:26 There are people in the audience hole wait around if
09:53:28 you have questions.
09:53:28 If not then maybe they will be able to leave.
09:53:33 >>SHAWN HARRISON: It's 45 million bucks.
09:53:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
09:53:37 Just for the record, Sal, this is just a pass-through
09:53:43 type of thing and there's no obligation on the part of
09:53:45 the city to guarantee these bonds?
09:53:49 >>> That's right. The bond holders will have to look
09:53:51 to the university of Tampa to have the bonds paid back
09:53:53 at the University of Tampa.
09:53:54 >> In the event of -- even in the event of a default
09:53:57 we are not on the hook?
09:53:59 >>> That's correct.
09:54:01 And the other item relates to the item that you have
09:54:03 this morning, item 2 on your CRA agenda, item number
09:54:06 30 on the City Council agenda.
09:54:07 Again we are asking you to defer that until next week,
09:54:12 the modification of the local agreement.
09:54:16 >> So moved.
09:54:17 >> Second.
09:54:17 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Asking to continue item number 30
09:54:19 until next week.
09:54:20 We have a motion and second.
09:54:22 (Motion carried).
09:54:25 >>> And item number 8 is the tax increment financing
09:54:28 ordinance first reading on that issue.
09:54:29 We are recommending that you go ahead and put it on
09:54:31 first reading.
09:54:32 It will not come back till second reading the 22nd
09:54:34 so this issue will be resolved.
09:54:37 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
09:54:46 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
09:54:48 Seems to be lawyer today today.
09:54:49 I want to provide you a brief update on the art
09:54:52 I know it's of great interest to you.
09:54:58 We are still Bork working with ACP.
09:55:01 The original folks who were on the other side, you
09:55:06 approved previously.
09:55:08 The appraisal, however, is a very complicated and
09:55:14 difficult one.
09:55:14 We have in essence what will be a severed building.
09:55:17 It's a special purpose building as well.
09:55:19 It's tough to find comparables for that kind of
09:55:23 We have unique redevelopment considerations that are
09:55:25 involved, which deal with issues of obsolescence and
09:55:31 We have a rapidly changing market.
09:55:36 We have escalating construction costs, as you well
09:55:39 And we also have uniquely relevant information that I
09:55:42 think wasn't sufficiently provided at the outset.
09:55:45 What I mean by that is, ACP had a transaction.
09:55:49 They that is probably the most relevant bit of
09:55:55 information to determine value, what a current, ready,
09:55:57 willing and able user was going to pay for that
09:56:00 That information understandably is difficult to share.
09:56:04 It's proprietary.
09:56:06 I think ACP has been willing to sit down and share
09:56:09 that information with the appraisers, so the
09:56:11 appraisers have the most recent information.
09:56:15 And also, I don't think the appraisers were fully
09:56:18 apprised of the fact this is a multi-property
09:56:25 What that means is we have the pavilions, we have the
09:56:28 garage and we have a lease.
09:56:31 Valued to some extent for some people, in terms of
09:56:37 where you locate that, you really have to evaluate
09:56:38 this transaction by looking at all three aspects of
09:56:41 it, to determine what you're really paying for the
09:56:45 For selling the garage, paying for the pavilion, so
09:56:52 that information is provided to the appraisers as
09:56:55 Unfortunately that is not entirely the most simple,
09:56:57 straightforward matter because the garage is divided
09:57:00 into various spaces.
09:57:03 It is encumbered by long-term lease.
09:57:06 That affects the value.
09:57:07 I don't want to bore you but we are working diligently
09:57:10 on this.
09:57:12 I have been designated as the person to get this done,
09:57:15 along with these other things that I get to do, and we
09:57:18 will get it done.
09:57:19 I was hoping to have more information for you from
09:57:22 discussions yesterday.
09:57:23 But I assume they were otherwise pre-occupied.
09:57:29 I wanted to let you know.
09:57:31 >>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you.
09:57:32 I just have one quick question, Mr. Smith.
09:57:35 Obviously, I was the opposing vote for this whole
09:57:39 And I was concerned about overruns and special
09:57:42 problems, to anticipate it would come up.
09:57:48 My question is, when you said there was a transaction
09:57:50 that ACP had already, in other words, was there
09:57:53 another buyer that was willing to buy it?
09:57:55 >>> I believe it was the tenant who was willing to
09:57:57 enter into a long-term lease.
09:57:59 >> But then again that seems like supply and demand.
09:58:02 If you have a tenant that wants to pay over market
09:58:04 value because he so desperately wants that selected
09:58:07 place, tongue in cheek, why does that affect the
09:58:13 Because that says simply if you want to pay for
09:58:17 something, if it's higher than market because you
09:58:19 want it --
09:58:20 >>> Only effects it because appraisers are trial to
09:58:23 assess the very question you have.
09:58:24 Is it above or below market?
09:58:28 So you need to look at the transaction.
09:58:30 Frequently they will talk to the parties.
09:58:31 I have had many appraisers call me when I was in
09:58:34 private practice asking me about transactions to make
09:58:36 sure that it was arms-length, and ready, willing and
09:58:39 Or were there other considerations involved in that,
09:58:42 that would suggest the value was high or low?
09:58:44 >>ROSE FERLITA: That's just one of the considerations
09:58:48 to the final.
09:58:50 >>> Right.
09:58:50 Given its contemporaneousness in time, it's some of
09:58:53 the most relevant data.
09:58:54 >>ROSE FERLITA: Thanks.
09:58:57 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, David.
09:58:58 Then we will return back to our agenda.
09:59:01 Item number 3.
09:59:14 >>> Karen pal to us report on item number 3 for the
09:59:16 administration to provide a report and update on some
09:59:19 of the complaints and issues, and take two parts with
09:59:26 This morning, the first one is in regards to abandoned
09:59:29 and derelict vessels, the removal of such vessels in
09:59:35 the waterway, and we currently -- since the beginning
09:59:39 of the three removed three vessels, two that were
09:59:42 beached and one on the rocks.
09:59:43 We have one vessel out there currently that needs
09:59:47 further salvage ability to remove it.
09:59:49 We are working with staff and TPD to be able to remove
09:59:52 that vessel.
09:59:53 And we do have a waiting period for that, for any of
09:59:56 the vessels that we remove.
09:59:58 Typically derelict boats, so everybody understands,
10:00:01 means has to be either beached, fully sunken, or in
10:00:05 some type of navigable waterway in which enforcement
10:00:10 officers, fish and wildlife and TPD officers, or Coast
10:00:13 Guard, can then deal with those vessels.
10:00:15 So those are the issues that were under constraint.
10:00:19 We are working with the new statute that has just come
10:00:22 forward, and to this past legislation, and Donna
10:00:25 Wysong, and myself, are working on that to incorporate
10:00:28 that within our ordinance and our ordinance revision.
10:00:31 We do have some partners we are working with in that
10:00:34 area to make improvement.
10:00:36 One is we have got a really good relationship with the
10:00:38 Davis Island Yacht Club, which is required based on
10:00:42 their lease of the property to provide a youth sailing
10:00:45 Due to the increase in number of boats and such in
10:00:47 that area, it has limited and reduced the safety zone
10:00:53 for that program as well as the Yacht Club itself
10:00:55 during hurricanes.
10:00:58 So it's timely to go forward on that agreement that.
10:01:00 Agreement is currently with TIA, in the process of
10:01:06 reviewing it.
10:01:07 We'll be bringing that agreement to you as an
10:01:10 extension of their lease and to other what's called
10:01:13 navigation agreement for flight zones and such for the
10:01:15 Peter O. Knight airport.
10:01:18 Those will be coming from us to you all for your
10:01:20 review, and approval.
10:01:22 We then have under ordinance revisions that are
10:01:25 underway, Donna has been working very diligently on
10:01:28 those, it is a very lengthy process.
10:01:30 I want to make sure we have all the appropriate
10:01:32 information in there.
10:01:32 So that's kind whereof we are at with derelict
10:01:37 The one is about 80 feet off the beach area.
10:01:43 Push it a little closer.
10:01:45 Unfortunately staff has been unable to reach it and
10:01:47 they are going through the boat process to have that
10:01:49 item removed so that should be coming forth.
10:01:52 It is a very extensive prop sees that we try to
10:01:54 minimize those and build up.
10:01:59 The derelict issues, the human waste issues, has been
10:02:04 brought forward.
10:02:04 We continue to monitor it.
10:02:06 Staff monitors the facility.
10:02:09 We monitor it to verify the area.
10:02:15 We also ask for our partners to share in other
10:02:17 information if they witness something or see
10:02:19 I will tell you based on the Florida Department of
10:02:21 Health review, they go out there weekly, and test the
10:02:26 water, and that particular area so far has come up in
10:02:29 this condition.
10:02:30 So it is under monitoring.
10:02:33 It is a concern of ours.
10:02:35 We ask the citizens if anybody does witness that to
10:02:37 please we are glad to be out there and get the health
10:02:41 department out there as well to monitor that.
10:02:44 >>MARY ALVAREZ: thank you for bringing the report to
10:02:48 It is an ongoing problem it seems to me.
10:02:51 What I would like to know is, since these are
10:02:55 derelict, that would mean they were abandoned.
10:02:57 Is there any signs on these boats that would say who
10:03:01 the owners were?
10:03:02 >> We currently work within the registration.
10:03:05 We have about five right now that do not have current
10:03:09 Staff is working with TPD to send letters to them, to
10:03:13 bring them into compliance.
10:03:15 Derelict again for us is, it is on the bottom,
10:03:19 beached, and unable to contact those owners.
10:03:22 >> Or abandoned?
10:03:24 >>> Yes, or abandoned.
10:03:25 Again derelict for us to remove.
10:03:27 Abandoned -- some of them look abandoned, and they may
10:03:31 not be.
10:03:32 So that's an issue that we are having to address
10:03:35 through the legal process.
10:03:37 >> So when you get the names of these -- when you send
10:03:43 the letters to them, and do you then go remove the
10:03:47 boats, or do you tell them to remove the boats?
10:03:50 >>> They have to remove the boats themselves.
10:03:52 We ask them to do that within a ten-day process
10:03:54 according to chapter 14.
10:03:55 So they are responsible for doing that.
10:03:57 And at that time, if they have not removed it then the
10:04:00 City of Tampa does have the ability to go in and
10:04:02 remove those vessels at our expense initially and then
10:04:06 go towards that.
10:04:07 The owner of those vessels for selection.
10:04:09 >> So you do send them a bill afterwards, in case --
10:04:14 >>> At this approximate point typically the vessels,
10:04:16 we have been unable to contact those owners.
10:04:18 >> So when you remove them it's because it becomes a
10:04:21 public health and safety issue.
10:04:24 >> A health and safety issue.
10:04:25 And that's one of the issues with the vessel that's
10:04:28 out there currently.
10:04:29 We are not sure exactly what's -- whether it has an
10:04:32 engine, whether it has fuel.
10:04:33 We have to go through all the environmental sections.
10:04:35 And again those are things to make sure we can remove
10:04:38 I believe by moving forward with the agreement with
10:04:43 David Fowler and our sea plane and run way for lack of
10:04:46 better term with TIA, that will help free up some of
10:04:49 the safety zone and reduce the amount of water
10:04:52 available for any improper mooring.
10:04:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I can't recall, does the city or
10:05:02 anybody else have a port-a-potty out there associated
10:05:06 with the basin or the dog area?
10:05:11 >>> There are a few port-o-lets for the boat ramp and
10:05:14 the basin itself, in regards to the live-aboards, or
10:05:19 do they have their portable containers on their
10:05:23 We have some letters to all those folks and referred
10:05:26 them to the Marjorie Park marina, when the complaint
10:05:29 had come forward, that we do have a pumpout station
10:05:32 for a nominal fee, if it's under 20 feet it's $5, if
10:05:36 it's over, it's ten.
10:05:38 So they have it at the waterway for them.
10:05:40 >> So the city is operating those two port-a-potties?
10:05:46 >>> Yes, we are.
10:05:46 >> So there's really no excuse.
10:05:48 >>> Yes.
10:05:49 >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:05:50 >>ROSE FERLITA: I would imagine if people are living
10:05:58 on those boats, they are not going to get on their
10:06:00 little dinghy and use the port-a-potty.
10:06:05 Karen, first thank you for meeting me with me
10:06:08 I think we clarified some things.
10:06:10 Explain again -- and I think you already referenced
10:06:12 this a little bit -- in terms of jurisdictional
10:06:14 component, you said that the city is doing, and what
10:06:18 we are charged to do, the port authority, TIA, and the
10:06:21 game and wildlife.
10:06:22 What are --
10:06:24 >>> Fish and wildlife and commission and its officers,
10:06:27 based on the new legislation, TPD officially as well,
10:06:31 has the ability to remove vessels, or to send letters
10:06:35 out to basically say they are derelict vessels and
10:06:40 allow the agency that governs the area which is the
10:06:42 city to be able to remove the vessels once they are
10:06:45 determined derelict: We work very closely with them,
10:06:49 with the Coast Guard, and with TPD to really work
10:06:52 within the constraints of the ordinances, as well as
10:06:54 the statutes to do as much to deal with those derelict
10:06:58 vessels as possible.
10:06:59 >> Karen, you know, this does come up every so often
10:07:02 not from a bunch of people but every so often, long
10:07:05 before you and this administration was here, and if we
10:07:07 follow the game plan that you have in terms of the
10:07:11 Davis Island Yacht Club, the in terms of the safety
10:07:13 zone, in terms of the requirement to be so far
10:07:15 offshore, that's going to really minimize the last
10:07:19 >>> Yes, it will minimize the number that will be able
10:07:21 to come in transientwise, if it is not an approved
10:07:27 mooring unit.
10:07:27 There are actually units, that some areas are private
10:07:31 entities have available, they are very costly, but our
10:07:35 area is more of a transient area, and we have the
10:07:37 advantage of now having Marjorie Park open, that we
10:07:40 have our transient docks for a minimum fee of $2 a
10:07:44 foot for a few days there.
10:07:47 Transients have an alternative.
10:07:50 It's the boats that have been there a long time that
10:07:52 will look for another location because it will
10:07:54 minimize the amount of water and provide the safety
10:07:56 We have the beach area that our ordinance allows for
10:07:59 100 feet off the beach, for a safety zone for all
10:08:03 vessels, or have the Davis Island safety zone so they
10:08:06 can offer their programs and also protect their
10:08:08 vessels that are there, and then will have the
10:08:12 protection with TIA and the runway area.
10:08:19 >> I think both you and Mr. Gerard did a good job of
10:08:25 updating me.
10:08:26 I think we need to find derelict vessels that are
10:08:31 When you talk about them having to be totally
10:08:36 Those that are not, then that becomes a public safety
10:08:38 issue for hurricane preparedness, and those type of
10:08:41 Hopefully, as we go forward, I would ask you that if
10:08:45 you have got any new information, to either share it
10:08:48 with us as a board or feel free to meet with me again
10:08:51 and I'll share it with my colleagues.
10:08:53 >> Rest assured our staff is trying to handle those
10:08:56 vessels as quickly as possible to get them out of
10:08:58 harm's way.
10:08:59 >> Thank you very much.
10:08:59 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Karen.
10:09:03 Item number 4.
10:09:04 Ms. Edge.
10:09:14 >>> Shannon Edge: Director of neighborhood and
10:09:18 community relations.
10:09:19 Very nice to be here today.
10:09:20 It is my pleasure to introduce to the colleagues the
10:09:25 Executive Director of the area agency on aging.
10:09:27 And approximately about a month ago, we met with the
10:09:37 mayor regarding community for lifetime, which many of
10:09:39 our fellow cities and counties in the State of Florida
10:09:42 already participate in.
10:09:44 Today, we are honored to be joining Maureen and her
10:09:48 group to become a community for a lifetime.
10:09:51 And I have a proclamation on behalf of Mayor Iorio and
10:09:55 the city to read.
10:09:57 Maureen Kelly.
10:09:59 Whereas supports the department of Elder Affairs,
10:10:01 community for lifetime initiative, to make Florida a
10:10:04 friendlier place to live for people all ages, that
10:10:06 they may be as independent as long as possible, and
10:10:10 remain in their homes and in the communities they
10:10:12 love, and realize the State of Florida has the highest
10:10:15 percentage of others of any state in the nation and
10:10:18 the elder population will continue to increase
10:10:20 reaching numbers in the first part of the century, and
10:10:24 whereas in order to allow all residents to maintain
10:10:28 significant security and independence, communities
10:10:30 must evaluate and modify their infrastructures to
10:10:34 create a community for a lifetime, and whereas the
10:10:36 City of Tampa and the Florida Department of Elder
10:10:37 Affairs share the vision and responsibility to
10:10:43 encourage the lives of all citizens so they can
10:10:45 prepare for and enjoy aging throughout their lives,
10:10:48 and whereas in order to achieve our mutual goals,
10:10:50 cities and counties together should begin to build a
10:10:54 place free of physical, emotional and social barriers.
10:10:58 Therefore, the mayor by virtue of the authority vested
10:11:01 in her as mayor of the City of Tampa, hereby resolves
10:11:05 that our community will make every effort to evaluate
10:11:07 and later remove barriers to create a community for a
10:11:12 Congratulations, Maureen.
10:11:16 We do recognize that many of their initiatives, in the
10:11:19 packet of information presented to us at our meeting
10:11:21 with Santiago Corrada, went very nicely with the
10:11:25 mayor's investing in neighborhoods initiatives and we
10:11:28 la forward to continuing a working relationship with
10:11:31 Thank you very much.
10:11:31 Have a great day.
10:11:33 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Shannon.
10:11:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to say that I think
10:11:38 one of the most critical things for people as they get
10:11:40 older is our transportation issues, so I encourage
10:11:44 you, we have two openings on our citizens advisory
10:11:48 committee for the metropolitan planning organization
10:11:53 to have a representative of your group try to be one
10:11:57 of the people selected to that.
10:11:58 Because it is going to be absolutely critical to get
10:12:01 that input on the transportation system.
10:12:09 >>> We have approximately $33 million in taxpayer
10:12:12 Then we also have some private grants and foundation
10:12:16 Mostly geared to keep people in their own homes as
10:12:20 long as possible.
10:12:21 And we do in fact fund transportation.
10:12:24 However, we could put all the money in transportation
10:12:26 and it would not be enough.
10:12:27 We would need to do -- I would bring to our board --
10:12:31 actually we are meeting on Friday.
10:12:33 We will make a recommendation.
10:12:35 >> You need to give the name of the person to Mr.
10:12:42 >>> We will do that. Thank you so much.
10:12:45 >> And thank you for your participation. The city has
10:12:47 grown and blossomed under your leadership.
10:12:52 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Shannon.
10:12:54 Item 5, the city staff is tied in with number 7.
10:12:57 So why don't we take --
10:12:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, we can't.
10:13:01 We should defer 5.
10:13:07 Oh, I'm sorry.
10:13:07 >>SHAWN HARRISON: it is set for time certain.
10:13:11 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Public works and utility services
10:13:16 here to address whether green roofs can be allowed in
10:13:18 the city.
10:13:19 Starting out to do that, what I would like to do, I
10:13:23 have asked Nancy McCann for those who may not be
10:13:30 familiar with the concept of a green roof briefly what
10:13:32 that is, and then go on from there.
10:13:34 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Nancy.
10:13:37 >>> Good morning.
10:13:38 Nancy McCann with the solid waste department office
10:13:41 of environmental coordination.
10:13:44 And the idea of the green roof is basically simple.
10:13:51 And the construction materials that normally replace
10:13:55 the waterproof membrane are substituted with green,
10:14:03 and the idea of this is to provide some environmental
10:14:07 and energy savings and benefits to a city and to a
10:14:12 And there's basically two main concepts to green
10:14:17 One is that it's a place that humans can enjoy.
10:14:22 Those typically are more expensive, harder to
10:14:25 maintain, and there might be trees, and it might very
10:14:27 much look like a garden, and those are typically
10:14:30 called rooftop gardens.
10:14:32 It has to be a place where of course having people
10:14:35 running around on a roof that's safe.
10:14:38 Then the roof that's more common in this type of
10:14:42 country, and it might not be so spectacular looking
10:14:46 but it's for function.
10:14:48 And the idea is that instead of normal roofing
10:14:50 material, the plants and the soil insulate the roof,
10:14:56 they prevent some amount of stormwater from not
10:15:02 running off of the roof.
10:15:04 The idea is that there's some environmental benefits
10:15:08 that offset the cost.
10:15:09 Typically, the statistics I've seen are that the green
10:15:14 roof structure can cost as much as 1.5 to 2 times more
10:15:19 than traditional roof covering.
10:15:22 And the idea is that then some of these other benefits
10:15:25 might offset the costs.
10:15:28 Every case is very specific.
10:15:29 There's as many types of green roofs as there are
10:15:32 gardens or different types of landscape.
10:15:38 Thank you.
10:15:42 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: thank you very much, Nancy.
10:15:44 We can find nothing that would prevent a builder from
10:15:47 building a green roof if they wanted to, if they so
10:15:50 choose to do that.
10:15:51 Of course the structure would have to be designed for
10:15:53 that, the roof load would have to be such that it
10:15:55 could handle the green roof, and the weight.
10:15:59 And there are plans for whoever was doing that, their
10:16:03 plans would be reviewed accordingly.
10:16:05 Cindy Miller is chairing a group which includes the
10:16:09 Sierra Club that's exploring green buildings, and
10:16:12 that's the item number 7 today.
10:16:15 One of the other questions that council has asked is
10:16:17 about specifically about the convention center and the
10:16:21 roof of the convention center.
10:16:23 John Moors is here if would you like to talk with him
10:16:26 about that as well.
10:16:29 >>> John Moors, administrator, convention center.
10:16:34 This all came up with the aspect of the need for a new
10:16:38 rev on the convention center, and the next step in the
10:16:43 tourist development council has approved use of
10:16:46 tourist development tax for this to be approved only
10:16:52 by the Board of County Commissioners, and that happens
10:16:54 in a couple of weeks.
10:16:55 We are very optimistic that this is the appropriate
10:16:57 and proper use of tourist development tax money to
10:17:01 assist the convention center.
10:17:03 The motion that was passed by the CDC was up to a
10:17:08 certain dollar amount, that was $5 million.
10:17:10 I don't know yet where that fits in on the scheme of
10:17:14 being able to provide a green roof, that we are
10:17:17 investigating the options.
10:17:19 It's been an exciting proposal.
10:17:20 And we certainly would support what's best for the
10:17:23 long-term of the convention center.
10:17:26 So that's where we are right now.
10:17:27 And continue to do research on it and kind of look at
10:17:32 the options.
10:17:33 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
10:17:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I really appreciate your
10:17:37 investigating it.
10:17:37 I'm hopeful that we will train our city staff people
10:17:41 so if the private sector comes up for permits for
10:17:44 green roofs that we will be able to review them.
10:17:47 And I appreciate that you are looking at this
10:17:48 potentially for the convention center.
10:17:50 And I know that the people who are speaking at eleven
10:17:52 are going to try to help fund additional resources to
10:17:56 offset the additional potential costs for installing
10:18:00 something like that.
10:18:01 I think it's very important, particularly with city
10:18:03 buildings, to look at the life cycle cost of the
10:18:06 And if in fact this were to save on long-term air
10:18:09 conditioning costs, it could be worth it.
10:18:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: John, as you look into this issue,
10:18:20 I would assume -- maybe I shouldn't assume anything.
10:18:23 But let's make sure that we look for any possible
10:18:26 grants to make up the difference between the cost of
10:18:30 the traditional roof or green roof, if in fact a green
10:18:33 roof is something that we might want to consider.
10:18:41 I would think if there are some benefits there might
10:18:43 be some federal grants.
10:18:45 >>> Absolutely.
10:18:47 Chuck Walter is a grant writer and they are
10:18:50 investigating those opportunities and there are
10:18:51 numerous ones, you're right, and we are working on
10:18:56 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
10:18:57 All right.
10:18:57 Item number 7 we'll take when we get to the 11:00.
10:19:02 Item number 6, which is Hartline.
10:19:09 I believe you all have a brief PowerPoint
10:19:14 >>> Ray Miller with Hart, which is the Hillsborough
10:19:17 area regional transit authority.
10:19:20 And I'm here to talk to you today about bus shelter
10:19:23 And if we could -- I just have a few slides that I
10:19:27 thought would be appropriate to share with you.
10:19:30 If we can get those up, that would be greatly
10:19:34 Thank you.
10:19:36 I'm here today to talk to you about the shelter
10:19:39 advertising program.
10:19:40 And I think as most of you are aware there currently
10:19:45 exists an ordinance that prohibits shelter advertising
10:19:48 in the city right-of-way.
10:19:49 So I'm here to ask for your consideration.
10:19:51 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Miller, can you wait one second?
10:19:54 I think that our clerk has gone out to ask them to
10:19:57 keep quiet.
10:19:58 Every time that door opens you have a lot of noise
10:20:00 that's competing with you.
10:20:04 I'm sorry to interrupt you.
10:20:07 >>> Okay.
10:20:10 Did you hear what I said?
10:20:12 Should I go ahead and repeat it?
10:20:15 >>SHAWN HARRISON: No.
10:20:15 >>> And this particular program, it will generate some
10:20:20 But it's really not about generating revenue.
10:20:23 But the revenue that we would generate, we would put
10:20:26 back into the shelter program.
10:20:27 It's really about getting more shelters out there on
10:20:30 the street.
10:20:35 Hart has 4,000 bus stops and really only about 200
10:20:39 shelters and with that harsh climate we thought it was
10:20:42 very important -- and I continually hear, and I'm sure
10:20:45 you do, too -- about the need for more shelters, and
10:20:49 shelter waiting areas.
10:20:50 So it is a great program that has been successful in
10:20:55 most of the metropolitan areas around the state.
10:20:58 And large number of metropolitan areas throughout the
10:21:02 So what we would be looking at doing -- and let me go
10:21:07 ahead and show a couple of examples.
10:21:09 But what we would be looking at doing is contracting
10:21:12 with a third party to actually purchase, install and
10:21:18 maintain the shelters, and then in turn obviously they
10:21:22 receive the advertising revenue.
10:21:24 But just right across the bay, here are pictures, an
10:21:29 example of what the PSTA, our sister agency in
10:21:33 Pinellas, is doing right now.
10:21:36 Here's an example of shelters in the Miami-Dade area.
10:21:41 And certainly when we -- if in fact we do have the
10:21:46 opportunity to bid this project, we would certainly
10:21:49 include design elements.
10:21:54 And then lastly, here are the shelters that we
10:21:57 currently use.
10:21:58 And there may be opportunities for us to retrofit our
10:22:02 existing shelters to allow for advertising panel.
10:22:06 But this program is not meant to replace our existing
10:22:09 shelter program with the goal this year is to install
10:22:13 30 shelters, the goal next year to install 40
10:22:15 shelters. But this is really a supplement to our
10:22:17 existing program which we will continue to pursue.
10:22:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Mr. Miller.
10:22:29 We had this conversation.
10:22:30 And I think that it's a good program.
10:22:33 The only thing is I want to make sure that it's done
10:22:39 properly, and with taste.
10:22:43 You and that doesn't mean I want the whole shelter
10:22:47 with advertising.
10:22:49 Maybe just one side of it or something.
10:22:51 But not overly advertising by these people, you know,
10:22:57 with the advertising.
10:22:59 Because we do have the ordinances in place for this
10:23:03 And I think you said we would have to change the
10:23:07 ordinances and so on.
10:23:08 And I'm willing to do that if we can have your
10:23:10 assurance that they will be done tastefully.
10:23:15 >>> Absolutely, you have that assurance.
10:23:18 You know, as we develop the RFP, I think we would want
10:23:22 to limit the advertising to one panel.
10:23:24 But allow us to put transit information in there as
10:23:31 That would be our intent, to limit the advertising to
10:23:33 one panel.
10:23:33 >>MARY ALVAREZ: And I know that we need more shelters
10:23:38 around the city, with the heat bearing down on the
10:23:42 passengers that are waiting for the bus.
10:23:44 It's really, really essential that we provide these
10:23:50 shelters for them.
10:23:52 And now that we are coming into hurricane season, it
10:23:55 doesn't mean that you are going to be doing it now.
10:23:57 But hopefully you can do it sometime this year.
10:24:00 But maybe, you know, in the future, we need to protect
10:24:04 the people that are out there.
10:24:11 I think I gave you some locations that I would like
10:24:15 for you to look into besides that.
10:24:18 Thank you.
10:24:22 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you, Mr. Miller.
10:24:24 I want to commend you on the program.
10:24:26 I think the shelter program that we advertised, it's a
10:24:30 wonderful way to get some additional funding for your
10:24:34 One of the things I was wondering, when you were
10:24:37 talking about your advertising on the side panels, is
10:24:40 there any way that you could make your panels kind of
10:24:43 like you have the advertising on your buses?
10:24:46 From the public safety standpoint, where it's
10:24:49 transparent where you can actually see through it,
10:24:55 actual advertising on one side, but the people that
10:25:01 are inside the shelter, they can see someone or
10:25:04 something approaching them from the other side.
10:25:06 Is that a possibility?
10:25:09 >>> I would think that that's a possibility certainly,
10:25:15 is available, to allow people to see through.
10:25:17 >> A lot of people who are riding buses are elderly.
10:25:20 And people prey on the elderly.
10:25:22 And if that's a blind spot or blind side, you
10:25:25 definitely don't want to create unsafe conditions for
10:25:31 But especially our elderly.
10:25:33 And if that's a feasible possibility from a cost
10:25:37 standpoint, I would really like to see it.
10:25:41 >>> We will certainly check into that.
10:25:44 I'm not aware of that existing.
10:25:47 But that doesn't mean --
10:25:51 >> It exists on the bus.
10:25:52 >>> On the bus, right.
10:25:53 But I am not sure aware of advertising panel shelters.
10:25:57 And there very well could be programs that do just
10:26:02 >> It's a good point to look at.
10:26:04 >>> Right.
10:26:04 Thank you.
10:26:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Miller, good to see you looking
10:26:12 so well and so glad you're here.
10:26:14 You mentioned the pictures you showed, showed one
10:26:19 panel but they also showed that there they were
10:26:23 That was the intent, I guess, in Pinellas, right?
10:26:27 >>> Right.
10:26:29 >> It's an opaque material and two-sided.
10:26:32 I guess if they did the RFP, and I think it was a good
10:26:38 idea, at least theoretically, that we would have to be
10:26:41 pretty clear to the -- if we were putting out an RFP,
10:26:46 probably only allow a one-sided approach.
10:26:51 What is our current cost per shelter when we are doing
10:26:54 them ourselves?
10:26:58 >>> The structure itself ranges from 7 to go B $10,000
10:27:02 depending on what type of shelter it is.
10:27:04 But in a lot of cases, the site improvements are
10:27:13 required, curbs and curb cuts, but the structure
10:27:17 itself about $5,000.
10:27:20 And under this program, we do look at obviously the
10:27:24 third party to not just acquire and own the shelter
10:27:29 but also maintain it on a routine basis.
10:27:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Would they also be putting in the
10:27:36 expense of the pad?
10:27:38 >>> It would be their requirement to do the
10:27:40 appropriate site work.
10:27:42 >> So compared to 7 to 10,000 what is our total
10:27:46 average cost per site for a shelter including the pad
10:27:49 and the approach?
10:27:50 >>> It can range from 15 to 20,000.
10:27:53 >> So if we are doing about 30 of those, this year,
10:28:02 for about --
10:28:03 >>> 20,000 each.
10:28:04 >> So, okay, 5, 600,000.
10:28:12 So I think there's clearly a balance here that we have
10:28:15 to weigh.
10:28:16 And I hope that we have had discussions with our
10:28:20 neighborhood groups including our T.H.A.N. group which
10:28:24 is our umbrella group to make sure that wave taken the
10:28:27 neighborhood considerations into effect.
10:28:30 There are certain places on Dale Mabry, or some of our
10:28:32 other major thoroughfares, where folks wouldn't mind
10:28:38 an urban look with a shelter and a poster.
10:28:44 No big deal.
10:28:46 It's Dale Mabry, Kennedy, or what have you.
10:28:48 But as our buses go through some of our true
10:28:52 neighborhoods, I think we have to be considerate and
10:28:57 sensitive of those issues.
10:28:58 So, you know, I have no opposition to moving forward.
10:29:02 But we just need to make sure we do it sensitively.
10:29:07 >>> Understood.
10:29:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Miller, when you have a bus stop
10:29:13 at a place where you have a right-of-way now but
10:29:17 there's no pad, no shelter, is it feasible to move
10:29:21 that shelter, to put a shelter in, in another location
10:29:24 but within the same area?
10:29:26 Or do you have to -- what do you do?
10:29:31 Can you move that bus stop?
10:29:35 >>> Certainly.
10:29:35 We work very closely with the city and the county in
10:29:40 Temple Terrace as well.
10:29:42 When we do relocate a bus stop we are working very
10:29:44 closely with the city.
10:29:46 You can actually move the structure, a shelter.
10:29:51 The structure can be moved to a different location.
10:29:55 >> Do you have to put it on the right-of-way?
10:29:59 >>> In most cases that's where we are, in the
10:30:01 But we also have an easement with the private --
10:30:04 >> Oh, you can get an easement?
10:30:06 >>> If we are fortunate enough.
10:30:08 >> Good.
10:30:09 Because I know that Martin Luther King near the
10:30:14 >>> I would say the hospital would be very interested
10:30:16 in working with us on providing that.
10:30:19 >> They have the not the shelters, the bus stops
10:30:22 across the street from MLK now across from the
10:30:28 And it's right on the right-of-way.
10:30:30 And it doesn't give much protection for anybody.
10:30:33 You couldn't put a shelter there. And I would really
10:30:36 like to see a shelter put in that area.
10:30:39 Thank you.
10:30:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to hear from our legal
10:30:45 I think that this is a very good proposal.
10:30:47 I certainly want to -- have we had a chance to look at
10:30:54 this vis-a-vis our ordinances?
10:30:57 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
10:30:59 If this proposal is something that council wanted to
10:31:01 pursue it would take an amendment to the right-of-way
10:31:04 ordinance and to our sign ordinance.
10:31:06 Our sign ordinance currently prohibits off-site signs
10:31:11 except for the grandfathered billboards.
10:31:14 And we have to take a very serious look at having a
10:31:18 provision which allows for a certain category of
10:31:20 off-site signs with our current ordinance as it
10:31:24 relates to the off-site signs.
10:31:27 That's something we would need to take a look at and
10:31:31 how that would affect that.
10:31:32 >> How much time would that take?
10:31:37 >>> I would ask for 60 days given the workload issues
10:31:40 right now.
10:31:42 That's just being realistic.
10:31:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move that we request that we send
10:31:50 this to legal for figuring out, while not undermining
10:31:56 our existing sign code, and report back in 60 days.
10:31:59 >> Second.
10:31:59 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
10:32:00 Discussion on the motion.
10:32:01 >>ROSE FERLITA: Obviously we are not going to take
10:32:04 action today but I wanted to put this on record.
10:32:06 In my particular case, Mr. Miller joins a couple of
10:32:10 people that are in a complementing company, and that's
10:32:13 Mr. McCary and Jake Slater.
10:32:16 Because sometimes while I don't approve of what they
10:32:18 are asking I think they are doing an incredible job.
10:32:24 I extend the same compliment to you.
10:32:26 I'm sorry you weren't here earlier in your career
10:32:29 because I think we would have been further along the
10:32:31 way given the barricades that have been thrown at you.
10:32:34 I would have some issues perhaps, Mr. Miller, but I am
10:32:37 not opposed to supporting the research that our legal
10:32:39 department will do.
10:32:41 We will take up further discussion there.
10:32:44 And Ms. Cole, given that we have the on-site plan
10:32:49 committee, I think to meet in 60 days is realistic.
10:32:56 Thanks to you and thanks to you, Mr. Miller.
10:32:59 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Let me also say I support your
10:33:01 proposal, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
10:33:02 I just sent a letter on behalf of the MPO where we
10:33:07 were encouraging all of our mayors in our
10:33:09 jurisdictions in the county to be very aggressive
10:33:11 about locations for shelters, especially when it comes
10:33:16 to handicapped persons.
10:33:19 And so we need -- this is something the county
10:33:23 We need to do whatever we can to help you all with as
10:33:26 much money as you can get, and this is a way for the
10:33:30 private sector to help out, so be it, whatever we can
10:33:33 do, to make these shelters more accessible to our
10:33:39 folks, we need to do this.
10:33:41 >>ROSE FERLITA: I forgot one thing, too. I don't know
10:33:44 if you said this but I think certainly a feather in
10:33:46 your cap.
10:33:47 When we were talking about the ridership in shelters
10:33:50 and the area that I work on Nebraska Avenue and the
10:33:52 fact that you are pretty maxed out in terms of
10:33:55 ridership --
10:33:58 >>> I love saying this myself, because it was reported
10:34:02 at the MPO meeting the other day by the community
10:34:04 advisory committee, we are in the top 20 of the entire
10:34:08 country in terms of ridership growth.
10:34:10 And we feel we have some good problems that we are
10:34:14 dealing with.
10:34:14 And that is overcrowding.
10:34:19 Some trips, for instance, on Nebraska Avenue, we are
10:34:22 literally at capacity, and are putting extra service
10:34:26 out there.
10:34:26 So our ridership growth has been incredible, 13% last
10:34:31 year, or close to 8% this year.
10:34:34 So we are leading the nation in ridership growth.
10:34:38 And that's why we are here.
10:34:41 >>ROSE FERLITA: And I hope some of that information is
10:34:43 channeled to some of our colleagues and county
10:34:47 You know what you're doing.
10:34:48 Thank you.
10:34:51 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We had a motion and second.
10:34:53 All in favor of the motion signify by saying Aye.
10:34:55 Motion carries.
10:34:56 Thank you.
10:34:57 All right.
10:34:58 Requests for reconsideration.
10:34:59 Is there anyone that would like to ask for
10:35:09 >>> My name is Agnes Stanfield, 2112.
10:35:18 I spoke briefly last week.
10:35:19 I sent an e-mail to City Council.
10:35:23 And I was at a meeting in early March for an
10:35:29 organization with 40 or 50 people concerned about the
10:35:33 paid advertising is one of the things all over the
10:35:38 United States, and they asked Mr. Miller --
10:35:41 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Ma'am, what item are you asking us
10:35:44 to reconsider?
10:35:48 >>> I'm sorry, shelters and advertising.
10:35:50 >>SHAWN HARRISON: That's on public comment which we
10:35:52 already handled for the early part of the agenda.
10:35:53 So we will ask you to wait until the end of the
10:35:55 meeting, which I think will probably be in about an
10:35:57 hour or so.
10:35:59 Then you will have three minutes.
10:36:00 Thank you.
10:36:01 Would anyone else like to ask for reconsideration?
10:36:05 Then we will move on to our committee reports and
10:36:09 consent agenda.
10:36:16 You item number 8.
10:36:19 Mr. White.
10:36:20 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance of the city of Tampa,
10:36:25 Florida establishing a redevelopment trust fund for
10:36:27 the Central Park Community Redevelopment Agency -- or
10:36:31 area, providing for the funding of said community
10:36:33 redevelopment within Central Park community
10:36:35 development area, providing for the administration of
10:36:37 said fund, determining the increment to be deposited
10:36:41 in said fund, establishing the base year for
10:36:43 determining assessed values of property in Central
10:36:46 Park community redevelopment area for tax increment
10:36:48 purposes, providing for the annual proposition of tax
10:36:52 increment by taxing authorities, levying ad valorem
10:36:57 taxes in the community redevelopment area, pointing
10:37:03 the governing body of the Community Redevelopment
10:37:04 Agency as the trustee of said fund, repealing all
10:37:09 ordinances in conflict herewith, providing for
10:37:12 severability, providing an effective date.
10:37:14 >> Second.
10:37:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The effect of what council is doing
10:37:18 today is to move this to second reading and a public
10:37:24 hearing scheduled for June 22nd in two weeks at
10:37:26 9:30 in the morning.
10:37:28 That is the net effect of what council is doing today.
10:37:31 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there any discussion on the
10:37:33 Let me just say that I think that we are seeing
10:37:37 progress on this.
10:37:38 I think that we do have to take a little time to
10:37:42 digest what the county commission did yesterday.
10:37:44 But people are good will are willing to sit down from
10:37:47 one another and try to come to a reasonable
10:37:51 And I think at the end of the day we'll all get there.
10:37:54 So Mr. White, thank you for moving the ordinance.
10:37:58 If there's no further discussion if newer favor
10:38:01 signify by saying Aye.
10:38:03 Motion carries unanimously.
10:38:05 Public safety, Rose Ferlita.
10:38:07 >>ROSE FERLITA: Like to move resolutions 9 through 11.
10:38:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would like to pull 11.
10:38:20 I still haven't heard from staff.
10:38:26 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move 9 and 10.
10:38:28 Thank you.
10:38:29 >> Second.
10:38:29 (Motion carried).
10:38:30 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Parks, Recreation, Culture
10:38:34 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I move item 12 and 13.
10:38:39 >> Second.
10:38:39 (Motion carried)
10:38:47 Public Works Committee.
10:38:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't think any of my items were
10:38:52 I move items 14 through 25.
10:38:56 >> Second.
10:38:56 (Motion carried).
10:38:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just wanted to make a quick
10:39:06 Looking to see which item it was.
10:39:10 Item 21.
10:39:11 Item 21 is really a wonderful thing for the City of
10:39:13 Tampa to participate in, in the State of Florida, but
10:39:17 basically it's a mutual assistance program, whereby
10:39:21 the City of Tampa will participate with other cities.
10:39:25 But if we have a disaster in our water or wastewater
10:39:31 system, other communities will come in and help us.
10:39:33 But I wanted to point out and commend Ralph Metcalf
10:39:37 and his group last year during the hurricane, I think
10:39:41 they had some problems down in the Naples area, and
10:39:46 our team went down there, I think they took all of our
10:39:49 new generators, and they really did a Yeoman's job of
10:39:53 assisting the folks down in southwest Florida who
10:39:57 otherwise would have had to -- they had the pump
10:40:03 stations pumping.
10:40:04 At some point I think Ralph is going to bring his team
10:40:07 in here so we can commend them on their hard work.
10:40:12 In the aid of that neighboring community.
10:40:14 I want to say thank you to those guys.
10:40:18 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. White, Finance Committee.
10:40:22 >>KEVIN WHITE: I believe there was a question about
10:40:24 item number 27.
10:40:27 >>ROSE FERLITA: Do that now?
10:40:28 Thank you, Mr. White, Mr. Harrison.
10:40:30 I just had some concerns in reading the details of the
10:40:33 audit that was submitted by our internal audit
10:40:35 director, Wayne Boytim, on page 4.
10:40:44 Work order consultants.
10:40:51 Identified 17 purchase orders totalling more than
10:40:54 2,072,000 for seven different firms positions of which
10:40:58 exceeded $50,000.
10:41:00 City ordinance section 2-280 states no work orders or
10:41:04 any other contracts however designated exceeding
10:41:07 $50,000 in the aggregate shall be first approved by
10:41:10 resolution passed by the City Council.
10:41:12 None of the 17 purchase orders had been approved by
10:41:15 City Council before being issued.
10:41:19 Then cutting short the rest of that and going to the
10:41:21 second recommendation, city ordinance section 2-280
10:41:25 should be reviewed to determine if it is still both
10:41:27 required -- obviously isn't -- and or practical.
10:41:31 If it is required then a procedure should be
10:41:34 established city-wide, and my issue is it is not being
10:41:37 complied with and rather than find a way where it's
10:41:39 not complied with, and we are finding a reason to
10:41:42 follow that logic, my concern is there's a violation,
10:41:45 and what are we doing about it?
10:41:47 I think this council has been very intent on weighing
10:41:51 in on some of these consulting contracts and obviously
10:41:54 there's some violations here.
10:41:55 So I think more needs to be done or maybe some
10:41:59 interaction with the auditor as opposed to just this
10:42:03 Mr. Shelby, maybe you can give me some direction.
10:42:06 I'm just not happy with somebody saying, that's right,
10:42:09 we are not doing it.
10:42:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, if you do have a question,
10:42:17 on a future agenda for discussion, have the
10:42:20 administration address the concern of how that
10:42:22 provision is going to be, or how is this complied
10:42:25 >>ROSE FERLITA: Again let me clarify, I have no idea
10:42:29 when or how far back, it may have been with the others
10:42:33 in the administration, too. I don't care about
10:42:34 administration that's in charge, I care about anybody
10:42:37 in the administration, this is not being adhered to,
10:42:40 Mr. Daignault.
10:42:41 And it's something that's policy.
10:42:43 I don't want to change policy because we are violating
10:42:45 I want us to comply with the current policies.
10:42:48 And maybe you can weigh in on that.
10:42:50 >>> I'll be glad to do that.
10:42:52 As you know about two years ago we set up the -- about
10:42:55 a year and a half ago, we set up the new contract
10:42:59 administration department, and that department, while
10:43:01 it hit the ground running and did a lot of work and we
10:43:04 had to bring up the speed to get all the people on
10:43:07 board to have it fully flushed out, it is still trying
10:43:10 to get its hands around all of the policies and
10:43:12 procedures that they follow in contract
10:43:15 administration, and separate from that is of course
10:43:19 the purchasing procedures.
10:43:21 What came out in this audit was something that we
10:43:24 somewhat suspected, and that is that there are other
10:43:28 departments doing this type of work, and not always
10:43:34 following the procedures.
10:43:37 Contract administration is going to write some
10:43:41 procedures and make sure that everybody in other
10:43:44 departments understand how they have to touch base,
10:43:47 and what some of these limits are.
10:43:49 I don't want to say it's easy.
10:43:52 But I can see in the heat of battle how a department
10:43:55 who has gone out and got a consultant on their own,
10:43:59 and then needs more work and more work and breaks a
10:44:05 threshold and then come back to council.
10:44:07 Unfortunately all of their people are not trained in
10:44:09 the city's contract administration so they don't do
10:44:12 So that's what was discovered here.
10:44:14 Again, it is clearly our intent to try to get a
10:44:18 tighter reign on that, try to limit and identify the
10:44:21 people in the various departments who do this type of
10:44:23 work, and make sure they know when they have to come
10:44:25 to contract administration to get that taken care of,
10:44:31 a document to council --
10:44:33 >>ROSE FERLITA: So, Steve, I guess we are all in
10:44:36 agreement, that it's fair, and my concern with the way
10:44:39 the recommendation was stated was to decide at this
10:44:41 point if it's required and practical.
10:44:43 It's obviously still required.
10:44:44 >>> Absolutely.
10:44:45 >> I think it's a good safety measure.
10:44:46 I understand that sometimes that slows things down but
10:44:49 I think this council has been pretty supportive and
10:44:54 Is there something we have to move, and move quickly,
10:44:57 but at the same time we have to be informed.
10:44:59 So as long as you are correcting that, and complying
10:45:02 with the city ordinance that's in existence now, I'm
10:45:06 comfortable with that explanation.
10:45:07 I just thought that that needed to be verbalized as
10:45:09 opposed to just receive and file.
10:45:13 Thank you very much.
10:45:14 >>> Just so you know, we do want to have some sort of
10:45:16 audit every year of our contract --
10:45:19 >> Well, that's the benefit of the internal audit.
10:45:21 That's fine.
10:45:21 We are checking on ourselves.
10:45:23 As long as we come up with something beneficial,
10:45:25 that's great.
10:45:26 Thank you so much for waiting around.
10:45:29 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you, Mr. Daignault.
10:45:31 I would like to move 26 through 29.
10:45:34 >> Second.
10:45:34 (Motion carried).
10:45:37 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Building, zoning, preservation
10:45:39 Mrs. Saul-Sena.
10:45:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move resolutions 31
10:45:43 through 34.
10:45:45 >> Second.
10:45:45 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
10:45:48 (Motion Carried).
10:45:48 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Did we already take action on 30?
10:45:55 >> That was just a report.
10:45:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I thought we officially deferred it
10:45:59 till next week.
10:46:00 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
10:46:03 Transportation committee.
10:46:04 Ms. Alvarez, vice chair.
10:46:07 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:46:08 Move item 36 and 37.
10:46:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, Ms. Alvarez, I was okay
10:46:15 with the explanation of 35.
10:46:18 >>SHAWN HARRISON: So 35 through 37?
10:46:20 >>THE CLERK: Substitution on 35.
10:46:27 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second on 35.
10:46:28 (Motion carried).
10:46:30 We need to set items 38, 39.
10:46:32 >> So moved.
10:46:33 >> Second.
10:46:33 >>SHAWN HARRISON: And 38 is the substituted item.
10:46:37 >>THE CLERK: Setting a public hearing for June
10:46:41 22nd at 5:30, and July 13th at 10 a.m., change
10:46:50 the date.
10:46:52 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
10:46:53 >> Second.
10:46:53 (Motion carried).
10:46:54 >>SHAWN HARRISON: All right.
10:46:56 We will now go to our public hearings.
10:47:00 Items 40, 41 and 42.
10:47:04 41 we think is going to be withdrawn.
10:47:06 If there is anyone who plans on testifying on items
10:47:12 40, 41, 42, please stand, raise your right hand to be
10:47:17 >>THE CLERK: Do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell
10:47:21 the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
10:47:23 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Item number 40 is a continued public
10:47:53 >>MARTY BOYLE McDONALD: Land development.
10:47:54 Before you is a continued public hearing, continued
10:47:56 from the May 25th night meeting.
10:47:59 Marty McDonald.
10:48:01 One of the things we need to clear first, this was a
10:48:03 two-week continuance, continued to a daytime meeting.
10:48:07 And we ask that council for clarity sake, if you can
10:48:10 waive the 13-day rule.
10:48:12 They did submit the site plan yesterday.
10:48:15 But I don't believe official action when we continued
10:48:20 for two weeks included a waiver of the 13 day rule
10:48:22 when we looked back.
10:48:23 So that needs to be part of what happens today.
10:48:28 The petitioner did submit a site plan yesterday.
10:48:31 And it took care of all of the objections except for
10:48:37 And the objections that are still standing are from
10:48:41 transportation, that they object to the reduction of
10:48:42 the parking spaces from 12 to 9, they object to the
10:48:48 shared driveway.
10:48:49 There is a waiver being requested for the reduction of
10:48:53 the 12 spaces.
10:48:54 And as far as the shared driveway, in speaking to
10:48:57 transportation, that is their standing objection.
10:49:03 Let me refresh your memory.
10:49:04 I know I kind of jumped ahead of myself.
10:49:07 If you look at the Elmo.
10:49:08 The site is located, I believe, 1005 West Platt, to
10:49:20 the west of Madison Avenue.
10:49:24 I will show you pictures to refresh your memory.
10:49:26 This is the subject site.
10:49:27 It will be removed.
10:49:32 Directly to the east is construction of another office
10:49:38 To the west is an existing office building.
10:49:43 And this is just a view looking east of Platt.
10:49:47 And then the bottom picture looking west on Platt.
10:49:52 And this is directly across the street, this
10:49:55 multifamily, town homes.
10:50:00 And they did ask for one additional waiver.
10:50:03 And that waiver was a required buffer to the east
10:50:07 property line.
10:50:08 And that was because of the shared drive and the zero
10:50:11 lot line.
10:50:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My understanding is the property
10:50:21 owners are the ones to the west.
10:50:25 So considered lost parking spaces might be made up in
10:50:31 spaces on either side.
10:50:32 >>MARTY BOYLE McDONALD: I think petitioner can address
10:50:35 that better.
10:50:36 I know they did ask for the waiver.
10:50:39 I'm glad you brought that up because it brought there
10:50:41 to my attention.
10:50:42 One of the comments had been we needed a cross-access
10:50:47 easement agreement signed before they went to
10:50:52 And I will enter this into the record.
10:50:54 It's a declaration of intent to grant easement.
10:50:56 And they have obtained this.
10:51:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It appears there is a 15-inch tree
10:51:05 in front, and it's going to be removed.
10:51:07 And I wonder if it's the only tree on-site.
10:51:19 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Here on behalf of Tim and Joanne.
10:51:22 It's not the only tree on the site.
10:51:26 There are several.
10:51:27 There's a grand oak tree in the rear.
10:51:31 It's not on the subject site.
10:51:32 But it's on this site.
10:51:34 And there's two oak trees immediately to the rear on
10:51:36 the property line that are all being saved.
10:51:41 In order to do that we are working with the Parks
10:51:42 Department limiting the height of the building,
10:51:45 pushing it forward, and enhancing the trees in the
10:51:49 That's the only reason we are taking the one out in
10:51:52 the front.
10:51:53 I don't remember an oak tree on the front, though, of
10:51:56 any -- where is it?
10:52:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I was going by the photograph.
10:52:03 As indicated on the site plan, it looked pretty big in
10:52:07 the picture.
10:52:08 And you are putting in --
10:52:11 >>> We have significant trees in the back that we are
10:52:14 >> I know that but I'm just talking about the one in
10:52:15 the front.
10:52:16 I'm wondering if you can't save the one in the front.
10:52:18 >>> I don't know how -- it's in the front by the
10:52:23 driveway now.
10:52:24 >> It's by an existing driveway that's going to be the
10:52:28 shared driveway?
10:52:29 >>> Yes.
10:52:29 If we can save it, we'll save it.
10:52:31 But we have already saved all of the other trees.
10:52:33 And adjusted the building significantly to accommodate
10:52:36 the grand tree in the back.
10:52:40 I prefer to not have to do that.
10:52:42 But we'll work with the Parks Department.
10:52:44 They have to approve everything that we are doing out
10:52:46 We put some very stringent controls of what happens
10:52:49 with the foundation and the elevation.
10:52:51 >> I understand that.
10:52:52 But I'm looking at your site plan.
10:52:54 And it shows the removal of those trees, that the
10:52:58 existing driveway is already there.
10:53:00 And what I am asking is remove the X on the site plan
10:53:05 and write that it's going to stay, and keep it.
10:53:12 >>> I don't know.
10:53:28 The driveway is very narrow. I don't think that
10:53:32 transportation will allow us to keep it.
10:53:33 They already objected to the narrowness of the
10:53:37 I prefer not to do anything with that.
10:53:39 We have done everything they have asked us to do.
10:53:41 And they have no objection to the removal of that
10:53:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
10:53:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Michelini, this TD site plan,
10:53:56 the zero lot line, on the west side --
10:54:02 >>> It's on the east you side.
10:54:14 The right side is the east side.
10:54:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What's the activity to the east?
10:54:23 >>> All three parcels, the one to the east and the one
10:54:25 to the west, are owned by the same owner.
10:54:29 It's an office building and it's set back 15 feet.
10:54:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is there any architectural
10:54:36 screening to the adjacent building --
10:54:46 >>> Yes, we provided you with the elevation.
10:54:52 The elevation should be on the --
10:54:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It doesn't show what's happening.
10:54:59 >>> We are not going to leave the bottom portion open.
10:55:01 It will be screened with a new wall and some kind of
10:55:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It doesn't indicate that on the
10:55:10 site plan.
10:55:11 >>> We can certainly add the note.
10:55:14 >> How high?
10:55:15 >>> Normally it's about a 3-foot wall.
10:55:18 It screen it is cars off.
10:55:20 And then -- you have to be careful about putting up
10:55:25 larger walls because we have a lot of trees on that
10:55:32 site. The grand oak tree in the back.
10:55:38 >> That's not affected, though.
10:55:39 >>> Well, the excavation.
10:55:41 If you want a 4-foot wall inside to screen the cars.
10:55:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm just saying some type of
10:55:52 permanent --
10:55:53 >>> Let me show you the elevation here.
10:55:56 This view that you're looking at is from the alley
10:55:59 This line right here is the screening wall that you're
10:56:02 talking about on the east side of the building.
10:56:07 >> It doesn't designate what material it is.
10:56:12 >>> Well, it's matching the building.
10:56:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You indicated you would be okay
10:56:17 with 4 feet.
10:56:18 >>> Yes, that's fine.
10:56:19 >> Why don't we put a minimum of four feet to screen
10:56:22 the cars on the east side.
10:56:26 And preferably some vegetation would be nice there,
10:56:31 >>> We are going to add vines.
10:56:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Before you go forward, council, I
10:56:40 believe as a matter of procedure to waive the 13-day
10:56:47 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Need a motion to waive the 13-day
10:56:50 Motion and second.
10:56:53 >> Is there anyone that would like to speak on item
10:56:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:56:58 This is a question for staff.
10:57:00 What are the reasons why this is even contemplatable
10:57:03 is because the property owner owns the property on the
10:57:07 east and west side.
10:57:09 If this was owned by somebody other than people who
10:57:11 own property on the east and west side, it would be
10:57:14 completely zero lot line on one side and shared
10:57:18 driveway, it's pretty unusual.
10:57:20 Is there any way legally on the site plan to ensure
10:57:22 that these three properties will stay under one
10:57:27 >>MARTY BOYLE McDONALD: Land development.
10:57:33 Point of clarification.
10:57:35 To speak to the second part, under the planned
10:57:37 development, you can have zero lot line, that gives
10:57:41 you the leeway.
10:57:42 On the one side, you have zero lo lot line.
10:57:47 As to the shared access -- I'll late Kate speak to
10:57:53 >>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Legal department.
10:57:54 I don't know that it's possible to include a
10:57:56 stipulation to that effect in the site plan approval.
10:58:00 What the petitioner has done is to grant an easement
10:58:04 in the event that one of the parcels -- the access
10:58:10 easement would be granted -- granted at that time.
10:58:12 Right now it's not legally possible to grant an
10:58:14 easement because the property owner is the same.
10:58:17 You can't grant an easement -- what we have done is
10:58:21 signed in an intent to declare that they will do so.
10:58:24 And I have advise dollars Mr. Michelini that that
10:58:26 document needs to be recorded in the public record.
10:58:30 If council is inclined to approve this PD, I need to
10:58:34 prepare a revised ordinance, and would be able to
10:58:36 present to the council this evening.
10:58:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would move then that we send to
10:58:44 legal to prepare.
10:58:48 But I would like legal to think about are there any
10:58:51 other concerns that you might have for the future if
10:58:53 the ownership were to change, in approving this PD in
10:58:59 the future, because it is such a tight situation.
10:59:03 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
10:59:04 (Motion carried) thank you.
10:59:09 Item number 41, we have had a request to withdraw, is
10:59:14 that correct?
10:59:31 I thought that we had a motion.
10:59:42 Ms. Saul-Sena made that motion.
10:59:45 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I did.
10:59:46 My motion is to ask legal to bring this number 40 back
10:59:51 this evening so that we can take action on it.
10:59:53 >> Second.
10:59:56 >> Motion and second.
10:59:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Whether you can do it in a continued
11:00:00 public hearing.
11:00:01 Right now it's still open.
11:00:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Keep it open.
11:00:06 >>SHAWN HARRISON: And we'll hear it at 6:00 tonight.
11:00:09 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
11:00:11 Motion carried.
11:00:12 Now, item 41.
11:00:20 >>THE CLERK: We have received -- petitioner submitted
11:00:25 as of June 7th, I want to cancel this request.
11:00:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to receive and file.
11:00:32 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion to receive and file the
11:00:34 notification of withdrawal of item 41.
11:00:36 All in favor indicate by saying Aye.
11:00:38 Motion carries.
11:00:39 Item 42.
11:00:40 >>ERIC COTTON: Land Development Coordination.
11:00:42 This is an appeal to the VRB decision to deny a
11:00:45 request which is the second time it's come before City
11:00:48 The petitioner has originally filed in October of 2005
11:00:53 the VRB heard the case in October 2005.
11:00:58 Petitioner requested petitioner's request -- on
11:01:06 December 13th the board denied the request,
11:01:08 petitioner appealed it to council.
11:01:10 Council, in February, remand it back to VRB with
11:01:15 specific instructions on the cul-de-sac, 5151 San Jose
11:01:21 where one of the fingers goes out into the bay, with
11:01:27 de minimus, intrusion into the front yard set back.
11:01:30 VRB heard the case on the 15th and again denied
11:01:34 it, that petitioner did not meet the hardship
11:01:38 This morning, legal council explained the criteria, a
11:01:44 brand new case before you, you are not held to the
11:01:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to announce at 11:00 we
11:01:53 are going to start the 11:00 discussion on
11:01:59 According to this clock, it's 10:57.
11:02:04 I think it would be better to just wait and to talk
11:02:07 about sustainability and then get into this case.
11:02:10 So if you don't mind.
11:02:32 This is going to be a complex case and we need full
11:02:35 attention and we have an 11:00 discussion of
11:02:38 sustainability scheduled.
11:02:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Can we continue this till after the
11:02:48 >> Motion to continue till after the discussion.
11:02:50 It's open.
11:02:51 >> Just so the record is clear.
11:03:04 >> Motion and second till after the sustainability
11:03:07 (Motion carried).
11:03:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We now have a representative on
11:03:18 >> Good morning.
11:03:20 Thank you for having us back.
11:03:22 I'm Liz Taylor here on behalf of the green ribbon
11:03:26 I was here in April.
11:03:28 And councilwoman Saul-Sena asked that we return with
11:03:35 some actual recommendation of items for what it may
11:03:43 cost to help the city move forward and towards
11:03:48 sustainability in green buildings.
11:03:50 I do have a document if I can --
11:04:15 Also to review, the green building coalition is
11:04:19 meeting with executives on city staff on a green
11:04:26 building task force.
11:04:27 And this is the way for City Council to lend some
11:04:32 leadership to this process.
11:04:38 Basically, we have five goals in this implementation
11:04:43 And the first would be to help train the city staff
11:04:47 about actual green buildings processes, in preparation
11:04:52 for launching a City of Tampa green building program.
11:04:55 So this would involve some additional funding, and we
11:04:59 have outlined some of the very specific costs
11:05:04 We suggest that you can take as a model the Sarasota
11:05:11 County has a similar program, where they cover the
11:05:15 costs of training, and accreditation, and the U.S.
11:05:21 green buildings council lead program, which is
11:05:24 leadership and energy and environmental design.
11:05:28 And they also incentivize their staff members to do.
11:05:35 This we would estimate 1,000 to 1500 per staff member
11:05:39 and you could set as a goal ten staff to become
11:05:43 accredited in 2007.
11:05:47 On the other side of the sheet, we would like to see
11:05:55 the city build its first certified green building.
11:05:57 And we can't associate a specific cost with this.
11:06:01 It's estimated that to build and design a building to
11:06:11 standard costs about an additional 1 to 2% of the
11:06:15 overall project cost.
11:06:16 These costs actually come back in significant savings,
11:06:21 operational savings and energy and other costs,
11:06:23 through the life of the building, which is why many
11:06:26 other city governments are doing this.
11:06:30 So what we are saying here is it's a good time to look
11:06:33 at your CIP budget and see if you can identify some
11:06:37 appropriate projects where you may want to do this.
11:06:41 When you do that, we can also provide case studies of
11:06:45 other buildings, similar buildings, from local
11:06:47 governments around the country.
11:06:55 Goal 3, to provide incentives for private developers
11:06:59 to use green building processes.
11:07:01 We see no direct cost with this.
11:07:03 This can either be fast track permitting or urban
11:07:07 density bonuses.
11:07:09 Goal 4 would be to analyze city activities for other
11:07:14 sustainability initiatives, and to obtain funding for
11:07:17 those initiatives.
11:07:20 We suggest funding and access sustainable program
11:07:25 This has been done in other local governments.
11:07:28 And again, they help conduct an audit.
11:07:31 They find cost savings which actually does pay back
11:07:36 the city over time.
11:07:38 And then goal 5, goes hand in hand with that, which is
11:07:42 to analyze city operations, to identify opportunities
11:07:45 for increased cost savings and sustainability.
11:07:49 And there is a formal program for that, with the
11:07:52 Florida green building coalition, green local
11:07:54 government audit.
11:07:56 So that's basically the summary of our
11:08:02 And we have some other representatives here who would
11:08:07 like to speak in favor of this, that are in support.
11:08:10 Is this an appropriate time for that?
11:08:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Dingfelder has a question.
11:08:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And somewhat of a comment.
11:08:21 We have a major building that is at least in plans and
11:08:25 budgeted for and I don't know fits been designed yet
11:08:27 which is the new TPD headquarters in East Tampa.
11:08:30 Does anybody know if that building -- Mr. White, you
11:08:33 may know.
11:08:35 Was it architecturally designed yet for TPD?
11:08:40 >>> Yes, it is designed.
11:08:41 We checked on that with staff.
11:08:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I mean do they have architectural
11:08:46 design, or do they just have some renderings?
11:08:48 Because I think that might be an opportunity there for
11:08:53 that building.
11:08:54 I'm familiar with the Lead program.
11:08:57 I attend the Urban Land Institute conferences.
11:09:00 And they are very big on the lead program.
11:09:04 And I think it's becoming more and more mainstreamed
11:09:09 for both governments and private developers to try and
11:09:14 meet the Lead standards.
11:09:18 So I think maybe there is an opportunity, if we don't
11:09:21 have an opportunity on the TPD building, I know we are
11:09:24 looking at buildings and fire stations in the next
11:09:30 year or two.
11:09:32 >>> Definite example of that and other locations.
11:09:34 >> I think there's some good opportunities we should
11:09:36 continue to look into.
11:09:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I know we only scheduled five
11:09:42 minutes but I would like to ask if we can let people
11:09:44 from the audience speak for one minute each because
11:09:47 they have come.
11:09:49 >>> Thank you very much.
11:09:50 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is there anyone that would like to
11:09:52 take a very, very brief second to speak about this?
11:09:54 Go ahead.
11:09:59 >>> Good morning.
11:10:00 Kimberly thin, co-founder of environment for
11:10:04 sustainable Tampa and the green river coalition.
11:10:08 We represent a community of individuals, organizations
11:10:10 and businesses whose goal is to establish Tampa as a
11:10:13 leader in bottom line sustainability, with the
11:10:18 economic and environmental advantages of smart growth
11:10:21 in green practices to Tampa.
11:10:24 According to the environment and development
11:10:25 sustainable development meets the needs of the present
11:10:29 without compromising the ability of future generations
11:10:33 to meet their needs. This means living within the
11:10:35 limits and understanding among the economy, society
11:10:38 and their environment.
11:10:39 Why is this important?
11:10:40 According to the U.S. census, by the year 2025,
11:10:44 Florida is expected to be the third most populace
11:10:47 state with over 20.7 million people.
11:10:49 Over the next three decades, Florida's total
11:10:52 population is expected to increase by 6.5 million
11:10:56 That means a new resident will move to Hillsborough
11:10:58 County every half hour.
11:11:00 That's a lot of people adding increased sprawl,
11:11:04 consumption of natural resources, fuel consumption,
11:11:06 water management issues, and increased burden on mass
11:11:09 transit and infrastructure.
11:11:11 Please consider funding the recommendations before you
11:11:13 today to change city staff, providing green
11:11:17 construction and identify funding and opportunities to
11:11:20 increase sufficiency and cost savings as a prudent
11:11:23 step towards meeting developments that is smart and
11:11:27 efficient and will meet Tampa's growing needs.
11:11:29 Thank you for your consideration.
11:11:33 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
11:11:34 Anything else on this item?
11:11:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Anyone else on this?
11:11:39 If you want to speak, this is your minute.
11:11:41 Just on sustainability.
11:11:42 And you have a minute.
11:11:44 >>> Pete Crawford, I'm an architect with the a local
11:11:47 firm in Tampa.
11:11:48 And I'm a member of the American institute of
11:11:57 And what this is, are we adding value?
11:12:01 And are we reducing the cost to the city operations?
11:12:06 And that's what we are trying to ask the City Council
11:12:08 to review, as to let's lower our costs and increase
11:12:13 our value in the environment.
11:12:15 And through working with staff, working with the
11:12:19 council, be able to use these ideas.
11:12:23 Thank you.
11:12:23 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you very much.
11:12:24 All right.
11:12:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: One more.
11:12:31 >>> Debra COBALT a member of the green ribbon
11:12:35 coalition working with the city.
11:12:36 I have been working a lot with the city staff on this
11:12:39 I just want to express the appreciation for the great
11:12:43 staff that we do have on N this city.
11:12:46 And they have already incorporated a lot of things
11:12:49 that are involved in the sustainability-type
11:12:51 environment into their everyday practices, and their
11:12:53 best practices.
11:12:55 And I urge you to go ahead with this.
11:12:59 It's good cost savings.
11:13:01 It's good for the city.
11:13:02 And you already have the people in place that can do a
11:13:04 great job in implementing it.
11:13:06 Thank you.
11:13:11 Ms. Saul-Sena.
11:13:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I know Cindy miller is heading the
11:13:14 staff group that's looking at affecting permitting,
11:13:16 affecting new buildings, and I look forward to her
11:13:18 continuing to work with this group and getting a
11:13:20 report back from you in several months on how that's
11:13:23 And we will look at making sure that some of this
11:13:25 funding is built into the new budget.
11:13:27 Thank you very much for coming down.
11:13:29 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
11:13:30 All right.
11:13:30 Item number 42.
11:13:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to reopen.
11:13:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
11:13:37 (Motion carried).
11:13:41 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Is somebody from city going to make
11:13:50 a presentation?
11:13:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Before we do that, I would like to
11:13:54 distribute to council applicable provisions of the
11:13:58 Let me give one to the clerk.
11:14:07 I'm sorry to take time to do. This but I want to
11:14:09 refresh council's recollection, today's appeal hearing
11:14:13 is the first time this issue is going to be coming up
11:14:16 either under the new standard of review 323.
11:14:21 The normal standard of review, I have highlighted
11:14:24 through what council has with this case in the past.
11:14:29 What applies now is this petition is again being
11:14:32 appealed to the City Council.
11:14:34 Therefore, the second column on that page applies.
11:14:38 And let me read it for you if you don't mind.
11:14:40 If the petitioner again appeals to the City Council
11:14:46 has still failed to comply with the above standards as
11:14:48 directed by City Council, then the City Council may
11:14:50 take any action which the board or commission was
11:14:54 authorized to take, in making its determination, City
11:14:57 Council shall not take any new evidence or testimony,
11:15:00 but shall only review the record established during
11:15:03 the public hearings by the board or commission and
11:15:07 hear arguments.
11:15:07 And this is the first time this is coming before this
11:15:10 council in this fashion.
11:15:12 So I just wanted to bring that to council's attention.
11:15:14 And again, on the second page, I included section
11:15:18 17.5-74, the application of variance power to refresh
11:15:23 council's recollection.
11:15:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just procedurally, are we in a
11:15:32 quasi-judicial mode where if anybody has spoken to us
11:15:36 about this appeal, we should disclose?
11:15:38 Nobody has spoken to me about it but I just want to
11:15:40 make sure that everybody knows what the ground rules
11:15:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
11:15:44 If any council -- first of all, I want to ask the
11:15:48 clerk if there's been any written communications
11:15:50 relative to this appeal that are going to be filed.
11:15:53 And again remind they are is a quasi-judicial matter,
11:15:57 The witnesses have been previously sworn.
11:15:59 I would ask them to reaffirm they have been sworn when
11:16:02 they do speak.
11:16:03 I also ask if any ex parte communications verbally has
11:16:06 occurred with the commissioner or -- excuse me, the
11:16:09 petitioner or his or her representative, that that
11:16:11 should be disclosed prior to the vote, the identity of
11:16:15 that person and the substance of that communication.
11:16:17 Thank you.
11:16:20 >>ERIC COTTON: I would like to repeat what I
11:16:22 previously said.
11:16:23 Two things.
11:16:23 This case was originally filed back in August. The
11:16:27 property is at 5151 west San Jose, which is one of the
11:16:31 fingers that goes out into the water.
11:16:32 Petition was originally filed back in October 2005.
11:16:35 The board originally heard the case in October of
11:16:39 2005, at the petitioner's request continued it for two
11:16:43 They heard the case in December and denied the --
11:16:46 denied the request due to the board's feeling of lack
11:16:49 of hardship.
11:16:50 Petitioner appealed to City Council.
11:16:54 Council heard the case in February.
11:16:56 Back to the VRB with specific instructions to look at
11:16:59 the development on the cul-de-sac and the de minimus
11:17:04 intrusion of the requested variance.
11:17:07 The VRB heard the case in March, denied it again, now
11:17:11 that petitioner is coming back before City Council on
11:17:18 >>SHAWN HARRISON: So we send it back with specific
11:17:20 instructions to look at two things, the pattern of the
11:17:22 development, and the de minimus impact.
11:17:27 >>> Correct.
11:17:28 >> And they specifically reviewed that at the hearing?
11:17:33 >>> That I believe is part of the basis of appeal by
11:17:36 the petitioner.
11:17:37 I'll let them get into that issue.
11:17:39 The board did look at the development of the existing
11:17:45 The petitioner showed an aerial from the property
11:17:49 appraiser's web site, the different property lines and
11:17:54 the existing development in the area, and they went
11:18:00 into more discussion, asked a couple of questions,
11:18:04 petitioner's representative and then again denied the
11:18:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What was the VRB vote?
11:18:12 >> 4 to 2.
11:18:15 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Petitioner?
11:18:15 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I'm here on behalf of Michael and
11:18:21 Kendall Wichman.
11:18:30 I was sworn.
11:18:31 One of the main issues here is the fact that the board
11:18:33 in fact did not consider the instructions given to it
11:18:36 by the City Council, and focused on issues that were
11:18:40 irrelevant, had no bearing, and were not before the
11:18:43 board, and any requests whatsoever regarding the
11:18:48 I'll point out specific instructions in the transcript
11:18:50 that identify that.
11:18:51 But one of the things that most specific addressed
11:18:55 that where they are talking about the location of a
11:18:57 pool, and issues like that.
11:19:01 We presented documentation showing that the setbacks
11:19:05 from the curb line were precisely in line with the
11:19:10 rest of the current development around the cul-de-sac.
11:19:15 And when we asked the city staff about how do you
11:19:17 determine building, averaging, essentially how do you
11:19:22 establish that line of development, it is establishing
11:19:26 the curb line, and not from the property line, because
11:19:30 the property line's jog, they are very irregular and
11:19:35 they are difficult to determine.
11:19:37 I can draw your attention to the Elmo for a second.
11:19:41 We presented --
11:19:49 We presented the site plan showing the arch and the
11:19:55 areas highlighted in yellow were the encroachment
11:19:58 We were requesting reduction of setbacks from 25 feet
11:20:00 to 15 feet.
11:20:03 City Council had indicated to the Variance Review
11:20:04 Board to review the de minimus intrusion in the
11:20:09 setback which they did not do.
11:20:17 We also show you the property line which is here, a
11:20:24 jog in here.
11:20:25 It is not a regular property line at all.
11:20:36 The cul-de-sac is not a true circle.
11:20:38 It is an' lips.
11:20:54 We showed a number of pictures which I will also show
11:20:56 you that the property, at the current time, if you
11:21:05 look at the property line in, this case, the curb line
11:21:07 is here.
11:21:08 The building is here.
11:21:09 Which indicates that it's about 15 to 18 feet from the
11:21:13 edge of the curb line, which makes it even closer to
11:21:16 the property line.
11:21:18 The property line is not at the curb line. The
11:21:21 property line is back in here.
11:21:30 Which shows you other pictures again.
11:21:35 The property line in this case runs out in here.
11:21:42 The curb line is here.
11:21:43 And the lots are 25 feet curb line to the edge of the
11:21:53 Showing you the proximity. The edge of the building
11:21:55 The curb line is here.
11:21:57 Again less than 25 feet.
11:22:02 Same condition exists here.
11:22:03 These are different photographs.
11:22:11 This is a side shot of one of the houses showing you
11:22:14 the beginning of the cul-de-sac.
11:22:18 Right in here.
11:22:20 The curb line.
11:22:21 The property line.
11:22:22 Do not know exactly where they are.
11:22:26 Again, up in here.
11:22:29 25 feet or less.
11:22:32 We provided aerial photographs which we have shown an
11:22:37 outline, the subject property that shows irregular
11:22:44 property line in here.
11:22:45 And the cul-de-sac showing the proximity of other
11:22:49 development as round the cul-de-sac of the property
11:22:52 line is now being the cul-de-sac line.
11:23:08 Here's a picture of a couple more structures.
11:23:13 Again, this is not a heavily traveled street.
11:23:19 The property lines are very difficult to deal with.
11:23:21 We submitted letters of support, again from all of
11:23:25 those properties that are marked in red.
11:23:27 And the subject property is marked in yellow.
11:23:31 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I don't see any red on there.
11:23:33 >> Black dots.
11:23:34 They are red down here.
11:23:35 But these dots, those are letters of support sent into
11:23:42 the record.
11:23:50 Let me draw your attention to page 2 of the
11:23:54 For the hardship criteria the variance of property
11:23:56 includes among other things the irregular
11:23:58 configuration, consideration of the wetlands setback
11:24:01 location present unusual or unique conditions which
11:24:03 warrant favorable consideration for the granting of
11:24:05 the variance.
11:24:07 If that property line is unusual it parallels with the
11:24:11 cul-de-sac and takes an inward jog.
11:24:13 The combination of the wetlands setback, the front
11:24:16 yard setback when applied to the lot which is unusual
11:24:19 front property line creates a hardship due to its
11:24:21 unique condition.
11:24:23 Lot configuration and the resulting development
11:24:25 conditions were not created by the owner that's
11:24:28 existed since the property was created in the
11:24:30 subdivision process.
11:24:32 The diagram shows you irregular shaped jog that occurs
11:24:35 as a result of the cul-de-sac configure --
11:24:38 configuration at the property line, further down the
11:24:41 And here is where the board is sort of talking about
11:24:44 what they were considering, after they were advised to
11:24:46 consider the de minimus intrusion into the front yard
11:24:49 set back.
11:24:50 Mr. Michelini: On the rear again, on the rear view,
11:24:53 there's a home, we grant add variance of four feet, I
11:24:55 guess, because it should have been 20 feet in the rear
11:24:58 and we gave them 16 feet. This was not the subject
11:25:00 property, this was some other property.
11:25:03 There's a swimming pool back there.
11:25:04 Can you see one?
11:25:05 Did you see the swimming pool back there?
11:25:07 I'm curious if there's a swimming pool.
11:25:10 I replied: I don't know, because you were supposed to
11:25:13 consider the development that is one of the things I
11:25:15 was curious about with a swimming pool.
11:25:17 I don't see the one back there, although that was my
11:25:21 The swimming pool was completely irrelevant, had
11:25:24 nothing to do with our request, and other properties,
11:25:28 had nothing to do with this property and was not the
11:25:30 issue that was before the VRB.
11:25:34 On how we measure the distances.
11:25:36 This is me speaking on page 9.
11:25:38 I have measured dimensions from the curb.
11:25:40 I do not have measured dimensions from the property
11:25:44 line because the property lines are irregular.
11:25:47 Along the cul-de-sacs.
11:25:48 If you look at the photographs I can certainly point
11:25:51 out to you the property lines jog in various
11:25:55 So when the city is measuring for averaging of front
11:25:59 yard setbacks they use curb lines because they
11:26:02 recognize the same problem.
11:26:04 Seems to be the only consistent thing out there,
11:26:07 that's why we told you that we pleasure from the curb
11:26:10 line and not the various property lines.
11:26:13 At the very close six feet, some of the buildings are
11:26:16 within six feet of the edge of the curb line, and we
11:26:18 don't know exactly where the property line is.
11:26:21 It's probably within four or five feet of the property
11:26:25 As far as 12 feet from the property line and the
11:26:27 houses along the cul-de-sac, another 12 feet.
11:26:32 Page 10.
11:26:35 It starts talking about the height of the house, which
11:26:37 was not before them.
11:26:38 We were not requesting a height variance on the house.
11:26:43 I understand at the previous hearing you indicated
11:26:46 reducing the height of the house.
11:26:48 We didn't talk about that at all.
11:26:50 It had nothing to do with the de minimis intrusion on
11:26:52 the property.
11:26:53 The question is, is your house shorter?
11:26:56 We oriented the house so that it would face the
11:27:05 And that is exactly what this does.
11:27:10 It faces the cul-de-sac.
11:27:14 It angles -- the property and the cul-de-sac angle at
11:27:18 that direction.
11:27:18 The setback line is continuous around the cul-de-sac.
11:27:22 It's not a perfect circle.
11:27:25 Reading from page 11.
11:27:26 Page 12, somebody suggested the houses were set back.
11:27:31 This is one of the commissioners asking, what were the
11:27:36 6 feet, 12 feet or 16 feet?
11:27:38 One of the commissionersality this point tried to
11:27:40 enter into the record evidence which was not part of
11:27:43 any request by the petitioner, on their own, had gone
11:27:47 out and decided they wanted to submit information
11:27:50 regarding site plans and surveys regarding surrounding
11:27:55 This was never presented to us, never shown to us,
11:27:57 never presented in the record.
11:27:59 It was held up in front of the other commissioners,
11:28:01 and weighed as if it were in fact true in fact.
11:28:05 It was never entered but used as a means to influence
11:28:08 the other members of the board, and improperly.
11:28:12 And if you looked at the videotape you could see that.
11:28:17 It was an egregious violation of the board going out
11:28:21 and trying to enter into -- submitting information
11:28:25 into the record which they are supposed to be sitting
11:28:27 and viewing, the information presented to them, not
11:28:30 creating the record themselves.
11:28:35 The documents that were out there came off the
11:28:39 We overlaid the plans so that you could clearly see
11:28:42 where the intrusions of the house occurred.
11:28:47 We didn't speculate.
11:28:48 We showed you exactly where the houses were.
11:28:50 And we showed you exactly where the curb lines are.
11:28:52 We cannot recreate aerial photographs.
11:28:55 They are what they are.
11:29:00 I've shown you what I believe was substantial and
11:29:02 competent evidence, which was the measurement.
11:29:05 Kendra Ligmen went out and measured the distance from
11:29:12 the curb to the building.
11:29:13 We'll put that on the record, as well as the aerial
11:29:15 photographs which verified those dimensions.
11:29:22 Photographs were placed in relationship to the street,
11:29:24 and that was our contention, what is the distance from
11:29:27 the edge of the curb?
11:29:28 That's what is the governing factor here, not
11:29:31 necessarily where an artificial property line may or
11:29:35 may not exist.
11:29:36 We went on to say that the -- we don't know the
11:29:41 property lines, it could be five feet, it could be 20
11:29:43 feet, it could be 16.
11:29:45 Nevertheless, existing development along the
11:29:49 cul-de-sac is in fact consistent with what they are
11:29:51 requesting the reduction for, 25 to 16 feet.
11:29:57 City Council instructions were to review based upon
11:30:01 development of the surrounding property.
11:30:03 We have done that.
11:30:04 And I think that we have proven in fact that this
11:30:06 proposal is consistent
11:30:09 Another comment.
11:30:10 Way think is interesting, I'll certainly do my best to
11:30:13 go to construction service to get the surveys.
11:30:17 Again, commissioners were trying to enter into
11:30:19 evidence records, into the record, never produced to
11:30:22 us, never shown to us, that was used to influence the
11:30:25 other board members.
11:30:28 I find it very interesting that six of the eight
11:30:30 projects have swimming pools.
11:30:31 Readding from page 16.
11:30:33 And the back yards are probably all on the wetland
11:30:36 setback and constructed before 1968.
11:30:38 Again that's material that was not presented to them
11:30:40 by us, had no material effect upon the property.
11:30:42 It was not a request by us to alter any wetland
11:30:46 setback for any information regarding a pool.
11:30:49 I'm sure you don't want to mess around with this
11:30:51 because it's another setback issue.
11:30:54 Again, that was noting is something that was before
11:30:59 I'll say take 2030th feet out of the wetland set
11:31:02 back and go more forward.
11:31:04 I would say that would be a hardship.
11:31:06 Sounds like the commissioner has discovered surveys
11:31:09 and other properties and other swim pools that affect
11:31:13 the setbacks.
11:31:14 Reading in the middle of the first paragraph.
11:31:18 So again the fact this lot is a blank slate, you
11:31:22 already mentioned there is a swimming pool and setback
11:31:24 and wetland.
11:31:25 Again, the swimming pools are not the front yard
11:31:29 I remember this case, the cul-de-sac does create some
11:31:32 hardships and all of the --
11:31:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I ask you a question real
11:31:36 quick, Steve, just off the cuff?
11:31:38 I hear what you're saying, because the setback you're
11:31:42 looking for in the front yard, and I remember this
11:31:44 case very distinctly from the last time.
11:31:47 But the other thing I remember very distinctly from
11:31:50 the last time you were in front of us, Mr. Michelini,
11:31:52 is one of the points that you made that justified
11:31:54 pushing this house forward was the existence of an
11:31:57 existing swimming pool in your rear yard.
11:32:00 So as I read the transcript when John Weiss and Eric
11:32:04 Graham were making the points about swimming pools and
11:32:07 rear yards, I don't know if you can have it both ways.
11:32:10 And that's what leaves me a little bit confused in
11:32:14 regard to your statement that you said that swimming
11:32:17 pools have no material effect on the front yard
11:32:19 Because we can go back to the transcript four months
11:32:22 ago when you were here the last time and you
11:32:24 specifically said that the -- one of the main reasons
11:32:28 we are here is because we have a wetlands set back on
11:32:30 the rear, we have a swimming pool in the rear and it's
11:32:33 pushing this house toward the front yard setback.
11:32:36 How do you justify that?
11:32:38 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I'd like to finish my presentation.
11:32:42 >> Well, whether you want to respond.
11:32:44 >>> That's fine, I'll respond to the.
11:32:45 The instructions by City Council and the remand were
11:32:47 to consider the de minimis intrusion.
11:32:50 That's what the instructions were.
11:32:51 And to consider the pattern of development.
11:32:55 And when we went back on the remand, that's what we
11:32:58 focused on was the de minimus intrusion in the front,
11:33:01 and whether or not it was consistent with existing
11:33:03 pattern of development.
11:33:05 We didn't reopen the whole case regarding swimming
11:33:08 pools, and rear yard setbacks.
11:33:10 As a matter of fact, I didn't discuss that in the
11:33:14 >> So are you suggesting that today we shouldn't
11:33:16 consider the swimming pool that's existing in the rear
11:33:19 of your client's property as a justification for this
11:33:22 front yard setback?
11:33:24 >>> Yeah what I'm saying is, what we were asked to do
11:33:27 is present evidence to you, certifying this was
11:33:30 consistent with the development around the cul-de-sac,
11:33:32 and in fact, was it a de minimis intrusion?
11:33:36 And that's what I'm attempting to indicate.
11:33:38 >> Do you want us to consider the pool or not?
11:33:41 I don't know, I'm asking you.
11:33:43 >>> I think that you have to consider all of the
11:33:44 evidence that's presented to you.
11:33:46 I can't tell you what you want to consider or not.
11:33:52 I was following your instructions the last time on the
11:33:55 And whatever is influencing you on the matter, I would
11:33:59 be happy to address it.
11:34:01 But my concern is that the issue regarding the pool
11:34:05 and the issue regarding the wetland setback was
11:34:08 already resolved.
11:34:09 We weren't asking for anything back there that
11:34:14 affected the rest of this.
11:34:15 Some other houses in the area had in fact asked for
11:34:18 pool setback variances, wetland set back issues, but
11:34:23 we thought that the consistency along the front, which
11:34:25 is what's visible to the public which is a far more
11:34:27 important issue.
11:34:32 I remember this case because the cul-de-sac does
11:34:34 create some hardships to the neighborhood because they
11:34:39 bow in and out of the street and use in other parts of
11:34:42 the city.
11:34:45 Some of the parcels talking about the value of the
11:34:48 And envious they wish they could build a house on a
11:34:52 piece of property, which again was not board before --
11:34:56 before the board and should have no bearing on whether
11:34:57 or not it's a $60,000 lot or more than that.
11:35:01 The way the house is shaped out there similar to
11:35:03 housing houses but similar does not in my mind
11:35:07 generate what is substantial, competent evidence.
11:35:10 It's an incredible neighborhood, beautiful property,
11:35:13 I'm envious in many ways.
11:35:16 Reading at the bottom of page 6.
11:35:17 I think what the City Council told to us do is based
11:35:20 upon -- I don't have a problem with that.
11:35:23 That was one of the other commissioners.
11:35:25 We go on in the hearing.
11:35:28 I think it's clear that there was evidence that was
11:35:32 presented, which clearly indicated that the intrusion
11:35:35 was de minimus, that in fact it is consistent with the
11:35:39 surrounding property owners.
11:35:41 We presented letters of support from a variety of
11:35:44 different property owners.
11:35:46 We entered them into the record.
11:35:48 A couple of them, one from Alex LAVA, 5148.
11:35:53 I reviewed the commissioners request, would not
11:35:57 negatively affect the aesthetics of the neighborhood.
11:36:03 Porter from 5150, the street makes an abrupt turn in
11:36:10 front of the Wichman's front property line, we have
11:36:14 absolutely no objection to the petition, and indeed
11:36:17 ask the board that the request be granted relief.
11:36:23 Whether you consider the rear or not, the front is
11:36:25 still a problem.
11:36:28 The irregular lot line creates the problem.
11:36:32 It wasn't created by the owner.
11:36:34 The cul-de-sac creates the problem.
11:36:36 And it is consistent with the development line that's
11:36:38 established by the aerial photograph.
11:36:42 And there is evidence that shows you where that
11:36:43 development line is.
11:36:46 We have Mr. Wichman and his wife Kendall who are also
11:36:52 parties of record and wish to speak.
11:36:56 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Shelby, who do we have to open
11:36:59 this up to as far as testimony goes?
11:37:06 It seems like Mr. Michelini is making very specific
11:37:10 allegations that what we instructed them to do, they
11:37:14 didn't do, and so do we need to hear more -- I guess
11:37:19 it's up to you all.
11:37:20 Do you need to hear more testimony on that particular
11:37:23 Because isn't that really the only thing that's before
11:37:26 us right now?
11:37:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That is a threshold question.
11:37:31 I am going to refer you back to the documents I gave
11:37:34 I highlighted the second column.
11:37:36 I would like to refer you to the sentence beforehand,
11:37:40 because I think that may be relevant, and at the end
11:37:44 of the first column it says if the petition is
11:37:47 remanded back to the board or commission, then the
11:37:49 board or commission shall only consider and take
11:37:53 action based upon the direction from the City Council
11:37:56 indicating how the board or commission failed to
11:38:00 comply with the above standards.
11:38:01 I think that was a threshold finding of fact that you
11:38:04 need to make, that if you want to bifurcate this in
11:38:06 that way, because after that, then, assume for the
11:38:10 sake of argument that you do find that, then as a
11:38:16 highlighted, this council can take any action which
11:38:19 the board or commission was authorized to take.
11:38:22 So my suggestion was if you want to bifurcate it and
11:38:24 just have people testify to that issue of fact, you
11:38:27 can do that.
11:38:28 Again it's limited to those people who are in the
11:38:30 record below who testified in the record below.
11:38:35 >> Then petitioner, I suppose that's your prerogative.
11:38:37 You want to have other witnesses testify that these
11:38:41 things were not done, you can.
11:38:43 But there's already evidence in the record -- or
11:38:46 there's your testimony anyway that that didn't occur.
11:38:52 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Well, I would certainly like them
11:38:54 to get up and acknowledge that in fact was the case.
11:38:59 >>> Mike Wichman.
11:39:03 What Steve is saying is true, that there was a lot of
11:39:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Take the microphone, please.
11:39:13 >>ROLANDO SANTIAGO: I'm here to assist this matter.
11:39:22 As VRB counsel I have to object to Mr. Wichman
11:39:27 Heed 15 minutes to make the case.
11:39:30 I would argue if you want additional testimony that
11:39:32 that would be third party beyond the petitioner who
11:39:35 encompasses Mr. Michelini on behalf of Mr. and Mrs.
11:39:42 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Did he testify at the VRB hearing?
11:39:45 >>> Yes, sir.
11:39:46 He did.
11:39:47 And already processed his is a minutes through Mr. MI
11:39:53 Those can be split up in any matter but they had their
11:39:56 15 minutes and I assume it's Mr. Michelini.
11:39:58 >>KEVIN WHITE: I would agree with Mr. Roland Santiago,
11:40:01 and would also agree I don't think the Wichmans are
11:40:05 going to say anything different than what their
11:40:07 representative said.
11:40:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Michelini, there's one point I
11:40:12 want to clear up for the record.
11:40:14 Those photographs shown on the council for the Elmo,
11:40:16 my understanding is the hard copies, the photographs
11:40:21 were not in the court file as presented on the record
11:40:23 for appeal.
11:40:25 Were those on the DVD that you provided?
11:40:28 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Yes.
11:40:29 We have shown you everything -- anything that we have
11:40:31 presented to you was presented at the hearing and was
11:40:34 on the DVD.
11:40:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
11:40:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to ask Mr. Santiago.
11:40:41 Were you also at the hearing?
11:40:45 >>ROLANDO SANTIAGO: Yes, ma'am.
11:40:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And you can tell me if this is an
11:40:53 okay question to ask.
11:40:54 Did you direct the board to pay attention to direction
11:40:57 from council?
11:40:58 >>> Yes, ma'am.
11:40:58 We read them verbatim, the directives from council, to
11:41:02 make sure they are fully aware of what their passing
11:41:05 order was for that.
11:41:06 Yes, ma'am.
11:41:07 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Dingfelder?
11:41:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Michelini, do you have the site
11:41:14 plan as part of the record that was given to me?
11:41:18 Can you put that on the overhead?
11:41:21 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I have a reduced version of that.
11:41:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just want to make sure we are on
11:41:33 the same page.
11:41:42 >> The numbers are very, very small.
11:41:44 It's hard for me to identify the dimension of the lot.
11:41:51 So if you do not know, Mr. Michelini, perhaps your
11:41:56 client, obviously it's an unusual lot.
11:42:00 Because it has, you know, some angles but what is the
11:42:05 rough dimension from the street back and what is the
11:42:07 dimension along the sea wall?
11:42:12 >> I can read to you Watt says.
11:42:19 110 feet along this line.
11:42:25 >> 110 feet off the street?
11:42:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: From the south side.
11:42:32 >> 130 feet along this line.
11:42:36 I don't have the dimension across the back.
11:42:39 >> Okay.
11:42:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 130 on one side deep.
11:42:43 110 the other side deep.
11:42:45 And the sea wall side.
11:42:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
11:42:53 The other dimensional question I had was, since we are
11:42:56 looking at a site plan of record, is a proposed site
11:43:00 plan of record.
11:43:02 There's been plenty of testimony that basically
11:43:04 there's an empty lot there right now.
11:43:10 >>STEVE MICHELINI: No.
11:43:12 It's not an empty lot.
11:43:13 The pool remains.
11:43:14 The sea wall remains.
11:43:15 The deck remains.
11:43:17 There is no house structure.
11:43:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But the proposed structure that is
11:43:23 shown on the site plan that's on the overhead, what is
11:43:28 the total squire footage of that proposed structure?
11:43:31 And what is the ground floor proposed footprint?
11:43:38 Does Mr. Wichman know that?
11:43:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Name for record, please.
11:43:50 >>> Yes, over T garage area which doesn't have a
11:43:52 second floor.
11:43:52 It's the house with the two-story structure, typical
11:43:57 of the neighborhood.
11:43:57 And then you have the garage.
11:43:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The first floor is how many square
11:44:01 feet approximately?
11:44:03 >>> 2800 thereabouts.
11:44:04 >> And the second floor?
11:44:06 >>> Approximately the same.
11:44:06 >>: So it's a total of 5600 square feet.
11:44:10 >>> Roughly, yes.
11:44:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, sir.
11:44:15 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Any other questions?
11:44:19 All right.
11:44:19 What's the pleasure of council?
11:44:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe Mr. Santiago representing
11:44:23 board would like to speak.
11:44:25 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
11:44:29 >>ROLANDO SANTIAGO: Legal department.
11:44:31 For the review board.
11:44:32 I would like to summarize the rebuttal period by
11:44:35 stating that the variance review board was given the
11:44:38 instructions from City Council, with ample discussion
11:44:44 on both sides.
11:44:45 I would submit to you that there was no violation of
11:44:47 due process in that regard.
11:44:50 Number two, for the variance review board to look at
11:44:54 as to the development of development.
11:44:55 I would prefer you to the pages 14 through is 18 of
11:44:59 the record in which there was discussion pertinent to
11:45:02 the pattern of development.
11:45:03 Pattern development is a very broad term.
11:45:06 The variance review board took into consideration as
11:45:08 you will see on pages 14 through 18, engaged in
11:45:13 discussion with petitioner after the pattern of
11:45:15 development, and surveys and setbacks, and properties.
11:45:20 I would further direct you to page 18, which is most
11:45:24 poignant because at that point in time in which a
11:45:26 motion is referenced in which the hardship, after
11:45:31 hearing evidence as to the pattern of development, the
11:45:33 hardship criteria was determined to not have been met
11:45:37 by the variance review board and they voted
11:45:39 accordingly 4-2 to deny the petition.
11:45:41 So they did take into consideration, they followed
11:45:46 your directives after hearing the evidence on the
11:45:50 issue, as opposed to constructing additionally, that
11:45:56 there was not a basis sufficient to warrant granting a
11:46:00 That is all.
11:46:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question.
11:46:05 Mr. Santiago, specifically Mr. White's motion on the
11:46:07 bottom of page 18, is that what you are referring to?
11:46:10 He says, I believe that competent substantial evidence
11:46:13 was not brought forth from the petitioner's agent to
11:46:15 determine the specific property setback that were
11:46:18 within that development.
11:46:19 Again, I don't believe the hardship criteria has been
11:46:22 Is that pretty much sum up what the discussion was,
11:46:26 and when Mr. Weiss made the motion to deny?
11:46:30 >>ROLANDO SANTIAGO: I would submit to you that is a
11:46:31 summation of the hearing.
11:46:38 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
11:46:40 Is that it?
11:46:41 Mr. Shelby?
11:46:45 >>> I would like to submit my objection, that Mr.
11:46:47 Santiago can't assume what's going on in the
11:46:49 commissioners' mind when they made the motion.
11:46:53 >>SHAWN HARRISON: This is a public hearing.
11:46:55 Do we need to close this or --
11:46:57 >> Move to close.
11:46:58 >> Second.
11:46:58 (Motion carried).
11:46:59 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Pleasure of council?
11:47:03 >>KEVIN WHITE: I move that we reverse the motion made
11:47:09 or the decision made by the VRB showing that they did
11:47:13 not act upon our specific orders and deviated from
11:47:18 that and lag at the -- just looking at that
11:47:22 particular -- looking at the cul-de-sac and things of
11:47:26 that nature on that particular block at DCF, the
11:47:30 hardship for the petitioner.
11:47:37 >> Second.
11:47:37 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
11:47:39 Discussion, Mr. Dingfelder?
11:47:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's really what the call comes
11:47:42 down to is hardship.
11:47:44 And that's my problem with this petition.
11:47:46 That was my problem with this petition the last time,
11:47:49 when you are building a 5600-foot -- they had an empty
11:47:55 lot with the swimming pool there.
11:47:56 And they gave it to the architect.
11:47:59 And then the architect, you know, if I give it to the
11:48:03 architect, I say, here's the lot, here's the city
11:48:08 Design me a house that will fit within that.
11:48:10 That would seem to be the logical thing.
11:48:13 They have been at this site a year now and I don't
11:48:16 understand it.
11:48:17 If you look at this site plan they had a couple of
11:48:19 They could have slid the entire structure, you know,
11:48:22 back toward that pool, okay, or they could have
11:48:26 reduced the structure down from instead of being 2800
11:48:30 feet as a footprint, or 5600 square foot house, they
11:48:34 could have cut it back a little bit and gotten rid of
11:48:36 some of those big guys and they wouldn't have been
11:48:38 here and wouldn't have been struggling with the city
11:48:40 for the last year.
11:48:40 That was not the hardship that is intended in this
11:48:44 I have repeated several occasions, I sat on the VRB
11:48:47 for a couple of years, we wrestled with what is a
11:48:51 And yes, this is an unusual site if you have an
11:48:54 existing house that you might want to add onto but
11:48:58 it's not a hardship if you have a blank slate.
11:49:02 And you give to the your architect and you say make it
11:49:04 They give it to the architect and he creates something
11:49:07 that didn't work.
11:49:07 And to me that is not the definition of a hardship.
11:49:10 It wasn't four months ago when it was in front of us
11:49:13 and it's still not.
11:49:14 And I think we should respect the work and effort that
11:49:17 the VRB puts into this.
11:49:19 John Weiss, Eric Brawncamp, Melanie Higgins and the
11:49:24 rest of them spend hours and hours on this stuff.
11:49:27 This record is full of discussion about the very issue
11:49:30 that we are talking about that we send back to them,
11:49:33 about whether or not this meets the hardship criteria
11:49:35 on that particular block.
11:49:37 And I recognize that everybody wants to build what
11:49:40 they want to build.
11:49:41 But the rules are there for a reason.
11:49:43 And this in my opinion is not a hardship.
11:49:47 I think we should respect what the VRB does.
11:49:49 And I can't support the motion.
11:49:52 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Just one comment here.
11:49:56 You're right in spoke respects, Mr. Dingfelder.
11:49:58 But the way I look at it is, who is this hurting?
11:50:02 Is it hurting the people around them that they have a
11:50:08 bunch of letters supporting this?
11:50:09 Or is it hurting us?
11:50:11 Is it hurting the city?
11:50:13 Because I believe this is just -- I think all the lots
11:50:21 are probably all filled in.
11:50:22 So this is just the last piece of this puzzle from
11:50:27 what I can understand.
11:50:30 They all support it.
11:50:31 I don't understand -- I don't understand -- I don't
11:50:35 understand who this is hurting.
11:50:38 I think it will be hurting them.
11:50:40 It's their prerogative to build the house they the way
11:50:42 they want it.
11:50:43 Yes, we do have regulations but we also have
11:50:47 And I do believe it fits the hardship criteria.
11:50:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think what is at point here is
11:50:56 the legal situation, and with the letters from the
11:50:59 neighbors, these are very nice people, these people
11:51:03 like them and want them to continue living in the
11:51:05 neighborhood, and they live there, and the neighbors
11:51:07 have a relationship with them, and they are saying, if
11:51:09 we can't build this, we'll build something that's very
11:51:14 So I think rather than thinking about the
11:51:16 personalities of the neighbors we should look at the
11:51:19 lot, and we should look at the proposed, and if
11:51:23 this -- it's 110 feet on the bottom, 130 feet on the
11:51:26 top, 110 feet wide, one can build a more than adequate
11:51:31 house within the legal footprints.
11:51:34 And I don't think this is a true hardship so I will
11:51:37 not be able to support the recommendation.
11:51:39 And I think this is a question we have to ask
11:51:42 It's not about the personalities.
11:51:44 It's really about the legalities.
11:51:50 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Any further discussion?
11:51:51 Let me weigh in.
11:51:52 I think that we all have great respect for what the
11:51:58 board who serves as volunteers, they are here till all
11:52:02 hours of the morning.
11:52:02 I tune in on occasion and watch.
11:52:04 And I think that we all care a great deal about what
11:52:11 they do.
11:52:12 And we remanded this back to them, we asked them to
11:52:15 look at very specific things.
11:52:16 According to Mr. Santiago, they did review both of
11:52:18 those things, but also would appear from the record,
11:52:22 they may have taken in some evidence that was not
11:52:27 properly before them, and again looking at the pattern
11:52:32 of development on this particular cul-de-sac, it would
11:52:36 appear that this house is like every other house
11:52:39 that's been built in there.
11:52:41 It doesn't look like any of them really are complying
11:52:44 with those setbacks, at least not from the evidence
11:52:49 put on by the petitioners.
11:52:50 So with that, I will support Mr. White's motion.
11:52:56 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Chairman, thank you.
11:52:58 I was sitting quietly trying to decide the pros and
11:53:02 the cons and the support of the board that do their
11:53:06 job as well.
11:53:08 But given the circumstances -- and by the way, I know
11:53:12 this location very, very well.
11:53:13 I lived at 5110 San Jose and it's kind of a weird lot
11:53:19 because it's not a cul-de-sac but there is just a
11:53:22 configuration that takes some adaptation so that you
11:53:26 can get the benefit of that lot.
11:53:28 I understand that perhaps some of my colleagues don't
11:53:32 think it's a hardship.
11:53:33 I understand that the property is vacant and you can
11:53:35 build around the parameters that are there without
11:53:37 asking for a hearing variance.
11:53:40 But at the same time, I think that this is something
11:53:41 that should be considered, I think it will be done
11:53:46 I don't see any detriment to doing this.
11:53:48 With all due respect to the VRB board, I am going to
11:53:51 support this.
11:53:53 It was a difficult choice but I believe the residents
11:53:55 have the opportunity to do what they can do with that
11:53:57 lot, and so I am going to support the motion.
11:54:01 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We have a motion and second.
11:54:03 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
11:54:06 Motion carries 4-2.
11:54:09 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Thank you very much.
11:54:10 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
11:54:13 I think that clears up everything on the agenda.
11:54:15 Information reports?
11:54:15 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Did wave another?
11:54:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: the one that I moved to pull,
11:54:30 number 11, I move to continue that over for a week.
11:54:34 >> Second.
11:54:34 (Motion carried).
11:54:35 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Information reports.
11:54:36 >>KEVIN WHITE: I would like to acknowledge one of our
11:54:40 community activists who has been stricken with or been
11:54:44 diagnosed with a terminally ill disease and has
11:54:46 suffered a massive stroke, and is in ICU.
11:54:51 Unfortunately the prognosis is not well and does not
11:54:55 look good for him to make it through the weekend, but
11:54:58 Mr. Jimmy Jackson,
11:55:07 He's a hard worker for our community.
11:55:10 And I would like everyone to know our thoughts and
11:55:12 prayers go out to his family and we wish him God's
11:55:15 speed and hopefully a speedy recovery.
11:55:20 But it does not look well.
11:55:24 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Mr. White.
11:55:26 Ms. Ferlita.
11:55:27 >>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
11:55:28 And of course my prayers and condolences for him and
11:55:33 his family.
11:55:34 Hopefully there will be some improvement that's not
11:55:37 The second thing.
11:55:39 We have gotten some notification that on June 8th,
11:55:42 the mayor's Hispanic advisory council, along with the
11:55:45 mayor, will host a Hispanic public forum to be located
11:55:50 at Jefferson high school.
11:55:51 And again I'm sorry to say that it's conflicting with
11:55:54 our schedule.
11:55:54 And I don't think the mayor had anything to do with it
11:55:57 but whoever scheduled it, I think we ought to open a
11:56:00 dialogue and ask that people schedule things that are
11:56:03 important for us as elected officials to attend on our
11:56:07 Thursday night council meetings, particularly when
11:56:10 government officials will highlight the project.
11:56:11 I'm sorry we can't attend.
11:56:13 I think our support is certainly in the Hispanic
11:56:15 issues that are going on in our community for that
11:56:20 Again, not very pleasant thing, but it appears no
11:56:22 matter what we do, lock the doors, we continue to lose
11:56:28 institutional knowledge in our legal department and
11:56:30 that again has happened this week with Cate O'Dowd I'm
11:56:33 sorry to say has submitted her resignation.
11:56:35 It is my pleasure and not my pleasure to make a motion
11:56:38 that we give her a commendation, wish her well, and
11:56:40 certainly I think she's going into the private sector,
11:56:44 and it's their gain, our loss.
11:56:46 I would like to tell her thank you for the
11:56:50 >> Second.
11:56:50 (Motion carried)
11:56:53 That's all.
11:56:54 Thank you.
11:56:54 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, ma'am.
11:56:56 Mrs. Alvarez.
11:56:56 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
11:57:00 I would like to also give my get-well, certainly has
11:57:11 been a force in the community, and I wish him well and
11:57:16 speedy recovery.
11:57:19 Also, I would like to piggyback on what Ms. Ferlita
11:57:25 I made my displeasure known to the ones that made the
11:57:32 public hearing at Jefferson high school this morning
11:57:34 and I told them it was my district that I would have
11:57:39 really have liked to have been there.
11:57:41 But be that as it may, they know how I feel about
11:57:46 And they told me, they gave me the assurance that they
11:57:49 would try to be a little more cognizant of our time.
11:57:54 The third thing I would like to do is I would like to
11:57:56 make a motion to have a commendation prepared for the
11:58:00 Larmon Furniture, they are celebrating their
11:58:08 I would like to go ahead and do that.
11:58:12 But will have to call them and find an available date
11:58:16 for them to get their commendation.
11:58:20 I congratulate them, too.
11:58:23 >> Pending?
11:58:26 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes, we'll check back with you maybe
11:58:29 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Motion and second.
11:58:30 (Motion carried).
11:58:31 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Ms. Saul-Sena.
11:58:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We have a very large convention
11:58:38 coming to Tampa the Fourth of July, the Shriners
11:58:40 And I want to make sure that the tracking patterns are
11:58:48 Two weeks, from transportation planning on the process
11:58:53 of congestion strategies.
11:59:00 Just so we know before.
11:59:09 >>SHAWN HARRISON: That's a big meeting, isn't it, the
11:59:13 (Motion carried).
11:59:15 >>ROSE FERLITA: Or we could aggravate everybody and
11:59:19 split it
11:59:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Speaking of the Shriners coming
11:59:25 July 4th, a couple weeks ago we approved a July
11:59:28 4th parade for the Shriners.
11:59:30 So for people that are looking for something to do on
11:59:32 July 4th, there will be a parade on the Bayshore
11:59:34 and I'm sure you will read more about it in the
11:59:39 The only item I had today, I was approached by Julie
11:59:43 Whitney, our Bayshore patriot, as well as some other
11:59:47 Bayshore lovers, Rosemary Henderson, and some other
11:59:51 folks, and they requested just a mere brief 3 to 5
11:59:57 minutes on our agenda on the 22nd to address some
12:00:00 Bayshore issues.
12:00:02 And I recognize it could even be in a night meeting
12:00:06 that evening.
12:00:13 They just didn't necessarily want to sit around and
12:00:16 wait for the entire meeting.
12:00:18 If we can limit them to three minutes, I think it
12:00:22 would be a nice courtesy for those folks.
12:00:27 We can even do it next week.
12:00:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Next week would be better probably.
12:00:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I can do it next week.
12:00:34 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Well, it's a choice between --
12:00:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I want to do it before break.
12:00:39 Otherwise we'll lose a lot of time.
12:00:42 >>THE CLERK: Next Thursday you have an agenda at 8:30
12:00:45 with your CRA.
12:00:47 You have the police Officer of the Month.
12:00:48 You have a presentation of the Hillsborough River
12:00:51 related issues.
12:00:53 You have a continued first reading on chapter 25.
12:00:57 13 separate readings ordinances coming in.
12:00:59 You have the CIP.
12:01:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It not going to take any longer
12:01:04 than they would take with their three-minute public
12:01:07 If they would just ask for three minutes, then we
12:01:10 could set it for a certain part of the meeting and no
12:01:14 when to come and only one person will speak.
12:01:18 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I have an idea.
12:01:19 Mrs. Saul-Sena, if you have a motion to have a written
12:01:23 report on a traffic pattern.
12:01:27 That will be on the 22nd.
12:01:29 So that would be an item that is on the agenda.
12:01:32 And they want to speak about traffic patterns on
12:01:37 And that would be on the agenda.
12:01:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On the 22nd.
12:01:46 I'll tell them to come the 22nd, and aim toward
12:01:51 that item.
12:01:56 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Do we need a motion for that?
12:01:58 No, we don't.
12:01:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to receive and file all
12:02:02 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I don't have anything to add.
12:02:05 Motion and second to receive and file all documents.
12:02:06 (Motion carried)
12:02:08 All right.
12:02:12 Anyone in the audience that wants to speak on any
12:02:14 You have three minutes.
12:02:20 (Meeting adjourned)