Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Tampa City Council
Thursday, January 25, 2007
9:00 a.m. Session

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

09:10:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
09:10:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It is my privilege to introduce
09:10:37 assistant rabbi for congregation Schaarai Zedek
09:10:40 Shoshana Conover.
09:10:49 She has been such a source of beauty, imagination, and
09:10:52 energy.
09:10:53 And just for the record, she's organizing an event
09:10:56 that the entire public is invited to on global warming
09:11:00 in March.
09:11:01 And I hope that people will take advantage of this.
09:11:04 So let us all stand for the invocation.
09:11:06 Welcome Rabbi Conover.
09:11:12 And remain standing for the pledge of allegiance.
09:11:18 >>> May it be your will, Lord of God and God of our
09:11:22 ancestors, to lead us and to support us in peace.
09:11:28 Lead us so that we may inspire ourselves and others to
09:11:32 work toward a community bustling with life and whose
09:11:37 citizens are ready to work with us toward a better
09:11:39 tomorrow.
09:11:41 Help us find solutions to every obstacle that we
09:11:44 encounter on the way.
09:11:46 Give us foresight and fortitude to find deliverance
09:11:49 from all afflictions that visit and trouble the world.
09:11:54 We pray that our meeting today will be budding with
09:11:57 ideas, knowledge, productivity, and comradeship.
09:12:02 Help us O God to incorporate all of these thoughts and
09:12:06 deeds into our lives, and the lives of our community
09:12:10 citizens.
09:12:11 Bless the work of our hand.
09:12:15 Let us receive divine grace.
09:12:18 Give us the sensitivity to treat others with loving

09:12:21 kindness so that we may find mercy in your eyes, and
09:12:24 in the eyes of all those we encounter.
09:12:27 Listen to the voice of our appeal, O God, for we know
09:12:31 that you respond to prayerful supplication.
09:12:34 Blessed are you, Lord, who hear our prayer.
09:12:38 Amen.
09:12:40 [ Pledge of Allegiance ]
09:12:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Before we begin our agenda, I would
09:13:00 like to let everyone know today that Keely Dorsey, a
09:13:05 football player at the University of South Florida, is
09:13:07 going to have his memorial service today in the sun
09:13:09 dome today at 4:00.
09:13:10 So let's bow our head for a moment of silence for
09:13:15 Keeley Dorsey.
09:13:16 (moment of silence)
09:13:25 Amen.
09:13:25 Roll call.
09:13:27 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Here.
09:13:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:13:30 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
09:13:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
09:13:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.

09:13:36 We are going to go to our sign-in sheet.
09:13:38 We have Mr. David curry.
09:13:48 >> David McCrary, director of solid waste and program
09:13:52 management.
09:13:54 Barbara and I are here to thank you for your vision in
09:13:58 Tampa becoming a greener city.
09:14:01 Here recently, we applied last you're for an
09:14:03 innovative grant that you approved and as part of that
09:14:07 grant we wanted to share with you some of the results.
09:14:10 For the first time in the history of Gasparilla we are
09:14:16 pleased to announce the greening of Gasparilla.
09:14:24 I wanted to share some things with you.
09:14:27 >>> Good morning.
09:14:28 We did start with the parade but we got a grant and
09:14:34 one of the projects that we had identified we would do
09:14:37 is Gasparilla, and last summer, Gasparilla got a new
09:14:40 beer sponsor and Busch, so they became our partner
09:14:49 which is just terrific.
09:14:51 And we started last week.
09:14:53 We actually recycled at Gasparilla six tons of
09:14:58 cardboard and about 600 pounds of bottles and cans.
09:15:01 But it wasn't so much of that added as there will be

09:15:05 this coming weekend.
09:15:06 As you all know, it's going to be a much bigger deal.
09:15:09 But we had about 30 volunteers out.
09:15:12 We gave out -- I didn't bring a plastic bag, but we
09:15:15 are giving out -- all of the votes, there are going to
09:15:22 be volunteers provided by Anheuser Busch that will
09:15:27 give these bags out to all of the boats that go out in
09:15:30 the invasion, and then they can put their recyclables
09:15:34 in these bags and we'll be collecting them on the way
09:15:40 back.
09:15:40 Then the krewes, all the krewes and all have been
09:15:45 given these big blue plastic bags and we are really
09:15:48 encouraging them to recycle.
09:15:50 You know, they are all partying on the floats before
09:15:52 the parade.
09:15:53 So we'll be collecting even before the parade starts.
09:15:56 And we also encourage them to recycle cardboard.
09:16:01 They all have beads and boxes.
09:16:04 My own Krewe uses bags like this, to not bring
09:16:07 cardboard, because not only is it a recycling and
09:16:11 waste problem but becomes a litter problem on
09:16:13 Bayshore, all those little plastic bags.

09:16:16 So we are really trying to encourage everybody to just
09:16:18 produce less waste as well as to put their beads in
09:16:23 these bags, and we were out taking pictures, the crew
09:16:27 krewes doing it right.
09:16:29 Now, our volunteers are going to be wearing these.
09:16:33 And we have got -- we had 100 of those, next to all
09:16:39 the garbage containers.
09:16:41 This weekend there will be 300 of these out.
09:16:44 And we expect to get them all filled up.
09:16:49 And in there will be bottles and cans.
09:16:52 So look for the blue and red beer bottles, because
09:16:55 they are not glass, but Anheuser-Busch is putting beer
09:16:59 in aluminum bottles this year.
09:17:06 They are all recycling.
09:17:08 And Busch came up with a log oh, get hooked on
09:17:12 recycling.
09:17:13 You have probably seen them.
09:17:16 So you will see more of these this weekend.
09:17:21 We will all be out parading, patrolling the route,
09:17:24 trying to make sure these cans don't overflow, and
09:17:30 collecting as many recyclables as we can.
09:17:33 We hope to have a great report for you next week on

09:17:35 how many recyclables we get.
09:17:38 And we brought these to pass out as well.
09:17:42 >>> Because of your commitment, we want to give you,
09:17:44 A, a bag.
09:17:45 We want to give it to unsung heroes, you never see
09:17:49 them so we want them to know we appreciate what we do
09:17:52 for you and Tampa.
09:17:52 >> Thank you.
09:17:54 >> Barbara, I hope the crews when you are giving them
09:17:57 out and the boats don't use them for their beads.
09:18:04 >> This would be better for beads than those boxes.
09:18:11 Those boxes all end up all over Bayshore, and all the
09:18:15 plastic bags.
09:18:17 They are real problems.
09:18:19 The biggest litter problem is all those little plastic
09:18:23 bags.
09:18:24 Because they are throwing the beads out.
09:18:26 And somehow, it's always windy at Gasparilla, right?
09:18:29 >> Are you putting them on the city floats, too?
09:18:33 Because there's a lot of boxes that are on these
09:18:37 floats.
09:18:37 >> You know what?

09:18:41 That would be great.
09:18:43 We did last week.
09:18:44 And actually, we thought the city float was pretty
09:18:47 good.
09:18:47 You know, a lot of people buy their beads are starting
09:18:52 to sell you the beads in these really nice reusable
09:18:56 bags.
09:18:57 And we sold a lot of them, and the city float was one
09:19:00 of them.
09:19:01 We didn't have a lot of boxes but that's a great idea.
09:19:05 Really encourage them.
09:19:06 >> Congratulations.
09:19:09 >> We are excited.
09:19:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to congratulate you for
09:19:12 receiving the grant that allows you to make a green
09:19:15 Gasparilla.
09:19:19 Your department has shown such initiative in terms of
09:19:21 protecting our environment.
09:19:23 I'm thinking that maybe we should start maybe a
09:19:26 monthly report, very brief, at the beginning of our
09:19:31 council meeting under "staff reports" for you to tell
09:19:35 us what green steps we are taking as a city.

09:19:37 So I would like to make a motion that the first -- the
09:19:44 last meeting of every month at 9:00, under staff
09:19:48 reports, we have a report on green steps for Tampa
09:19:52 provided by you, Mr. McCrary.
09:19:58 >> I'll second fountain you make it quarterly.
09:20:01 I don't want to burden staff.
09:20:03 >>> If I could then put a plug in for one of the
09:20:06 projects which I think is another fabulous green
09:20:09 facility, the forum.
09:20:10 The second forum, even before, now, we got this grant,
09:20:14 and we are encouraging more, they are a green facility
09:20:17 already, and they are going to have a green night
09:20:20 February 27.
09:20:21 So I am putting a little plug in them for the green
09:20:23 night.
09:20:24 And then they are really going to be able to keep
09:20:26 their -- they are really doing a terrific job.
09:20:30 >>MARY ALVAREZ: What about the other venues, the
09:20:35 aquarium?
09:20:38 >>> You know, we have a lot of good facilities.
09:20:40 I think one of the best is the zoo.
09:20:41 The zoo has had a problem that is completely run by

09:20:45 volunteers and it's terrific.
09:20:48 But we are also working with Raymond James.
09:20:50 And they are doing a pretty good job.
09:20:52 There's more that they can do but they are doing a
09:20:54 pretty good job and working with the convention center
09:20:57 about the beautiful containers.
09:20:59 And they really are very committed to recycling.
09:21:02 So the zoo and the aquarium, I will tell you, are
09:21:06 already doing a lot, okay?
09:21:10 >> What will probably be helpful later is maybe do a
09:21:12 "spotlight Tampa" on all of those initiatives, so the
09:21:16 whole public can see all the green that we are doing,
09:21:19 and that's going on around the city.
09:21:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Great idea.
09:21:28 >> This is the third largest parade only behind Macy's
09:21:31 day parade and the Rose Bowl.
09:21:34 Gasparilla day parade is the third largest parade in
09:21:37 the country so for us to say we are that we are
09:21:40 greening it, I think, is really terrific.
09:21:44 >> Mardi Gras isn't?
09:21:46 >> That's what I thought but apparently not.
09:22:01 >>> Maybe you remember, I came back, we got a second

09:22:04 grant, going out in the community, and try to
09:22:06 encourage more participation.
09:22:07 That's the next grant we got.
09:22:09 So every year I can apply for another one.
09:22:11 But with the staff we can only do two at a time.
09:22:15 When this one is done we might apply for one that kind
09:22:18 of follows up this one.
09:22:20 >>GWEN MILLER: That's good.
09:22:22 You're doing a great job.
09:22:24 We have a motion and second on the floor.
09:22:25 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
09:22:27 Opposed, Nay.
09:22:28 Thank you.
09:22:28 (Motion carried).
09:22:30 Barbara LePore.
09:22:39 >>BARBARA LEPORE: I'm here to talk about wet zonings
09:22:42 that I also associated with the Gasparilla festival.
09:22:47 One petition, WZ 0-740.
09:22:50 The petition is the Florida Aquarium.
09:22:55 It is to be post on the agenda today and held on the
09:22:58 agenda today.
09:22:58 They were not able to -- they didn't complete the

09:23:02 application on time.
09:23:02 So the application comes in late.
09:23:08 They would like to be on the agenda.
09:23:12 I would like to talk about the agenda on your --
09:23:16 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to waive the rules.
09:23:21 >> So moved.
09:23:21 >> Second.
09:23:21 (Motion carried).
09:23:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Now what date do they want to do it on?
09:23:28 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Today.
09:23:29 >> So moved.
09:23:30 >> Second.
09:23:30 (Motion carried).
09:23:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 2.
09:23:34 >> And the second issue that I would like to talk
09:23:36 about is the item number 25 on your agenda, associated
09:23:44 with the Gasparilla parade.
09:23:49 WZ 07-40.
09:23:51 Requesting a 15-day, because the waiver is 15-day
09:23:57 filing requirement.
09:24:01 I have the certificate of mailing and the letters.
09:24:06 I will be happy to answer any questions that you have.

09:24:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions?
09:24:09 Do you want to waive the rules?
09:24:11 >>MARY ALVAREZ: There's a few of them.
09:24:14 Is that the one you are talking about?
09:24:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 25.
09:24:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I know.
09:24:21 >>GWEN MILLER: All of them.
09:24:23 So we need a motion to waive the rules.
09:24:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
09:24:27 >> Second.
09:24:27 (Motion carried).
09:24:27 >>GWEN MILLER: We'll move it when we do committee
09:24:31 reports.
09:24:32 Mr. Fletcher, you have an announcement?
09:24:34 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Yes.
09:24:35 I wanted to introduce my intern from USF, Eric
09:24:39 Diebold.
09:24:45 I just wanted to welcome him here today.
09:24:49 >> Would you like to say something?
09:24:52 >> I'm happy to be here.
09:24:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Good.
09:24:54 Glad to have you here.

09:24:56 We need to approve the agenda.
09:24:58 >> So moved.
09:24:58 >> Second.
09:24:59 (Motion carried).
09:24:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone need to pull anything?
09:25:04 Okay.
09:25:04 We will go to our unfinished business item number 1.
09:25:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to approve the agenda.
09:25:21 >>GWEN MILLER: We approved the agenda.
09:25:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm sorry.
09:25:25 This was originally a motion that -- or subject that I
09:25:28 had brought up which was I thought we should reduce
09:25:32 the sidewalk fee.
09:25:36 Staff has done a great job with the industry to talk
09:25:38 about that reduction and I think they are here to talk
09:25:41 to us.
09:25:42 But what I want to ask council is actually put this
09:25:45 aside for about 60 days because what we haven't done
09:25:48 is we haven't gone out to the community and T.H.A.N.
09:25:52 and to the neighborhood associations to talk about the
09:25:57 proposals that are on the table.
09:25:59 The discussion expanded a little bit beyond just the

09:26:02 price of the sidewalks.
09:26:04 And, therefore, since it's gone more into a policy
09:26:08 issue, I think it would be more appropriate for our
09:26:10 staff and the development community to get with the
09:26:16 neighborhoods and to get with us in a little more
09:26:18 lengthier conversation, perhaps in a workshop mode, to
09:26:23 talk about this issue.
09:26:24 So long winded.
09:26:25 I apologize.
09:26:26 But I would like to pull number 3.
09:26:27 >>GWEN MILLER: When we get there we can pull that.
09:26:32 It's unfinished business.
09:26:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think it's just better to pull
09:26:36 it.
09:26:36 >>GWEN MILLER: We can pull it when we get there.
09:26:39 Ms. Alvarez?
09:26:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I was going to respond but let's go
09:26:42 ahead.
09:26:43 >> I have a comment on that as well.
09:26:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 1.
09:26:48 We have a memo from the city attorney's office to
09:26:51 continue that for three weeks.

09:26:52 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
09:26:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 1.
09:26:54 We have a motion and second to continue item number 1
09:26:58 for three weeks.
09:26:59 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
09:27:01 Opposed, Nay.
09:27:01 (Motion carried)
09:27:03 Item number 2.
09:27:05 >> So moved.
09:27:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Is that the motion, to continue for
09:27:10 three weeks?
09:27:11 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
09:27:12 >> Second.
09:27:12 (Motion carried).
09:27:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Now number 3.
09:27:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll just move to continue this for
09:27:17 60 days.
09:27:17 I think there's a lot more discussion that needs to go
09:27:20 on in the community before we really get into this and
09:27:22 spend a lot of time and energy on it at council.
09:27:26 There's been no report to T.H.A.N. on this whatsoever.
09:27:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, I don't think I can support

09:27:30 that, Mr. Dingfelder, because we have been briefed,
09:27:35 some of us, and they are just coming here to give us a
09:27:38 report regarding the discussion.
09:27:41 I want to hear it because I'm not going to be here in
09:27:43 60 days, I don't think.
09:27:47 65 days to go.
09:27:48 Well, maybe.
09:27:49 [ Laughter ]
09:27:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But who's counting?
09:27:54 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I would like to hear about it and then
09:27:56 we can also ask for the public but I want to hear what
09:28:01 they have to say.
09:28:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I imagine you ever already been
09:28:04 briefed on this so you heard what they have to say.
09:28:06 But what you haven't heard is the community.
09:28:09 So last week we went until 4:00 in the afternoon
09:28:12 because we got into a lot of issues that really didn't
09:28:16 need to be dealt with, and went on and on and on.
09:28:20 I'm trying to tighten that up.
09:28:22 And let's just focus on the issues that we need to.
09:28:24 And then actually accomplish something.
09:28:27 Because we are not going to accomplish anything on

09:28:28 this issue without talking to the community first.
09:28:32 >>MARY ALVAREZ: And I understand that but they are
09:28:34 here and ready to make a report to us.
09:28:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Fletcher?
09:28:42 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I tend to agree with councilman
09:28:45 Alvarez.
09:28:46 My understanding is we have a situation now where we
09:28:49 have got a fee that is at least double the cost of a
09:28:55 homeowner to by themselves put in their sidewalk as
09:29:00 required by the code, and that creates a situation
09:29:04 where we are basically not going to have anybody doing
09:29:09 whatever this fee is in place and projects by the
09:29:12 city, and I think the sooner we fix that the better,
09:29:15 because I I'm pretty confident we are not seeing any
09:29:19 money going into that fund that we need to do bigger
09:29:23 sidewalk projects.
09:29:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm the chair of that committee,
09:29:26 and they reported to me yesterday that it's not just
09:29:29 fixing the -- that's what we asked them to do is fix
09:29:34 the fee.
09:29:34 But now what they are doing is saying we are going to
09:29:37 make it optional to actually put in the sidewalks or

09:29:40 not put in the sidewalks.
09:29:42 And that's what this discussion is going to be.
09:29:44 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I haven't heard that part.
09:29:47 >>GWEN MILLER: I haven't heard that part either.
09:29:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We can hear it and flush it out.
09:29:52 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: The community groups are
09:29:56 interested in talking about changing the zones --
09:29:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The problem in what we are about to
09:30:01 do is the staff has met about the development
09:30:03 community, and now they are going to come and report
09:30:06 to us, and they have missed a key component.
09:30:09 They haven't talked to the community groups.
09:30:11 They haven't talked to the neighborhood.
09:30:13 And I say that is wrong.
09:30:15 It's a waste of our time to go into that.
09:30:18 It's a waste of everybody's time, because we shouldn't
09:30:21 be even having these discussions until those key
09:30:24 policy issues are discussed with T.H.A.N.
09:30:26 That's been the way we have done things for a long
09:30:28 time.
09:30:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think I have a solution.
09:30:37 Mr. Dingfelder, you are the chairman of the Public

09:30:38 Works Committee.
09:30:39 Why don't you schedule a meeting, invite the
09:30:43 community, invite the developers, invite counsel
09:30:46 members, invite staff, and hash it out there.
09:30:48 But do that not 60 days from now.
09:30:51 Do that like in two weeks.
09:30:52 Let's have that conversation before council in three
09:30:56 weeks.
09:30:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm okay with that.
09:30:57 I'll accept that as a friendly amendment.
09:31:02 I second that as a friendly amendment.
09:31:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My motion was that we have a
09:31:06 special discussion meeting at a time that Mr.
09:31:10 Dingfelder deems, but not necessarily on a Thursday at
09:31:15 council meeting where you invite everybody in, hear
09:31:17 what the staff has to say, hear from the community,
09:31:20 which is the missing piece, hash it out and then bring
09:31:23 it before council.
09:31:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you have a date which you wish to
09:31:27 have that done?
09:31:29 You can have a special discussion.
09:31:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mrs. Saul-Sena said to continue

09:31:37 this for three weeks which I'm fine with.
09:31:39 In the interim I will schedule a meeting with the
09:31:42 development community and the neighborhoods to discuss
09:31:45 this important issue.
09:31:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The date of three weeks is the
09:31:54 15th.
09:31:59 >>THE CLERK: February 15th.
09:32:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll second Mrs. Saul-Sena's
09:32:05 motion.
09:32:06 I'll withdraw my motion.
09:32:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Dingfelder, in an effort to
09:32:10 hear from the public that obviously is interested in
09:32:13 this, would you like to schedule it for a day meeting
09:32:15 or schedule it like on the 22nd we have a 6:00
09:32:17 meeting but we don't have a 5:00 meeting, to schedule
09:32:20 it at 5:00, which would make it easier for the public
09:32:23 to weigh in on it.
09:32:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Create a special night meeting on
09:32:27 the issue?
09:32:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Or schedule it like at a time
09:32:33 certain on the 15th.
09:32:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I am still not going to support that,

09:32:39 because they are here already.
09:32:41 They want to make a report.
09:32:43 And they are here to provide recommendations.
09:32:48 We can hear this.
09:32:49 And then we can also schedule a workshop.
09:32:55 And they are going to listen.
09:32:56 They are going to be watching, I'm sure.
09:33:01 So I won't support that motion.
09:33:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Listen today and hear what the staff is
09:33:06 saying when you have the special meeting, they know
09:33:09 what to expect and what to talk about.
09:33:12 And then have a special meeting and the neighborhood
09:33:15 association will hear what they say and they'll be up
09:33:17 to date and know what they need.
09:33:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I am wholly in favor of reducing
09:33:25 this fee.
09:33:26 As a matter of fact, I was the first one who brought
09:33:28 it up.
09:33:28 I said, now what?
09:33:29 We need to reduce that sidewalk fee because it's not
09:33:32 in line with the commercial rate.
09:33:34 So don't misunderstand me.

09:33:35 >>GWEN MILLER: I want to hear what the staff has to
09:33:37 say.
09:33:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: At the same time there's always a
09:33:41 lot of deference given to the committee chair, and Ms.
09:33:44 Saul-Sena often takes advantage of this, to --
09:33:47 >>GWEN MILLER: We still will have that meeting.
09:33:51 But we will know what the staff is going to say.
09:33:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Forget the question.
09:33:56 I withdraw my second.
09:33:58 I defer to Madam Chair.
09:34:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
09:34:02 Mr. LaMotte, who is speaking on item 3?
09:34:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Normally your staff reports are
09:34:08 limited to five minutes.
09:34:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder will meet with the
09:34:12 community.
09:34:13 He knows what staff will say and they can have a real
09:34:16 discussion and know what they are talking about.
09:34:18 That's what I feel about it.
09:34:21 >>ROY LAMOTTE: It's my pleasure to be here before you
09:34:25 this morning on this dreary day.
09:34:29 We obviously have a lot to say about sidewalk in lieu

09:34:34 fee and we understand how important it is to the city
09:34:36 at large.
09:34:38 The last meeting that we were together, you instructed
09:34:40 me to go out and meet with the building industry and
09:34:44 have a consideration of what we were talking about, an
09:34:48 in lieu fee, and -- I will pass them along.
09:35:00 I'm sorry I don't have them here.
09:35:01 But I will discuss the three points if it's your
09:35:03 pleasure.
09:35:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I can't read it.
09:35:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We can't see it.
09:35:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Read it first, Mr. LaMotte.
09:35:11 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Maybe have somebody make a copy.
09:35:14 >>> I apologize.
09:35:15 We will have reproductions.
09:35:16 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a copy machine right out here.
09:35:19 >>GWEN MILLER: She can make a copy while you are
09:35:22 talking.
09:35:23 She's going to get a copy made.
09:35:31 >>ROY LAMOTTE: The items of the in lieu fee were to
09:35:33 discuss with the industry in particular about the
09:35:35 districts that were created and fees collected and

09:35:39 that was the difficulty.
09:35:41 And we'll bring it back under a simple matrix, only
09:35:44 three items have been discussed.
09:35:46 The other items spoke to costs.
09:35:48 As you recall, we identified a $43 fee, and the
09:35:53 industry felt that they could do it at a lower fee.
09:35:56 We looked at what our direct costs were per linear
09:36:00 foot for sidewalk construction during the fiscal year
09:36:02 of '05 to '06 and found that tee fee to be $27.01.
09:36:08 And with material testing and oversight brought it up
09:36:11 to 32.41.
09:36:13 And then there was added expenses associated with
09:36:17 obstructions, tree roots and other items that we find
09:36:20 in the field, which adds another 30% to our cost.
09:36:22 Again, that's how we derived the $43 linear foot.
09:36:27 Now, when a contractor has to undertake the task, they
09:36:30 mobilize on-site because they are already there.
09:36:33 When we undertake the task, we have to put these
09:36:36 projects into a collection and get it out to contract
09:36:39 and have a contractor.
09:36:43 The contractor needs to mobilize.
09:36:45 They don't know what they are anticipating when they

09:36:47 go into the field.
09:36:48 So again they suggest the homeowner, well, we can do
09:36:52 contract expenses.
09:36:53 But then at the same time, if we find unusual
09:36:57 situations we have to add on.
09:37:01 We always have to anticipate for the worst-case
09:37:04 scenario, particularly in-fill projects, in case we
09:37:09 have obstructions that have been planted in the
09:37:11 right-of-way.
09:37:11 And I'll hold for one second here and thank the clerk
09:37:14 for her services and my inability to have copies for
09:37:18 you.
09:37:18 I apologize.
09:37:24 When we talked about an unconditional payment option,
09:37:29 the industry agreed with us, yes, and we as a staff
09:37:33 agreed.
09:37:34 The removal of the trust fund districts, the industry
09:37:37 greed with us, yes, and we concurred with them.
09:37:41 The removal of the driveways from the calculations and
09:37:45 the reduced fee, the industry wanted that particular
09:37:47 option, and we said no.
09:37:50 We have to have the 2% slope.

09:37:54 They talked about reduced fee requirement.
09:37:56 The industry said yes, and we said yes to a lower
09:38:01 suggestion of reducing it to 32.
09:38:03 Again, the industry request for exchanges, we had a
09:38:10 staff position on it.
09:38:11 We are not here to dictate policy that is your right,
09:38:13 and we follow your direction on that.
09:38:17 Questions from the council at this moment in time and
09:38:21 answer anything else.
09:38:22 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. LaMotte, what you are saying is
09:38:25 the staff has not recommended but they have found that
09:38:29 because they have obstructions that the contractors
09:38:33 may not have when they are building these sidewalks,
09:38:37 that's what adds to the costs.
09:38:39 >>ROY LAMOTTE: Absolutely.
09:38:43 >> That would be like trees around there and could be
09:38:45 utilities on the right-of-way and so on?
09:38:47 >>> Perfect examples.
09:38:49 >> So the contractors or the developers, they have
09:38:54 like a clean slate that they are working with.
09:38:58 >>> That's correct.
09:38:58 >> And what is their fee again?

09:39:02 >>> Their fee?
09:39:03 Well, they agreed that the $32 fee -- I am sure you
09:39:06 will hear from them -- but they agree the $32 fee was
09:39:10 amenable to them, that they felt they could reduce --
09:39:16 >> And our fee for doing all of that is $43.
09:39:20 >>> 43.
09:39:21 And the reason I'm standing on that price is basically
09:39:23 we don't know what the expectation is when we go out
09:39:26 to do it.
09:39:27 We have our overhead to carry the project but we have
09:39:29 unexpected difficulties that run into, and we are
09:39:31 basing it on our past years projects that we
09:39:34 undertook.
09:39:34 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
09:39:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have to ask you again because I
09:39:45 don't know what it means.
09:39:47 The unconditional option.
09:39:48 >>ROY LAMOTTE: They would like to have that -- the
09:39:51 unconditional option for single family residential
09:39:53 development, and a fee reduction derived from a
09:39:58 decrease per-foot charge in consideration for driveway
09:40:00 construction.

09:40:03 >> So we are not talking about -- I mean, the City
09:40:10 Council policy decision has been that we want
09:40:13 sidewalks.
09:40:14 This would only be allowed in a situation where
09:40:20 counsel or the Variance Review Board or someone has
09:40:23 weighed in, and specifically allowed the sidewalk
09:40:27 construction to be waived?
09:40:29 Or does this give the developer of the property the
09:40:33 option to just waive the building sidewalks?
09:40:37 >>> They could waive it but they have to approximate
09:40:39 pay into an in-lieu fee.
09:40:41 >> Well, that's a real sticking point. That wasn't
09:40:44 the intent of council.
09:40:45 Council wanted to make, if there was an extraordinary
09:40:47 situation where we waived the sidewalk, we wanted the
09:40:50 amount that they paid to be a fair amount.
09:40:52 But it was never the intent, I believe, of City
09:40:56 Council just willy-nilly allow sidewalks to not be
09:41:00 constructed.
09:41:01 We had a very firm policy on this for some time.
09:41:07 Maybe we didn't communicate that clearly.
09:41:09 >>> We understand your stance.

09:41:14 >> I heard about community people and I have heard
09:41:17 from other folks.
09:41:17 What I was told, and I would like you to elaborate on
09:41:22 this because it's one of the reasons I wanted to do it
09:41:25 today so I can hear it from the horse's mouth, so to
09:41:27 speak.
09:41:28 This option, I guess calling it an unconditional
09:41:31 option, that would only apply to single-family homes.
09:41:36 It would not apply to townhouses, commercial,
09:41:38 industrial, any other activity.
09:41:44 Is that correct?
09:41:46 >>> That's correct.
09:41:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That is not correct.
09:41:48 Single family residential includes town homes.
09:41:52 Our code, single family residential, a town home is
09:41:55 called a single family attached.
09:41:56 So if that's your intent, you have to clarify that
09:41:58 intent.
09:41:59 I don't know that that's your intent.
09:42:01 >>ROY LAMOTTE: Again I think we were making a
09:42:04 distinction between commercial and single-family.
09:42:10 The clarification that councilman Dingfelder brings

09:42:13 forward is correct.
09:42:15 >> On the single family as well as somebody that Rae
09:42:16 sided in a condo.
09:42:18 We don't distinguish between people in a residential.
09:42:21 It's a commercial property.
09:42:21 There's big differences between that and retail.
09:42:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think what we asked to you do is
09:42:30 get the price in line with what it really cost people.
09:42:32 I don't think we meant for there to be a policy change
09:42:35 about how sidewalks are allowed or not allowed.
09:42:37 And that's the conversation, I think, that we all want
09:42:40 to have with the community.
09:42:41 We want to hear from the neighborhood organizations.
09:42:43 We want to hear from T.H.A.N.
09:42:45 They are the ones who many years ago said you all need
09:42:49 to make sure we get sidewalks.
09:42:51 So I think what we should do now, after we hear from
09:42:53 anybody else who wants to speak, is set a meeting with
09:42:56 the community to hear their concerns, and digest that
09:43:00 before we make any policy changes.
09:43:09 >>> I heard from one person who lived in a
09:43:14 neighborhood where they have put in a number of these

09:43:16 sidewalks as the new homes developed, and where I live
09:43:19 in South Tampa, and then when the city came in and put
09:43:22 in the full sidewalk, I'm assuming paying for it
09:43:27 through the sidewalk fund, the city actually ended up
09:43:30 taking out the sidewalk in front of their house and
09:43:33 some of the other people's house that is they had put
09:43:34 in when they had redeveloped.
09:43:38 Is that common when you go in and you put in a whole
09:43:40 sidewalk for a neighborhood to have to take out the
09:43:43 preexisting sidewalks?
09:43:47 >>> Again this is a design in place.
09:43:48 Sometimes wove to take a look at the panels that are
09:43:50 already in place and see if they meet the 2% slope for
09:43:53 ADA purposes.
09:43:54 I don't know.
09:43:54 I would have to look at it on a case-by-case basis.
09:44:00 >> But I not common to have to take out -- if a
09:44:04 sidewalk the two years old because it doesn't line up
09:44:06 with the one that's half a block down the street.
09:44:10 >>> If it's in good condition and meets the design
09:44:12 standards I can't see where we would remove it but if
09:44:16 it's lined up and doesn't line up with the design,

09:44:19 then yes, they have to come out and replace it.
09:44:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If anyone looks at the bottom of
09:44:27 this page it stays says the staff recommendation is 32
09:44:32 dollars per linear feet.
09:44:34 That is great.
09:44:34 That is exactly what we are talking about.
09:44:36 Because it's not the developers paying this fee,
09:44:40 ultimately it's the homeowner who is going to be
09:44:42 buying that house.
09:44:43 So we can help everybody in our community by reducing
09:44:45 the if he to an appropriate amount.
09:44:47 That's good.
09:44:49 But then you go to the next part of the language, it
09:44:51 says "provided single family residential development
09:44:54 has an unconditional option to pay" -- it's poorly
09:45:00 worded but basically says we eliminate the mandate
09:45:03 that this be done.
09:45:05 I have got to tell awe little story real quick.
09:45:07 I was walking in neighborhoods the other day and I
09:45:10 came across this one short block that was right off of
09:45:13 Dale Mabry.
09:45:14 And it was a cut-through street between Dale Mabry and

09:45:17 Sterling.
09:45:17 And on that street, on one side of the street, there
09:45:21 were five brand new detached single-family houses.
09:45:24 And every single one had put in a brand new sidewalk.
09:45:27 And it was 5:00 in the evening.
09:45:29 And guess what I saw.
09:45:30 I saw little children playing -- I saw two mothers and
09:45:35 four little kids playing up and down that brand new
09:45:37 sidewalk.
09:45:38 And all of a sudden, I said, you know what?
09:45:41 This program has its flaws, but it's working.
09:45:46 And I'm going to give credit to Ms. Saul-Sena and to
09:45:51 Mary and Gwen because you were here when that went
09:45:54 into play in encouraging and almost mandating those
09:45:57 new homes have sidewalks, because eventually in these
09:45:59 redeveloping areas, you end up with a nice stretch of
09:46:02 sidewalk.
09:46:02 Now, yes, in the short term, sometimes you have got a
09:46:05 sidewalk, then you have got a space, then you have a
09:46:07 sidewalk.
09:46:07 But eventually the idea is that these will fill in and
09:46:10 the children will have a place to play.

09:46:15 And I saw it myself.
09:46:16 Okay.
09:46:16 So we are throwing out the baby with the bath water if
09:46:20 we went with this bad recommendation.
09:46:22 I love Ms. Saul-Sena's idea about let's slow down a
09:46:26 little bit on this, let's meet with the community,
09:46:28 because you know what?
09:46:29 There's two columns to the staff report, Roy.
09:46:31 It says, what does the industry say?
09:46:33 What does the staff say?
09:46:34 But it doesn't say what the community says.
09:46:36 It has to get back to the community.
09:46:38 We have to talk to the neighborhood.
09:46:39 We have to talk to T.H.A.N.
09:46:41 We have to get their input as well.
09:46:42 And I think that that's critical to any decision he
09:46:46 would make, and especially one like this that really
09:46:50 has a major impact in neighborhoods.
09:46:52 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I couldn't agree with you more, Mr.
09:46:54 Dingfelder.
09:46:54 And we all love sidewalks.
09:46:56 I wish I had one in front of my house but I don't.

09:46:59 And that was the object of having the discussion here.
09:47:04 It's not that we are going to talk to the community.
09:47:08 It's just that I wanted some feedback now as to what
09:47:10 the staff is recommending.
09:47:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: in that case I apologize.
09:47:17 Because I thought this was some sort of rush to get
09:47:19 this staff approval approved.
09:47:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: No, no, no.
09:47:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Because I don't agree with the
09:47:25 staff and it sounds like you don't either.
09:47:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: No, but I wanted to hear and I wanted
09:47:32 the public to hear, too.
09:47:33 It's like Mrs. Miller said, everybody is in tune,
09:47:37 everybody is on the same page.
09:47:38 When we go in for discussions we can have a
09:47:40 constructive type of conversation.
09:47:43 So I will support Ms. Saul-Sena's motion if she wants
09:47:48 to do this.
09:47:49 >>GWEN MILLER: 15th?
09:47:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: February 15th.
09:47:55 I think we should set it for -- I would like to set it
09:47:57 for 1:30, if I could.

09:48:04 For example, the neighborhood people will want to
09:48:06 come.
09:48:09 If we say 11:00 for a time certain.
09:48:14 When you were talking about the gap, I was thinking
09:48:16 about kids, getting their adult teeth and they have
09:48:20 these gaps.
09:48:26 It will allow --
09:48:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I second the motion.
09:48:31 And I would like to have one part of that.
09:48:33 I don't mean to duck this.
09:48:34 But you have been involved in this for many years.
09:48:36 And I would just ask that you hold that meeting with
09:48:39 the neighborhood and the developers in the interim.
09:48:44 Because if that's okay with you.
09:48:48 Part of planning and zoning.
09:48:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Sure.
09:48:51 And what --
09:48:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If she's going to have a separate
09:48:54 meeting.
09:48:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It will come back to council on the
09:48:58 15th.
09:48:58 The week before, I would schedule something probably

09:49:04 on Wednesday.
09:49:06 You know what I am going to do?
09:49:07 I am going to ask my assistant to come in with my
09:49:09 calendar.
09:49:15 I will find a date.
09:49:18 I'm sure she's watching and will bring in my calendar.
09:49:21 The motion is for the 15th.
09:49:23 Under staff report.
09:49:26 11:00 time certain.
09:49:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
09:49:29 (Motion carried)
09:49:39 Thank you, Mr. LaMotte.
09:49:43 Number 4, Mr. LaMotte.
09:49:45 >>ROY LAMOTTE: This item you asked me to provide a
09:49:47 report regarding the status of the right-of-way of TC
09:49:52 Choy restaurant along plat near Howard.
09:49:54 Again, I'm hoping that this will show up on our Elmo
09:49:57 today.
09:49:58 >>GWEN MILLER: It does.
09:50:06 >>ROY LAMOTTE: This is Platt Street coming down.
09:50:08 You can see the corner that's in question here.
09:50:10 I am going to draw in a little bit on this and show

09:50:13 you a little bit closer picture.
09:50:18 And you notice there's a walkway.
09:50:21 It's now been replaced with shrubs.
09:50:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Is that right-of-way there, Mr.
09:50:29 LaMotte?
09:50:30 >>> That is right-of-way.
09:50:31 >> Did they ask permission to do that?
09:50:33 >>> This goes back to an ordinance granted by council
09:50:35 in 2000.
09:50:37 It was ordinance 2005.
09:50:39 And they actually received a waiver for the public
09:50:42 sidewalk along Platt Street.
09:50:44 And to be used in its capacity.
09:50:47 I don't really understand the intent, it's to place
09:50:51 before my presence but we did research the ordinance
09:50:55 and do have a copy here.
09:50:57 It's ordinance 2025 and they waived the requirement to
09:51:01 provide sidewalks along Platt Street and Moody Avenue
09:51:03 and waiving the buffer requirements between the
09:51:06 different land uses.
09:51:07 So this is how it comes to be.
09:51:09 Do we agree with it?

09:51:10 Absolutely not.
09:51:14 Going to point out that there is additional sidewalk
09:51:17 approaching this direction.
09:51:19 And if I go back to the original picture here you can
09:51:21 see there's obviously sidewalks along the frontage.
09:51:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Bring it up a little bit, Mr. LaMotte.
09:51:32 The bottom picture.
09:51:36 There you go.
09:51:40 >> I have a close-up picture here that I think will
09:51:43 display it a lot better.
09:52:08 Out to the curb line you can see there's been a
09:52:10 walkway created her and in the history of review that
09:52:13 I undertook, there are actually palm trees that were
09:52:17 ha in here before the shrubs were added.
09:52:20 And then for some reason, they constructed this
09:52:22 masonry wall with landscaping that required someone to
09:52:26 come down the walkway, obviously take a left, and turn
09:52:30 into in front of the building.
09:52:36 The situation is bizarre to say the least.
09:52:40 This doesn't show the site plans.
09:52:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: it doesn't show the masonry flower
09:52:50 bed that blocks the walkway?

09:52:52 >>> No, that we had on file, that we uncovered.
09:52:57 I think the issue is that it could function as a
09:53:01 walkway.
09:53:01 But again they would have to give a hold harmless to
09:53:05 the city because the structure over the right-of-way.
09:53:11 And then additionally they brought the corner so you
09:53:14 can't have access to the pedestrian signals, if you
09:53:17 are departing the facility here.
09:53:20 I think there's a number of design components on the
09:53:28 plan back in 2000.
09:53:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We gave them to permission to put the
09:53:33 canopy but when didn't give them permission to do the
09:53:37 shrubbery.
09:53:38 >>> That's my understanding.
09:53:39 >> So that's not conforming.
09:53:42 >>> That's correct.
09:53:42 >> And so is the planter.
09:53:46 >>> That's correct.
09:53:47 >> So what do we do?
09:53:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think it's a legal question.
09:53:52 >>> I have to defer at this time to have conversation
09:53:54 with council about the options to be taken.

09:53:59 I think clearly they have taken objections -- actions
09:54:02 on their own.
09:54:03 I think they would like to have a cafe set up
09:54:05 underneath the canopy.
09:54:06 I think that's commendable but obviously they have
09:54:08 obstructed the path of the general public.
09:54:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Reddick?
09:54:20 >>FRANK REDDICK: (off microphone) ... around the
09:54:22 corner.
09:54:24 Someone needs -- anything that's an obstruction in the
09:54:28 right-of-way needs to have the right-of-way permit.
09:54:31 >>MARY ALVAREZ: They are in violation big time.
09:54:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm the biggest cafe proponent in
09:54:38 this community.
09:54:38 I love cafes.
09:54:40 But I think the public safe access along this part of
09:54:44 Platt is critical, particularly because Publix is
09:54:46 building a grocery store a block away for the folks in
09:54:50 the neighborhood at least want to be able to walk
09:54:52 there.
09:54:53 And now there is no safe place to walk.
09:54:55 So what I would like to do is request of legal come

09:54:57 back to us in two weeks with a report on how quickly
09:55:03 we can make this property owner remove the unpermitted
09:55:07 parts of the structure and create safe passage for
09:55:10 pedestrians.
09:55:11 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
09:55:13 (Motion carried).
09:55:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I got my calendar.
09:55:17 The 13th is a good day when I don't have anything
09:55:21 down.
09:55:21 And I know that -- we can meet at either nine or noon.
09:55:29 And I would like to ask, February 13th, it's a
09:55:32 Tuesday, if the other council members will check their
09:55:35 calendars and see whether they prefer nine or noon in
09:55:38 the next hour so we can set the date.
09:55:40 >>GWEN MILLER: We can do that later.
09:55:42 Thank you.
09:55:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. LaMotte, number 5, please.
09:55:47 >>ROY LAMOTTE: I guess it's Roy LaMotte day today.
09:55:51 We do recognize the importance of sidewalks in our
09:55:53 city.
09:55:54 And I really want you to understand, our database
09:55:56 indicates there's about 14,000 block segments in the

09:55:59 city.
09:56:00 And we have only got information about 1400 or 10%.
09:56:06 Again, they have been ranked in terms of priority.
09:56:11 Total inventory, he would don't have an inventory of
09:56:14 the entire city sidewalk system.
09:56:16 We believe it's around 950 miles.
09:56:18 The system has expanded ten miles a year of which five
09:56:22 are by the city and five by the development community.
09:56:25 The new construction, we have a list of a backlog of
09:56:29 757 block segments.
09:56:32 And it's valued at today's dollars of $16 million.
09:56:36 Again a sizable proportion of our sidewalks
09:56:39 construction involves stormwater drainage systems
09:56:42 which require additional detail.
09:56:44 The new construction as of yesterday, we had 21
09:56:47 additional requests waiting list and it takes us about
09:56:52 20 years to construct all the segments we have on file
09:56:55 to date.
09:56:56 Again today's is based on the most cost effective
09:56:59 system we have.
09:57:00 The new request for sidewalk increases about a million
09:57:04 dollars per year, to put this in perspective.

09:57:07 Again our CBG contract has been awarded.
09:57:10 We also do sidewalk restoration inventory, and the
09:57:13 sidewalk infrastructure is expected to last 20 years.
09:57:17 I have to tell you the oldest sidewalk that we have in
09:57:20 the city was built in 1888, and at the corner of
09:57:24 Franklin and Kennedy.
09:57:25 But we are adding new systems daily.
09:57:28 We consider sidewalk restoration, a half inch or more
09:57:35 and will consider the restoration. ADA community is
09:57:40 expecting no mobility problems.
09:57:43 Sidewalk restoration is valued at 560,000.
09:57:48 As of yesterday we received 29 additional requests
09:57:52 waiting for consideration.
09:57:56 We have the people first attitude and the average wait
09:57:59 for time of service is currently at 24 months.
09:58:01 Again, we are on target to receive a million in new
09:58:05 requests and the wait time is expected to grow from 24
09:58:08 to 36 months.
09:58:10 Our restoration project in '06, we are making repairs
09:58:16 from our '06 budget.
09:58:18 We have awarded the FY 07 contract valued at 700,000.
09:58:22 And we expect another 140 blocks in the year.

09:58:30 The most common sidewalks are constructed first and
09:58:32 again we have a system like we go over with you and
09:58:35 talk about the priority of how we judge that.
09:58:38 Some examples are, praises are rising from 300 to 1500
09:58:43 as we add ramp improvements for mobility.
09:58:47 It's really the status of our report to you this
09:58:49 morning.
09:58:51 And I will be glad to take any questions you have.
09:58:56 Red road Mr. LaMotte, I am aware of the several
09:59:02 neighborhood projects that just requested sidewalks.
09:59:11 Through TIF funds.
09:59:12 What is the priority for completing sidewalks for
09:59:15 neighborhoods?
09:59:18 These neighborhoods have been waiting for sidewalks.
09:59:21 >>> Just an entirely different funding source and
09:59:23 implement a contract to get those undertaken and work
09:59:25 with the CRA managers to get that accomplished.
09:59:29 That is separate from our ongoing program.
09:59:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to compliment you and your
09:59:36 staff.
09:59:37 You have become much more systemized and organized and
09:59:40 strategic in the sidewalk construction.

09:59:43 I would like a report.
09:59:44 I don't think council received a copy of the
09:59:45 information that you just shared with us.
09:59:47 And we would really like to get in the writing so we
09:59:49 can see it.
09:59:50 But I know what we are doing.
09:59:54 And I know we have this large waiting list.
09:59:56 And I want council to think about this as when develop
09:59:58 our budget each year, because I think that sidewalks
10:00:02 are key to all the other transit forms that we would
10:00:07 like to see available.
10:00:08 Bus transit doesn't work if people don't have a safe
10:00:11 way to get to the bus stop.
10:00:12 And we are trying to encourage more walking.
10:00:14 We are trying to link different modes of
10:00:17 transportation and sidewalks are the key.
10:00:19 And I know that you have been prioritizing transit
10:00:21 stops and things like that.
10:00:26 Heart loin has a new bus stop coordinator.
10:00:28 I know she has trippled the number of bus stops but
10:00:31 they are attempting to complete every year which is
10:00:33 great.

10:00:33 And then we need to provide the other supportive
10:00:35 connection.
10:00:36 So I would like for you to share the information that
10:00:41 you have and tell us what it would take to -- how much
10:00:47 money it would take to increase our productivity, or
10:00:51 if the staff -- I know the staff is working really
10:00:54 hard.
10:00:54 Even if we have money we are building it as fast as we
10:00:58 can.
10:00:58 That would be great.
10:00:59 You can provide that just in written information to
10:01:01 different council members.
10:01:02 But you're doing a great job, which is I think why
10:01:05 people want more because they see how convenient and
10:01:10 safe it is to use sidewalks to get around.
10:01:12 Thank you.
10:01:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You are doing a great job in all
10:01:16 regards.
10:01:17 The request I have is to you and your department but
10:01:19 it's also sort of the entire administration.
10:01:24 When you send these reports to us, send them also by
10:01:27 e-mail.

10:01:29 There might be certain council people who like the
10:01:31 hard copy, and certain council people who prefer the
10:01:34 e-mail.
10:01:34 Also, I like the e-mail because I can take those
10:01:37 e-mails and if I know there are certain constituents
10:01:39 who are interested in these types of issues, I can
10:01:42 bounce those reports onto the constituents or to the
10:01:47 other interested parties.
10:01:48 So that would be a message to any staff that's
10:01:52 listening, that when you send us reports, you know, as
10:01:56 long as you have them in your computer, to go ahead
10:01:58 and send to us in a PDF file or whatever is
10:02:02 appropriate.
10:02:03 >>> Very good.
10:02:04 We will do that.
10:02:05 I appreciate the kind words.
10:02:06 The credit really goes to staff.
10:02:12 Works very diligently to get these in priority order.
10:02:19 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Thank you for coming.
10:02:21 I don't want to get off topic.
10:02:23 But one of the issues that came up that jogged my
10:02:30 memory was the December 14th date.

10:02:33 We had an issue come up about the restaurant and the
10:02:37 sidewalk issues and the right-of-way issues here.
10:02:41 Where are we on that, getting that resolved?
10:02:46 >>> We are here to talk about it.
10:02:47 If you are willing to listen, I have information on
10:02:49 that.
10:02:51 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Okay.
10:02:54 >> This is the -- this is Jetton.
10:03:23 Thank you very much.
10:03:28 If you will indulge me for just a moment.
10:03:30 We have had so many topics this morning.
10:03:35 There was a question about the area.
10:03:42 That utilize it is right-of-way, and how it was
10:03:45 handled and how sidewalks, and the original perception
10:03:49 that this area was covered over.
10:03:51 And that there was a sidewalk that was removed, which
10:03:55 was never the case but I am going to show you a
10:03:59 photograph.
10:03:59 When I began being involved in this project, this was
10:04:04 the current situation.
10:04:05 It was interpreted that this particular strip in here
10:04:08 had been a sidewalk.

10:04:12 The utility cut continued to wash out and the roadway
10:04:15 became very unstable at that point.
10:04:18 And in the former condition, there was parking on the
10:04:22 right-of-way.
10:04:23 It's not something new that was due to the picture.
10:04:26 As a matter of fact, an older picture, a document, as
10:04:32 you can see, the dumpster in the area, that there was
10:04:35 this open page area.
10:04:36 And looking upward at Howard at that point in time.
10:04:45 >> That looks like a sidewalk to me.
10:04:50 >>> Beyond this point it was nothing but blacktop.
10:04:53 I think I have another picture that I can display.
10:04:55 >> Why wouldn't that have been a sidewalk?
10:04:57 >>> I'm sorry?
10:04:58 >> My question is, why wouldn't that have been a
10:05:01 sidewalk?
10:05:02 Usually, sidewalks are continuous.
10:05:04 And this is all one plot of land so wouldn't the
10:05:10 sidewalk naturally have been continuous?
10:05:12 I understand that it stopped at the driveway.
10:05:14 But wouldn't it have continued on?
10:05:17 Doesn't the city make continuous sidewalks?

10:05:19 >> The natural reaction would say to you, yes, but
10:05:22 that wasn't the prevailing condition.
10:05:23 I can't speak to conditions that prevailed before the
10:05:27 city was involved.
10:05:29 >> Is the land a public right-of-way?
10:05:31 >>> Yes, ma'am.
10:05:32 The land was a public right-of-way.
10:05:33 >> As a public right-of-way, doesn't the private
10:05:39 property owner not -- I mean -- I'm not saying this
10:05:44 correctly.
10:05:45 If it's public right-of-way, how could a private
10:05:48 property owner create private parking on top of a
10:05:50 public right-of-way?
10:05:53 >>> At the time, I think someone may have made the
10:05:55 consideration -- again it's prior to my time so it's
10:05:58 only an assumption of why this took place -- is that
10:06:02 they may have found the need for parking for the
10:06:04 facility, and people park as close to the front door
10:06:06 as they can get it.
10:06:07 And why they never put in a sidewalk, I can't explain
10:06:11 that to you.
10:06:11 I can only tell you, after evaluating the situation,

10:06:15 and the need to have a pedestrian walkway, we did ask
10:06:18 them to develop a plan.
10:06:20 And they did do a plan.
10:06:22 And that plan was developed and reviewed by my
10:06:26 department, and asked them to formalize the parking,
10:06:29 restore the area with additional paving to bring the
10:06:34 condition back from where it was, provide for a
10:06:36 walkway for the pedestrians to come through, a walkway
10:06:41 that would be at the corner of the property, and
10:06:43 provide a continuous path.
10:06:45 I didn't want people walking in back of parked cars.
10:06:48 I wanted them to walk in front of it if they were to
10:06:51 choose so.
10:06:52 And there was sidewalk availability across the street.
10:06:58 >> When was this plan developed?
10:07:00 Was it after the fact?
10:07:01 >>> This plan was developed in August 21st of '06.
10:07:04 >> Of '06?
10:07:06 >>> Of '06, ma'am.
10:07:08 >> But that was after what was there was there.
10:07:10 >>> That's correct.
10:07:11 >> So this plan sort of codified what had already been

10:07:14 done.
10:07:17 >>> It allowed the parking, continuing the
10:07:21 right-of-way, and that's what you see out in the field
10:07:26 before we had them make the improvement.
10:07:29 You do not see a sidewalk in there. Do you not see a
10:07:32 pedestrian walkway.
10:07:33 And they can park in any style and manner that they
10:07:36 chose to.
10:07:37 What we did is formalize it and make an area for a
10:07:40 pedestrian.
10:07:40 We asked them to protect the pedestrians within the
10:07:46 walkway that was to be provided.
10:07:47 We asked them to clearly correct the road condition
10:07:50 and make it doable.
10:07:53 We asked them to strike it and we asked them to
10:07:55 improve the corner.
10:07:57 And again, this is the area that you see in the
10:08:03 photograph that was determined to be a sidewalk.
10:08:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My question is, since there's a
10:08:08 sidewalk immediately to the west of this, and there's
10:08:10 a sidewalk that connects to on Howard Avenue, why
10:08:14 didn't you think to continue the sidewalk and say the

10:08:21 parking needed to be perhaps parallel instead of
10:08:25 perpendicular?
10:08:26 Because it wouldn't be obvious to the average
10:08:28 pedestrian that you go from a sidewalk, and then you
10:08:31 jog up and alley, and then you walk next to the
10:08:35 restaurant.
10:08:36 >>> The opinion related to that is overflow parking
10:08:39 from this facility.
10:08:40 And it was infiltrating the neighborhood.
10:08:42 And to have less parking is only going to push more
10:08:45 parking into this neighborhood.
10:08:47 >> Was any conversation held with the neighbors?
10:08:50 >>> I can't say that we did.
10:08:53 >>CHAIRMAN: Other questions by council members?
10:08:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Rose Ferlita when she left council
10:09:05 said you're in charge now.
10:09:09 I think that what we have now is not optimum.
10:09:12 It sounds like it might be legal.
10:09:14 But obviously the neighbors don't feel it's safe.
10:09:18 They don't feel comfortable with it.
10:09:20 I don't know what options we have now.
10:09:22 I guess I would -- I will have a conversation with our

10:09:27 legal department and see if we have any recourse.
10:09:31 Unless anybody else has a great idea.
10:09:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Michelini, you represent them?
10:09:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have one question when he's done.
10:09:52 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I think we are operating under a
10:09:55 couple of misconceptions. This was previously a
10:09:57 convenience store and was right-of-way parking that
10:09:59 was being provided for that convenience store going
10:10:01 back into the early '60s, at least apparent from
10:10:05 some of the earlier photographs.
10:10:07 In addition to that, this was free and open parking,
10:10:14 it's not reserved for restaurant use, it's on
10:10:18 right-of-way parking.
10:10:18 And if you start talking about South Howard and the
10:10:21 critical need for parking, you might want to low and
10:10:24 see what's happening in the area.
10:10:27 This is further south on Howard.
10:10:29 That's clearly right-of-way parking.
10:10:31 It's parallel.
10:10:33 That's down close to Bayshore.
10:10:35 This is another shot of the same area.
10:10:45 You have critical issue.

10:10:48 Sidewalk weaves behind the cars.
10:10:52 >> Move it down.
10:10:53 We can't see it.
10:10:54 >> I'm sorry.
10:11:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's a sidewalk there.
10:11:01 >> I understand.
10:11:02 But there was no sidewalk on the other property
10:11:03 before.
10:11:04 Ever.
10:11:04 They just walked across the asphalt.
10:11:06 And what happened was, when we went to see Mr. LaMotte
10:11:10 about how to solve the problem, it was a result of
10:11:13 neighbors calling and complaining that they had
10:11:18 removed the sidewalk, and they didn't.
10:11:19 This was the utility cut that Mr. LaMotte said that
10:11:22 was repaired.
10:11:23 They used to just walk across back behind the cars.
10:11:26 And under the current code you don't want people doing
10:11:29 that.
10:11:29 It's not a safe condition.
10:11:30 So we pushed parking back, put the safety bars in and
10:11:33 put the sidewalk area up front.

10:11:40 This used to be la BARDO.
10:11:46 This is the same condition you had over at Antony.
10:11:55 >> There is a crosswalk.
10:11:58 I go to Dr. LILY.
10:12:04 >> The.
10:12:08 There's parking in the right-of-way.
10:12:13 No sidewalk.
10:12:14 It's just asphalt that people walk on.
10:12:23 These are all side streets.
10:12:29 This is the detail shop.
10:12:31 This is immediately across the Street. The sidewalk
10:12:33 seems to end here.
10:12:34 And you take your chances walking across the asphalt
10:12:37 down to the corner.
10:12:40 This is aside shot of Bern's where the parallel
10:12:44 parking is and the sidewalk is put up close to the
10:12:46 building.
10:12:48 This is Watrous and Howard.
10:12:56 This is further up.
10:12:57 This is Hugo's.
10:13:00 This is Morrison.
10:13:01 This is looking south on Howard.

10:13:02 You have cars parallel parking here and a sidewalk.
10:13:06 >> I'd lick to point something out.
10:13:07 The cars are parked on the street.
10:13:10 And throws a curb.
10:13:11 And then there's a sidewalk.
10:13:15 There obviously isn't a curb and sidewalk in this
10:13:17 situation.
10:13:18 But a sidewalk is provided for pedestrians.
10:13:25 >>> There is one here, too.
10:13:32 Antony's has a sidewalk.
10:13:35 >> How wide is that?
10:13:37 >>> I have to look at that.
10:13:38 This is the antique shop that's further down.
10:13:40 This is north on Howard. This is just parking.
10:13:42 There's no sidewalk here.
10:13:52 This is down from where you spoke, TC Choys, and the
10:13:58 sidewalk is actually incorporated under the canopy,
10:14:00 put the cars back in the right-of-way.
10:14:06 This is another shot.
10:14:08 This is Morrison or Howard where the cars are hanging
10:14:11 out in the right-of-way and the sidewalk curbs around
10:14:15 up and in front of the cars.

10:14:18 This is a better shot of that, where the but the
10:14:24 sidewalk actually comes in front it doesn't go behind
10:14:27 the cars.
10:14:29 There were some will allegations that were thrown
10:14:33 about, about not having permits to do. This permits
10:14:35 were issued, all of the change of use issues were
10:14:37 dealt with, site plan review, and this parking was not
10:14:40 relied upon in terms of the site plan review that
10:14:45 Antony's underwent.
10:14:48 This was a result of the neighbors complaining and
10:14:50 saying that we had paved over and illegally using the
10:14:53 right-of-way.
10:14:53 So a citation was issued to Antony's for right-of-way
10:14:58 which they had no control over.
10:15:01 So we went in, and at the expense of the owners, we
10:15:04 went in, had the plans prepared, drew up everything
10:15:07 that had to be done, had a permit, took out the
10:15:12 insurance policies, had this installed, had all the
10:15:15 repairs made at the owner's expense.
10:15:17 Now, it's not exclusive.
10:15:19 If somebody wants to drive up and park there, they
10:15:21 can.

10:15:24 It's a benefit to that area, but, nevertheless, Soho
10:15:27 has -- I know you remember this, Linda.
10:15:31 We talked about shared parking.
10:15:33 We talked about right-of-way parking.
10:15:34 We talked about the critical Ned for parking in the
10:15:36 area.
10:15:37 And if you start taking away on the right-of-way
10:15:40 parking, you are going to just create more of a hazard
10:15:44 than you currently have and more of a demand.
10:15:46 Neighbors are complaining already about intrusion of
10:15:49 parking.
10:15:49 But this stops at the alley.
10:15:51 It doesn't go back beyond the commercial areas.
10:15:55 It doesn't go back in front of anybody's house.
10:15:57 It goes directly in front of the other properties that
10:16:00 are commercial.
10:16:00 Just like all the other properties along Howard.
10:16:05 I prepared a little statement for you, for your
10:16:11 records, about the process and the permitting we have
10:16:13 gone through to achieve this.
10:16:15 And, again, it's not exclusive.
10:16:17 If somebody wants to park there, they are free to do

10:16:19 that.
10:16:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Fletch er?
10:16:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think the width of the sidewalk
10:16:29 created is pretty important, because my memory of this
10:16:34 that it's not standard sidewalk width, that it's very
10:16:37 narrow.
10:16:38 And if you were concerned about protecting people with
10:16:41 the sidewalk and having balance lasts you could create
10:16:46 parallel rather than perpendicular parking, you would
10:16:49 still have the parking but you would have safer
10:16:51 pedestrian access.
10:16:52 I don't belief the sidewalk that you created is ADA
10:16:54 accessible.
10:16:55 >>> It's 32 inches wide according to the plan that was
10:16:58 approved by transportation.
10:16:59 And that plan was drawn to their specifics.
10:17:04 Antony's didn't come in and say this is the plan.
10:17:06 There were numerous meetings with the department of
10:17:09 public works to review this and determine exactly what
10:17:12 was the optimal solution.
10:17:14 And that's what came out of this.
10:17:15 This wasn't necessarily a plan that we came in and

10:17:19 said, here, this is what when want to do.
10:17:22 They didn't want to necessarily jog the sidewalk
10:17:24 either.
10:17:24 But it was the safest plan that was possible under
10:17:28 these conditions.
10:17:28 And in terms of finding your way from one sidewalk to
10:17:32 the other, there is a stripe that directs people to
10:17:36 that shows where your pedestrian path goes so it's
10:17:39 easier to follow.
10:17:40 And that was also done just to help people find their
10:17:43 way around.
10:17:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Fletcher?
10:17:47 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Yes.
10:17:48 I have a comment for question for Mr. LaMotte.
10:17:57 That sidewalk just does not appear to be for the
10:17:59 public.
10:18:00 That's just the reaction.
10:18:01 I understand what you're saying.
10:18:03 But especially when you're out there.
10:18:10 The safety chains and bollards, where are those
10:18:15 going -- are they in place at this point?
10:18:17 >>> They are in place, yes.

10:18:19 Because if that's what you're talking about, that does
10:18:23 not give -- for people walking down the street, you
10:18:27 get the impression that it's part of the restaurant.
10:18:29 So just a comment for consideration in dealing with
10:18:32 this.
10:18:35 Somebody that goes to that part of town.
10:18:42 For Mr. LaMotte, there's been discussion at meetings
10:18:44 the last couple of months about putting additional
10:18:46 parking in South Howard, building a parking garage,
10:18:50 money that had been set aside, the CIT fund for doing
10:18:53 that many yourself ago.
10:18:56 Obviously, we have got a big parking problem down
10:18:59 there.
10:18:59 Has any progress been made on that issue?
10:19:06 >> At the South Howard project we had a meeting as
10:19:08 late as last week with the neighbors.
10:19:10 And everyone involved.
10:19:11 I think it was very productive meeting.
10:19:13 It was not a meeting that had conclusion brought to
10:19:18 the closure of the meeting.
10:19:19 It was a meeting to have people air their views.
10:19:22 And you had already met with the residents and met

10:19:25 with the businesses.
10:19:26 We are looking cooperatively with the parking
10:19:29 department to look at areas where parking can be
10:19:32 accommodated.
10:19:33 Even in will go at such innovative areas as
10:19:36 overconservation areas to be built.
10:19:39 We are discussing.
10:19:40 We had a meeting just this past Monday with Hartline
10:19:43 to discuss about running a shuttle route that would be
10:19:49 elongated and have 7-minute headways so people could
10:19:53 park on the peripheral areas of the recreational area
10:19:56 and entertainment area.
10:19:59 And we believe that can go into progress rather
10:20:01 quickly.
10:20:01 So I think we are making progress.
10:20:04 Again if it was related to a structure, it contains a
10:20:07 great deal of funds.
10:20:08 I believe the funds that may have been amassed at one
10:20:12 time are no longer available.
10:20:13 But we are looking at ways at how we could develop to
10:20:18 do that in the future but I think it would be a
10:20:20 public-private venture.

10:20:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Daignault?
10:20:26 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Yes.
10:20:27 Councilman Fletcher, for your information along that
10:20:29 regard, there was a request, and I think there's a
10:20:31 date certain -- there's a date in March.
10:20:34 I don't know if it's the 1st, the 8th or the
10:20:37 15th but there is a date we are working to have
10:20:39 the full information on the money as well.
10:20:41 We do have the real estate department actually looking
10:20:45 for a possibility for parking garage in that area.
10:20:49 But we'll have a full report for you.
10:20:55 >> A report also to include Cleveland and Platt?
10:21:01 When is that?
10:21:02 >>ROY LAMOTTE: (off microphone)
10:21:10 >> We specifically had a motion pending to ask you to
10:21:12 come back and report to us on Cleveland and Platt.
10:21:16 I'm pretty sure.
10:21:17 If we didn't, I'll make it right now.
10:21:19 >>> I believe you did, too.
10:21:21 Date certain, I'm not aware of the actual date.
10:21:23 But I can tell you that we indicated to the residents
10:21:25 we were coming back in 60 days.

10:21:27 And everyone that attended the meeting that we would
10:21:31 have that, and we were having staff look at the
10:21:34 possibility of how to rely on street parking to pick
10:21:37 up an additional supply.
10:21:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
10:21:43 Any more questions of Mr. Michelini?
10:21:45 Thank you.
10:21:47 We now go to --
10:21:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I wasn't present when you waived the
10:21:53 rules to allow Mr. Michelini toy speak.
10:21:56 There may be other people that may want to speak to
10:21:58 this.
10:21:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move to waive the
10:22:00 rules.
10:22:01 To allow Mr. Michelini to speak and now to allow
10:22:04 several other people who are here on this point.
10:22:07 >> Second.
10:22:07 (Motion carried).
10:22:11 >>> Thank you for your consideration.
10:22:12 Linda Pearson.
10:22:14 I represent residents that live along Jetton.
10:22:16 I would like to show you some photographs.

10:22:25 Here's the walkway that, and you would walk in between
10:22:30 the ballards and the building. The plan shows it's 32
10:22:36 inches. The neighbors indicated somewhat less than
10:22:38 that.
10:22:38 But furthermore, to speak to the ADA requirements, and
10:22:43 these pictures are over a week old so unless something
10:22:46 happened more recently, you walk in between the bars,
10:22:53 and then I don't know how a wheel chair would get over
10:23:00 this, but walk over -- pardon me?
10:23:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is the planter in the path?
10:23:10 >>> Yes.
10:23:29 Unless it's been removed in the past few days.
10:23:31 But there's no way that this meets ADA requirements.
10:23:35 Furthermore, you know, I think the idea that the
10:23:41 pedestrians pathway is right up by the by some
10:23:45 electronic equipment, I don't know what it provides
10:23:48 service to, it's right up there, no screening, no
10:23:51 buffering, no site plan.
10:23:52 The site plan that Mr. LaMotte showed you, someone
10:23:58 signed off on it.
10:24:06 There are other issues of this site plan and
10:24:08 redevelopment.

10:24:10 The neighbors feel like it needs to be addressed.
10:24:15 Basically it is a safety issue.
10:24:17 It's their hold harmless agreement with the city.
10:24:19 You have to leave this right-of-way, go on to their
10:24:25 private property, back into the right-of-way.
10:24:32 It's just not acceptable.
10:24:33 I thank you for your time.
10:24:35 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mrs. Pearson, I'm sorry.
10:24:40 The dumpster that you are showing us, is that toward
10:24:43 the back?
10:24:45 >>> No.
10:24:46 >> The front?
10:24:46 >>> That is in the front.
10:24:51 It's on Jetton.
10:24:53 It's at Jetton.
10:24:56 Howard is here.
10:24:57 >> So it is in the back.
10:24:58 Okay.
10:24:59 Okay.
10:25:02 I see it now.
10:25:02 I understand.
10:25:03 Thank you.

10:25:07 >>> This is the parking lot along Howard.
10:25:09 This is Jetton.
10:25:13 There used to be a townhouse here, which we believe
10:25:15 the residents, it's more appropriately placed because
10:25:18 you have room between the property to the north and
10:25:27 the restaurant.
10:25:28 As you can see there was some trees in this area at
10:25:31 one point.
10:25:31 This is about three yourself ago.
10:25:38 In the rear and down the alley, it was not visible
10:25:40 from Jetton.
10:25:41 It's been moved.
10:25:43 I don't know why.
10:25:44 And it's still not screened as of yesterday when I
10:25:46 drove by there.
10:25:47 >> It looks ugly.
10:25:49 I think, Mr. LaMotte, you are going to need to look at
10:25:53 this thing again.
10:25:54 See if we can make some changes on it.
10:25:56 Because it's unsightly.
10:25:59 You are looking at a residential street there.
10:26:02 Jetton.

10:26:03 It looks really bad.
10:26:11 >>ROY LAMOTTE: The compacter, again the current
10:26:14 location needs to be relocated further back to the
10:26:17 back of the building.
10:26:18 There is a pathway.
10:26:19 And I think it was alluded to earlier in the previous
10:26:21 conversation that we just had looking in between the
10:26:26 planting area and the actual marked area.
10:26:28 There is a walkway that's contiguous that will take
10:26:31 you out through the parking lot.
10:26:33 But again, as far as aesthetics go, we certainly would
10:26:36 be more than willing to look at that for you and see
10:26:39 if there's any way enhancements could be done here.
10:26:42 >> And what about the problem with the ADA?
10:26:47 32-inch sidewalk, is that enough for a wheelchair to
10:26:52 go through?
10:26:53 >> We'll have to take a look at that.
10:26:56 >> Please will at that because it does look unsightly.
10:26:59 And I know they are a successful business and they are
10:27:01 trying to do the best they can but I think they can do
10:27:04 a little better than that.
10:27:05 And I think you need to help them.

10:27:07 >>> We appreciate your comments.
10:27:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I remember when that was a
10:27:11 convenience store.
10:27:12 And at that time, there weren't as many multifamily
10:27:16 dwellings right up close where people are walking to
10:27:21 Howard and walking along Howard.
10:27:24 So the amount of foot traffic has increased
10:27:27 significantly over the last ten years and I think
10:27:29 that's why we are hearing more complaints.
10:27:31 But perhaps the best thing to do would be request a
10:27:33 report back in, let's say, 30 days from transportation
10:27:37 as well as legal to address what we can do to make
10:27:40 these improvements.
10:27:44 And that would be at the beginning of the meeting
10:27:46 under staff reports.
10:27:47 >> Second.
10:27:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think somebody else wants to
10:27:51 speak.
10:27:53 >>GWEN MILLER: All right.
10:27:54 Next.
10:28:01 >>> Bob Samani, 1102 South Moody Avenue, Tampa.
10:28:09 The situation here is that the gentleman who owns

10:28:16 Antony's take whatever time they want.
10:28:22 If we look at the old pictures we can see traces of
10:28:24 the sidewalk there for sure.
10:28:26 I lived there for about eight years.
10:28:28 The issue of utility easement is about four yourself
10:28:35 ago, there was old four fate wide, almost, sidewalk,
10:28:40 and they were going to replace it back then which we
10:28:44 made a lot of noise, and say you cannot do it.
10:28:46 And they just put gravel in there.
10:28:48 There is no utility easement there. They have
10:28:50 created -- we looked at the site plan that they have
10:28:54 submitted, and kind of went around to get the permit.
10:28:57 To me they deceived the city employees to get permits.
10:29:01 They created a sidewalk which is a joke.
10:29:04 You are going through there.
10:29:11 I as a person, you as a person, cannot walk through
10:29:13 it, rather than a handicap.
10:29:15 They come to the compacter, as Linda mentioned, there
10:29:21 is, the compacter is a nuisance, it violates if
10:29:27 setbacks, it doesn't have an enclosure on it.
10:29:30 And they say to help the crowd or people in South
10:29:36 Tampa?

10:29:37 No.
10:29:37 You get there at 6:00.
10:29:39 You see the cones go in there.
10:29:41 And they have very aggressive valet people, because I
10:29:47 live there, just to see their reaction.
10:29:49 They chase me.
10:29:51 "this is private parking."
10:29:53 And they do the same thing at Primadonna.
10:29:55 They put cones in the street.
10:29:57 And this sidewalk, if you just go down, the sidewalk,
10:30:04 they install cones for evening, so in evening they put
10:30:07 it right in N there when they open up the business.
10:30:11 The hours are between nine to eleven and the hours of
10:30:15 three to five, they take the cones so maybe if
10:30:18 somebody want to park there, they could.
10:30:20 Now, we live there.
10:30:21 I have two little kids.
10:30:24 A pregnant lady with a little kid, we are all afraid.
10:30:31 Unfortunately I don't have a picture.
10:30:32 If they park, they can almost, right to Jetton.
10:30:36 Now the compacter violation, put it in the black,
10:30:41 enclosed, and if we take a walk.

10:30:42 It's funny, there's so many violations.
10:30:54 They come with this little sidewalk.
10:30:56 It's not a sidewalk to say it's ADA approved.
10:31:01 And you see the traces of the sidewalk there.
10:31:05 It was here and was presented to you.
10:31:07 And I lived there for eight years.
10:31:09 Unfortunately, this meeting is in the morning.
10:31:12 There is plenty of objection to this situation.
10:31:14 And I would be glad to talk to the neighbors and bring
10:31:17 an affidavit saying it's not right for us.
10:31:21 Thank you very much.
10:31:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
10:31:24 We are going to go to item number 6.
10:31:26 We have a memorandum that we received.
10:31:28 Make a motion to receive and file.
10:31:30 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
10:31:31 >> Second.
10:31:32 (Motion carried).
10:31:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 7.
10:31:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On item number 67, this is the
10:31:46 transportation -- the contract we are going to have to
10:31:50 evaluate the trust.

10:31:52 Why don't you tell me what item is 6 real quick?
10:31:56 >>> Item 6, I believe the interpretation, it says the
10:31:58 downtown vision plan for an update is actually a
10:32:01 question that was raised related to our downtown Tampa
10:32:05 circulation model study.
10:32:07 And what we were going to tell you is a little bit
10:32:10 about that particular study regarding the scope that
10:32:14 surrounds it, why we need it, why we are implementing
10:32:16 it.
10:32:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I think did you a good job on
10:32:20 that, the written memorandum. The question I had is
10:32:22 related to Harbor Island.
10:32:24 We all know that the residents of Harbor Island,
10:32:28 occasionally the bridges get -- shaked off and they
10:32:33 get stuck and they can't get home.
10:32:36 And that's becoming a problem more and more.
10:32:39 What I want to be sure about is that the scope of this
10:32:41 report directly includes how all of these projects
10:32:47 that we are doing downtown -- and they are great
10:32:50 projects.
10:32:51 We are all in favor of downtown redevelopment.
10:32:54 But we need to make sure that this report studies how

10:32:59 the projects, especially the projects closer to the
10:33:01 bridge, impact the bridges, and therefore how they
10:33:03 will impact the Harbor Island residents, number one.
10:33:06 Number 2 is, there's been discussion about a possible
10:33:10 extension of the trolley.
10:33:11 Again, I think that this study and this consultant
10:33:14 that we are paying probably a few hundred thousand
10:33:17 dollars needs to include in the report, if the trolley
10:33:20 is built along some proposed path, how will that
10:33:23 impact Harbor Island residents as they try to get on
10:33:26 and off the Frankland street bridge?
10:33:29 Is that what we call it, the Franklin Street bridge?
10:33:32 The Beneficial Bridge.
10:33:34 >>GWEN MILLER: The getting-off bridge.
10:33:37 >>> To answer your question, it is all linkages with
10:33:40 the islands are part of the model.
10:33:42 The answer is --
10:33:43 >> You believe it does?
10:33:44 >>> Yes.
10:33:46 It does.
10:33:46 And it will.
10:33:47 I guess I'll be firm about that.

10:33:48 I will tell you that to create a model to be able to
10:33:52 do the scenarios, and you have alluded to the
10:33:55 tremendous amount of development we are experiencing
10:33:56 right now.
10:33:57 We are will go at two-waying streets, looking at
10:34:00 changing operations.
10:34:01 We run operations differently when we have special
10:34:04 events.
10:34:05 This model will assist us in our planning for that
10:34:08 type operation.
10:34:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: When will we expect it to be
10:34:13 completed?
10:34:15 >>> We are looking at the end of this year.
10:34:16 We actually aren't able to start the consultant until
10:34:22 June because we are having to work through the
10:34:24 consultant, competitive negotiation process with our
10:34:28 administration department.
10:34:30 So we have got an RFP on the streets.
10:34:33 We had consultants come in this week for a
10:34:35 pre-submittal meeting, a lot of response, some big
10:34:38 firms.
10:34:39 So we are encouraged we'll have a quality firm

10:34:41 conducting the study.
10:34:42 We are log at the beginning of June of this year.
10:34:49 >> That includes Channelside?
10:34:51 >>> Yes.
10:34:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
10:34:52 Item number 7.
10:34:53 Need to receive and file the memo.
10:34:55 >> So moved.
10:34:56 >> Second.
10:34:56 (Motion carried).
10:34:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 8.
10:34:58 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
10:35:13 I was asked to report back, and giving you the copy of
10:35:17 the memorandum, and the language for the scenic
10:35:19 corridor designation for Bayshore Boulevard, which I
10:35:22 handed back.
10:35:23 I handed out to you back in October.
10:35:26 The memorandum you will note was revised this week on
10:35:30 the 16th -- I'm sorry, last week on the 16th.
10:35:33 He would did receive notice from the Planning
10:35:34 Commission that if you will look on page 1, under
10:35:37 scenic corridor designation time line, April 2007 is

10:35:41 the Planning Commission public hearing.
10:35:42 And the original memo that I sent to you back in
10:35:45 October, February was the Planning Commission hearing.
10:35:48 They have consolidated their hearings and pushed it
10:35:50 out to April.
10:35:51 That was really out of our control to mandate any kind
10:35:55 of hearing from them on an earlier date so she shifted
10:36:00 it to April.
10:36:00 That was the one provision here. That pushes the
10:36:02 final adoption hearing out to October.
10:36:04 And then on page 2 under Bayshore Boulevard overlay
10:36:07 time line, the adoption hearing, City Council approved
10:36:12 adoption hearings were pushed out to October/november.
10:36:15 We had to get it after the plan amendment cycle.
10:36:19 I'm here for any questions that you have.
10:36:21 It's just a re-report from October.
10:36:24 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Coyle, are you still doing the
10:36:26 draft overlay regulations on February 7th?
10:36:30 Somewhere in February?
10:36:32 >>> That's when we plan to have a template out just
10:36:35 for public consumption.
10:36:36 In April.

10:36:37 I was also going to mention, I have assigned this
10:36:42 project to Abbye Feeley.
10:36:45 She will be working closely with our Planning
10:36:47 Commission staff and starting in April, she's trying
10:36:49 to lock in Kate Jackson to have more public workshops.
10:36:53 Then we hope to follow that with public workshops in
10:36:55 front of council.
10:36:56 The draft overlay that is mentioned in here is really
10:36:59 the template, based on our other overlays that we
10:37:02 have, laying out general landscaping, general
10:37:05 streetscaping, general site building standards,
10:37:08 potential signage standards.
10:37:09 Then we fill in the gaps along the way through the
10:37:11 public workshops.
10:37:12 >> Did you happen to go to the mayor's beautification
10:37:17 breakfast yesterday morning?
10:37:19 >>> No.
10:37:22 >> The mayor was talking about colorizing the
10:37:25 Bayshore.
10:37:26 So I guess --
10:37:31 >>> Could potentially.
10:37:32 I will have to low at that.

10:37:38 >> Plants, flowers, to sustain the weather.
10:37:44 >>> We have engaged internal staff as well.
10:37:49 Carla is our landscape architect at the Parks
10:37:51 Department.
10:37:52 And Randy Goers and many others in the internal staff
10:37:57 as well.
10:37:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just have a quick question, which
10:38:01 is why is it not going before the Planning Commission
10:38:06 until April?
10:38:06 >>> They consolidated their hearings and canceled
10:38:08 their February meeting and moved it to April.
10:38:10 We have no control of that date.
10:38:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 9.
10:38:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Discussion relative to the creation
10:38:23 of the public Nuisance Abatement Board, it was
10:38:26 previously discussed that each of you were to discuss
10:38:30 the issue of your appointment to the public Nuisance
10:38:35 Abatement Board.
10:38:37 I believe I put in front of each of you, in case you
10:38:40 hadn't already received a copy or blank application
10:38:44 for appointments to voluntary boards, and in keeping
10:38:47 with policy that whoever should be ultimately

10:38:54 considered for appointment complete one of those for
10:38:56 distribution to council prior to doing so.
10:38:58 There was an issue that has, I believe, has not been
10:39:01 resolved.
10:39:02 And that is with regard to the appointments on March
10:39:08 31st.
10:39:09 But I believe it would be my opinion that it is
10:39:14 necessary to have appointments made to have a full
10:39:16 board before you can proceed with taking any actions
10:39:24 to be presented to Nuisance Abatement Board.
10:39:26 I guess the action that will be requested is if you
10:39:29 decide who it is you wish to appoint, to have them
10:39:31 complete the application, have it returned, and then
10:39:34 we can have it placed on the agenda.
10:39:35 If you wish to have a deadline to do that, to move it
10:39:38 along quickly, to doc that.
10:39:39 >>GWEN MILLER: I think we need a deadline to get these
10:39:42 applications started.
10:39:43 >>MARY ALVAREZ: March 31st?
10:39:47 >>GWEN MILLER: We need earlier because terms expire
10:39:50 March.
10:39:50 We need to do it before.

10:39:53 >>MARY ALVAREZ: February.
10:39:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:39:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Question on the motion.
10:40:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess what I'm wondering about, I
10:40:03 thought we had heard from legal staff that the public
10:40:06 Nuisance Abatement Board hadn't met for years.
10:40:10 Is that correct??
10:40:14 I understand they don't have any members but the
10:40:16 question is, did they have any issues?
10:40:18 And I think it's sort of a rhetorical question because
10:40:21 it's my understanding that the state of the law
10:40:23 changed a few years ago where the courts came down
10:40:26 very hard on cities that were trying to use the -- use
10:40:30 the public now sans abatement process, and therefore
10:40:33 that's one of the reasons that cities including the
10:40:36 City of Tampa sort of pulled back from using that
10:40:38 process.
10:40:39 And we went into other processes like code
10:40:42 enforcement, and additional police, you know, patrols
10:40:46 or what have you.
10:40:48 Mr. Shelby, can you help me, or jewel what?
10:40:53 Can you help me on that?

10:40:55 If we need that to be activated let's activate it by
10:40:59 all means.
10:40:59 But if we are just going to appoint people and put
10:41:02 them on a board that's never going to meet because
10:41:04 there are no issues, that sounds like a waste of
10:41:06 everybody's time.
10:41:07 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I was going to say we have a purpose
10:41:09 here.
10:41:15 >>> Earnest Mueller, assistant city attorney.
10:41:17 I will try to address that issue.
10:41:19 >> Short.
10:41:20 >>> There have been some case law out there.
10:41:26 Has to do with the closing of establishments.
10:41:28 And there has to be certain findings made.
10:41:32 And that doesn't prohibit the board from acting.
10:41:36 But I'll tell you this much. The city of
10:41:38 St. Petersburg has a public Nuisance Abatement Board.
10:41:40 It operating, working.
10:41:42 I have tentatively looked into setting up a workshop
10:41:45 with them.
10:41:46 So that observe, talk with those board members, get an
10:42:01 understanding of what the case law is, what the

10:42:03 findings have to be.
10:42:04 So in answer to your question, yes, there are some
10:42:06 limitations.
10:42:08 There has to be certain findings made.
10:42:10 But the public nuisance abatement boards are
10:42:12 operating.
10:42:14 >> It's sort of I Ron being because it's my
10:42:16 recollection the city of St. Petersburg was one of the
10:42:18 one that is got hit with a court case and decision of
10:42:20 having to pay out, I think, a bar own area lot of
10:42:23 money because they shut down the club without the
10:42:27 appropriate process and finding.
10:42:29 So Ernie, if it's your recommendation in working with
10:42:34 staff that, you know, this is appropriate, and there
10:42:37 is a Ned for it, and that we have good use for it,
10:42:40 then I say, yes, let's go forward with it.
10:42:45 >>> I would certainly recommend reconnaissance
10:42:46 substituting the board.
10:42:47 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second for the
10:42:49 applications to be by February 28th.
10:42:51 All in favor say Aye.
10:42:52 (Motion carried).

10:42:54 >>SHAWN HARRISON: It seems to me this is one of those
10:42:57 boards where each one of us has an appointment.
10:42:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
10:42:59 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I think probably very little
10:43:02 discussion would be in order, if this is a particular
10:43:06 from one of us.
10:43:14 >> Whoever is doing the appointment should have the
10:43:16 application.
10:43:17 February 28th.
10:43:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, for clarification I want to
10:43:20 be clear.
10:43:21 Do you want to have the applications received prior to
10:43:23 then so it can be doc agendaed and distributed to
10:43:28 council before the action on the 28th?
10:43:33 My suggestion would be to get it back at least a week
10:43:37 in advance, and that way we can have it --
10:43:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to rescind that motion.
10:43:43 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
10:43:44 >> Second.
10:43:44 (Motion carried).
10:43:45 >>GWEN MILLER: February 21st?
10:43:51 On February 21st.

10:43:53 All in favor?
10:43:54 (Motion Carried)
10:43:55 Item number 10.
10:43:59 Need to discuss our calendar?
10:44:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question about item number
10:44:05 7 after that.
10:44:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Any discussion on the calendar?
10:44:10 Anybody want to talk about the calendar?
10:44:14 At the end of the agenda.
10:44:15 All the way in the back.
10:44:16 Have you seen it?
10:44:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: May I request we defer this till
10:44:21 next week?
10:44:21 I want a chance to look at it carefully.
10:44:23 And I want to look at the Jewish holiday.
10:44:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
10:44:32 >>GWEN MILLER: They put them on there already.
10:44:34 >>> I just want to make sure I have got it right.
10:44:37 Make a motion to put this on our agenda for next week.
10:44:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
10:44:41 (Motion carried)
10:44:42 Item number 11.

10:44:47 Need a motion to set for March 1.
10:44:57 5 p.m.
10:44:58 I'm sorry.
10:44:59 5:30.
10:45:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: This is a resolution setting a
10:45:04 transmittal public hearing?
10:45:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
10:45:06 For March 1st.
10:45:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: At 5:30 p.m. relative to the JLUS
10:45:15 study?
10:45:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The MacDill land use study.
10:45:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I believe there's some people here
10:45:24 in the audience to speak on this.
10:45:26 I don't know if we should hold off.
10:45:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How can they speak on this setting
10:45:31 a meeting?
10:45:32 >>GWEN MILLER: It comes back on March 1st.
10:45:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, obviously when it comes time
10:45:37 to agenda public comments, they can speak about any
10:45:39 items that is placed on the agenda.
10:45:41 Again I will be coming back to you in February to talk
10:45:43 about public comments but it may be something that

10:45:46 somebody may say that will ultimately affect your
10:45:48 decision whether to pass the resolution but you can
10:45:50 always recall it if you have an issue.
10:45:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is there a motion on the floor?
10:45:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Move the resolution.
10:46:01 (Motion Carried).
10:46:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Item number 8, I apologize, I
10:46:04 wasn't here.
10:46:05 No, number 7, the medians in the vicinity.
10:46:08 I didn't receive any paperwork on this.
10:46:10 And I didn't understand what his memo was, Mr.
10:46:13 LaMotte's memo. I wonder where we were.
10:46:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do you want me to tell you as
10:46:18 public works?
10:46:20 I'll tell you.
10:46:20 I mean, I can't tell you outside of the meeting but
10:46:24 I'll tell you this second.
10:46:25 The golf view/parkland folks had these medians that we
10:46:31 read about in the paper.
10:46:32 They were problematic.
10:46:33 They better half done.
10:46:34 And I'm really proud that the Parks Department and the

10:46:36 public works department and everybody got together and
10:46:39 met with the neighborhood and they decided, now what?
10:46:42 You're right, these medians were not finished, there's
10:46:44 not landscaping to cover the sprinkler systems,
10:46:49 et cetera, they are going to finish them in the next
10:46:51 couple of months.
10:46:52 >>: I would like to make a motion we get a report back
10:46:55 in three months.
10:46:56 >> Second.
10:46:56 (Motion carried).
10:47:00 >> Now we move to item number 58.
10:47:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you would announce which ones.
10:47:25 >> It should be items 58, 59, 61, 62, 63, ever 64.
10:47:48 65.
10:47:50 66.
10:47:53 67.
10:47:54 68.
10:47:57 That's it.
10:47:58 >>GWEN MILLER: That's it?
10:48:00 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I need to row cues mason 58, 61
10:48:03 and 62 for the record.
10:48:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: State the reasons, please, briefly.

10:48:11 >> My wife is associated with the firm representing
10:48:14 clients who are the petitioners in those matters.
10:48:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And Mr. Fletcher, you will file the
10:48:24 appropriate forms?
10:48:25 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Yes.
10:48:29 >>> The handouts you are getting is an orientation map
10:48:32 of the Rattlesnake Point area, just so you will -- if
10:48:35 there are any questions on any of the properties.
10:48:40 It's a response to the Orc report that you will be
10:48:43 adopting as part of the plan amendments.
10:48:46 On page 3 is the changes to the text amendments that
10:48:51 were discussed at our last meeting.
10:48:57 Those who don't really like to read through the
10:48:59 strikeout, page 18, is actually a clean copy of the
10:49:02 policies.
10:49:04 That helps maybe in terms of being able to run through
10:49:06 those.
10:49:08 A couple of points to keep in mind that this is a
10:49:10 response to an Orc report that was transmitted to DCA.
10:49:15 Department of Community Affairs has three objections
10:49:18 and our Ponce to those objections is contained in this
10:49:21 report much another point to remember is this was not

10:49:23 a city-initiated plan amendment, this was a plan
10:49:26 amendment that was requested by property owners in the
10:49:29 area, and the city has provided a review -- the
10:49:36 Planning Commission provided a review and
10:49:38 recommendations as part of the process.
10:49:41 The changes that we made were fairly minor.
10:49:43 There are some that are very -- just wordsmithing.
10:49:48 But at the January 11th meeting there were two
10:49:50 issues that surfaced with property owners, and
10:49:53 property owners primarily that were not part of the
10:49:55 map amendments, and the concerns were how the heavy
10:49:59 industrial uses were characterized in the transition
10:50:02 policies.
10:50:03 Policies we are talking about them being permanently
10:50:05 eliminated.
10:50:06 They felt that was characterizing them that their
10:50:09 business had to go out of operation, or maybe were
10:50:11 considered a new sans.
10:50:13 That was not our intent.
10:50:14 In fact the Orc report speaks to them being available
10:50:18 businesses in the area providing a commodity to the
10:50:21 area.

10:50:22 The transition policies were changed to acknowledge it
10:50:24 was -- they would be relocated or they would make some
10:50:27 choices on their own.
10:50:28 But the idea was that no residential development would
10:50:31 occur in the point until the heavy industrial uses no
10:50:35 longer were there for whatever reason.
10:50:38 The other change that were policies of the heavy
10:50:41 industrial uses, property owners felt it may impair
10:50:46 their ability to expand their operations or continue
10:50:48 operations in the long run.
10:50:49 We changed those to allow heavy industrial uses to
10:50:52 continue operations as they are now.
10:50:54 So again the choice is up to those property owners as
10:50:57 to if they want to change or expand, move, relocate or
10:51:01 whatever.
10:51:02 The other policies were --
10:51:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just a point of order, Mr. Goers.
10:51:08 Is there a strike-through underlined version from
10:51:12 where we were when we transmitted to where we are
10:51:15 today?
10:51:17 >>> Yes.
10:51:17 Page 3.

10:51:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It all went to page 18.
10:51:23 Thank you.
10:51:24 >>>
10:51:25 >>RANDY GOERS: I can briefly run through the changes.
10:51:26 Some are very minor.
10:51:28 We just tried to clear that up, make it more that the
10:51:31 transition is not a mandatory transition, or
10:51:34 regulatory transition.
10:51:36 It's really encouraging the transition at this point
10:51:39 to the changes of some of the plan amendments.
10:51:42 Policy A-1-6, there seemed to be a lot of confusion
10:51:46 when we started referencing certain policies and he
10:51:48 would decided that it wasn't necessary to bring that
10:51:51 sort of circular discussion in.
10:51:53 Suffice it to say, that the city, before residential
10:51:57 development can proceed, the city needs to know that
10:52:02 the hazardous uses are no longer there and pose a
10:52:04 threat to residential development.
10:52:06 Policy A-2 was very worthy in terms -- wordy in terms
10:52:11 of what was expected.
10:52:12 This is the plan to try to address all of the
10:52:14 what-ifs as we move forward from an industrial area

10:52:18 to a mixed use residential commercial.
10:52:21 Your use that is want to stay there for a while.
10:52:24 What if you have tenant leases? What you have if you
10:52:26 have a develop theory wants to come in and proceed
10:52:29 now?
10:52:29 What if you want to protect the waterfront?
10:52:31 All of those what-ifs are supposed to be addressed
10:52:34 in the transition plan.
10:52:35 Remember, staff's preference at the beginning of the
10:52:37 process was that the transition plan be completed
10:52:39 first, and then the plan amendment.
10:52:41 And as far as that plan update process.
10:52:43 So we still believe that we are going to need to look
10:52:45 at the entire area in terms of how fits into the
10:52:48 long-range plan.
10:52:50 During our plan update.
10:52:51 So if there's any unresolved questions that comes up
10:52:54 today, it can be taken care of during the plan update
10:52:58 during the transition process, or transition plan,
10:53:01 excuse me.
10:53:02 As far as the A-6-43, 4 and 5, we are really talking
10:53:12 about at the time that the properties become

10:53:15 designated CMU.
10:53:17 They are going to be a CMU but have a mixture of other
10:53:20 uses that are not necessarily allowed under CMU.
10:53:22 So changes are to alloy a lot of those uses to coexist
10:53:26 in that category.
10:53:27 Itself was also acknowledged that there are properties
10:53:30 not designated CMU and they shouldn't be subject to
10:53:33 those same kind of restriction that is were imposed in
10:53:35 a different plan category property.
10:53:38 Those changes were again to allow the differences in
10:53:40 the property owners, and their respective planned
10:53:45 designations at this point.
10:53:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question about that, Madam
10:53:49 Chair.
10:53:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead.
10:53:52 >> A-6-A .3, at the top of the page, Mr. Todd, and I
10:54:00 think one of the other attorneys, objected to this and
10:54:03 said they wanted their properties not included in
10:54:06 this.
10:54:06 And it looks like these what you have done, because I
10:54:09 think Mr. Taub's clients property was not a CMU 35
10:54:14 property yet.

10:54:19 But at the same time I thought we were not going to
10:54:20 allow the redevelopment of any of this peninsula until
10:54:24 all of these hazardous uses are gone including the
10:54:28 hazardous uses that are illegally occurring on Mr.
10:54:33 Taub's property.
10:54:34 >>> No residential redevelopment.
10:54:36 And that goes for the entire peninsula.
10:54:38 Residential rezoning is not allowed in the industrial
10:54:41 categories that exist now.
10:54:43 The CMU, they would be allowed.
10:54:47 But in this area they are not allowed as long as the
10:54:49 heavy industrial uses are present.
10:54:54 So what we are saying is that the planned category can
10:55:00 change but residential cannot occur until heavy
10:55:04 industrial uses are no longer there.
10:55:06 >> So in other words if Mr. Taub's client or the other
10:55:08 industrial user is not part of this wants to expand
10:55:12 their industrial use, then they continue to expand it.
10:55:17 And then the other property owners just have to wait?
10:55:21 >>> It may delay the transition longer than maybe what
10:55:24 some property owners anticipated.
10:55:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Goers, is there a time set for the

10:55:32 transition of these industrial uses?
10:55:35 >>> No.
10:55:35 >>: So it could go on forever?
10:55:38 >>> Well, it could go on --
10:55:40 >> As long as they are there.
10:55:41 >>> We can't predict really what the future is in
10:55:44 terms of how market, how other are going to grow and
10:55:50 how the integration of uses evolve.
10:55:54 Other areas you find around the country is just the
10:55:56 nature of what happens around the area in terms of
10:55:58 residential growth and what people would like brings
10:56:01 to bear, certain forces that require a change.
10:56:06 There are market changes that occur when maybe land
10:56:08 becomes more valuable for residential, or transitional
10:56:11 use than it is in its current use, and the property
10:56:14 owner is able to make a change on its own.
10:56:17 Our goal is to not necessarily put in place any of
10:56:19 those prescriptive measures but to identify what you
10:56:24 probably should change, what needs to change and who
10:56:26 is responsible for making those changes.
10:56:29 Any follow-up will end up having to be decided with
10:56:33 property owners and then if there is anything that

10:56:35 needs to come before City Council, City Council has
10:56:37 the final say.
10:56:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: In the meantime these text amendments,
10:56:44 the CMU designations when we put them in.
10:56:48 >>> It's to protect -- it's to allow the property
10:56:51 owners that are seeking the change, allow them to move
10:56:54 forward in one step.
10:56:54 You remember when the petitioners first came to us it
10:56:59 was thought by moving to this first step, they would
10:57:03 then be able to begin on their own transition
10:57:06 strategies.
10:57:06 It was always the property owner initiated program
10:57:09 where they would then be able to move forward.
10:57:11 So we are allowing that first step to move forward but
10:57:14 we are going to ensure that residential development
10:57:16 can't proceed until the health and safety aspects are
10:57:19 addressed.
10:57:19 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I agree with that.
10:57:22 Thank you.
10:57:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead.
10:57:24 >>> The policies, kind of clean-up changes to help
10:57:27 streamline.

10:57:29 The last two weeks, after council's direction, there
10:57:32 were a number of e-mails and meetings with the
10:57:36 petitioners.
10:57:38 This past Tuesday we had everyone together and had a
10:57:41 meeting and tried to work out any of the last details.
10:57:45 There may be some minor just changes in the way the
10:57:49 policies are worded.
10:57:50 We think we have addressed all the concerns.
10:57:53 And we can address any other major concerns during the
10:57:56 plan update, as we look at it further.
10:57:58 There's one thing to mention.
10:58:00 We really couldn't write a policy to say this.
10:58:02 But we wanted to make sure our staff's view and the
10:58:06 city's view was consistent all the way through the
10:58:07 process, that we look at this as a first part of a
10:58:11 long-term transition of the area.
10:58:13 It was -- when the CMU gets changed, we look at it, it
10:58:17 was a co-existence of a continuation of the light
10:58:21 industrial uses on those properties, in a category
10:58:24 that may not typically allow those uses.
10:58:29 We would come back in and rezone this.
10:58:32 There's a question by some of the tenants on those

10:58:34 properties that wants to know if the city is going to
10:58:36 be compelled to rezone the property and bring it into
10:58:38 conformance with the CMU.
10:58:42 We don't believe that would compel us to do that.
10:58:44 We know you have to come in and look at some of the
10:58:46 development regulations, when the residential
10:58:49 development goes forward so they can coexist, and
10:58:53 throws a policy that specifies ensuring that once the
10:58:55 heavy industrial uses are gone and residential permits
10:58:58 are being pulled, are being developed, that when make
10:59:01 sure they can coexist with any industrial uses that
10:59:04 are out there.
10:59:04 But we don't feel the city -- first we don't feel the
10:59:08 city is compelled to change if zoning, nor do we have
10:59:11 the desire to do that or feel we are going to.
10:59:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Goers, I realize this is sort
10:59:19 of like probably herding cats or spinning plates on
10:59:25 top of sticks.
10:59:27 Because there were so many parties and so many
10:59:29 players.
10:59:30 I appreciate your hard work.
10:59:31 But policy A-6-A .10 on page 5, if you recall, I have

10:59:39 some concern about that.
10:59:41 My good friend Mr. Steenson is in the back of the
10:59:44 room.
10:59:44 And here on behalf of the Gandy civic association.
10:59:47 And one of the reasons that he told us that the Gandy
10:59:52 civic association is in support of all this comp plan
10:59:54 amendment was in the hopes that all the chemical
11:00:02 formulating and gas storage, et cetera, would be
11:00:05 eliminated from there.
11:00:06 So they saw it as a trade-off.
11:00:08 And I'm speaking for Al, and I'm sure he'll come up
11:00:11 and speak for himself.
11:00:12 But if they can get rid of the gas storage and the
11:00:15 chemical stuff, then okay, then we'll go along with
11:00:18 this redevelopment plan.
11:00:21 But I have a problem with A-6-A.10 the way I see it.
11:00:27 And tell me what the original intent was as compared
11:00:29 to now.
11:00:30 Because now it says, no building permit shall be
11:00:34 issued for residential uses on property designated CMU
11:00:37 35 until heavy industrial uses permanently cease
11:00:41 operations on property designated CMU-35 within this

11:00:45 area.
11:00:46 So it excludes the two big parcels that have the
11:00:50 chemical and the gas uses which seems to me to be
11:00:54 contrary to what the Gandy civic association thought
11:00:56 they were signing off on.
11:01:06 >>> That was an error. That should come out.
11:01:09 The intent is, we want to be clear on two intents.
11:01:12 The policies that were presented on the 11th did
11:01:15 have some language that precluded the expansion or
11:01:20 made it look like there was a limitation on continued
11:01:22 operation for the heavy industrial.
11:01:27 That was taken out so the industrials --
11:01:32 >> In the policies you are talking about.
11:01:33 >> It was always the intent that residential
11:01:36 development could not be permitted and.
11:01:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let's just focus on this.
11:01:44 The second underlying portion where it says -- the
11:01:47 first underlying portion I'm fine about where it says
11:01:51 designate CMU 35.
11:01:53 The second portion, needs to be stricken.
11:01:56 Correct?
11:01:58 And that gets back to the original intent of this

11:02:02 council, most importantly.
11:02:06 >> Yes.
11:02:09 >> We are all good.
11:02:10 Thank you.
11:02:12 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Just for my clarification, what you
11:02:18 are showing me here, you have PA 06-05, which is
11:02:26 ventures, and Lazari leasing, all of those properties
11:02:30 there will be CMU 35, supposedly.
11:02:32 >>> Yes.
11:02:33 >> But they can't build on there until the chemical,
11:02:41 what do you call it, the chemical formulators and the
11:02:44 propane storage is gone.
11:02:45 >>> Right.
11:02:46 >> So all that property there, including PA 609, and
11:03:00 08-07, all of that land, with the exception of those
11:03:04 two properties I mentioned, those are the only two
11:03:10 that are going to be staying heavy industrial?
11:03:15 >>> Yes.
11:03:15 Well, the two parcels that are not part -- they are
11:03:22 not really part of --
11:03:24 >> But nothing can happen in there until these two --
11:03:30 >>> Yes.

11:03:30 No residential development.
11:03:31 >> Okay.
11:03:32 Gotcha.
11:03:36 >>RANDY GOERS: That's it.
11:03:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Does anyone in the public want to speak
11:03:40 on item 58?
11:03:52 >>> Keith Bricklemyer, attorney for leasing, one of
11:03:58 the applicants in this process, also speaking on
11:04:00 behalf of the other applicants this morning and really
11:04:01 want to thank staff and the city attorney's office for
11:04:03 all the hard work that they have put in on this effort
11:04:07 to bring a number of parties together.
11:04:09 I counted up last night.
11:04:10 There's been no fewer than a dozen lawyers involved in
11:04:13 this exercise, which talk about herding cats, I'm sure
11:04:19 you recognize the process.
11:04:20 We are in support of the policy that is have been
11:04:22 presented to you and obviously the map amendment
11:04:25 changes, and I think those folks who spoke with some
11:04:28 concern at the last hearing are also -- he would like
11:04:31 to encourage you to adopt those.
11:04:33 Thank you.

11:04:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:04:34 Next.
11:04:37 >> Madam Chair, and ladies and gentlemen of the City
11:04:40 Council, my name is Ted Taub, if you have some white
11:04:47 smoke you can send it up.
11:04:50 We have worked very hard.
11:04:53 I personally, in all of the other lawyers and your
11:04:56 staff, and I personally want to thank David Smith and
11:05:00 Julie Cole, particularly, and Randy Goers, and all of
11:05:04 my fellow council.
11:05:07 We have wordsmithed this to the extent where we are
11:05:13 thoroughly satisfied.
11:05:14 And just been presented to you this morning.
11:05:17 And we appreciate it.
11:05:20 And we appreciate having that opportunity for
11:05:27 reasonable dialogue, which we have.
11:05:29 I don't know how many phone calls occurred, how many
11:05:32 e-mails occurred, I don't know how many iterations
11:05:35 occurred.
11:05:36 But we are pleased.
11:05:37 And just want to thank everybody involved.
11:05:39 Lastly, I want to tell Mr. Dingfelder that I'm sorry

11:05:44 about yesterday, but I needed some funds.
11:05:53 >> Needed funds?
11:05:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
11:06:03 >> My name is Joe SOLO, 1409 east Mohawk Avenue.
11:06:08 And my first question is, why do we need more housing
11:06:16 on rattlesnake?
11:06:17 Why do we need upscale out there when there's a
11:06:22 commercial business already out there operating that
11:06:28 would be forced out by people that just want to be out
11:06:31 there next to the water?
11:06:32 This is one of the last privately-owned port areas in
11:06:38 the city.
11:06:41 And I just don't understand why the city would even
11:06:47 consider forcing people that have been in business,
11:06:49 and been in business for awhile, why they are talking
11:06:54 about forcing them out of there, their place of
11:06:56 business, when they have been there forever.
11:07:00 And -- well, for a long time.
11:07:04 Let me just -- okay.
11:07:08 I also bring in maned, if you remember a place called
11:07:13 Jones chemical over in St. Pete.
11:07:16 You all remember that?

11:07:17 Well, over in St. Pete, there was a company called
11:07:19 Jones chemical.
11:07:20 And one day they had a spill.
11:07:22 And it was all the citizens that built houses all
11:07:27 around this plant that had been there for yourself and
11:07:30 years, 30 years or so, they developed all around it.
11:07:34 And then they had a chemical spill one day.
11:07:36 And then the citizens were up in arms going to City
11:07:39 Council, why did they let a chemical company come in
11:07:44 there and build a business in their area?
11:07:46 Well, they were there long before the people were
11:07:49 there with their houses.
11:07:50 So my question again is, why do we need upscale
11:07:56 housing out there on the point?
11:07:58 Upscale housing to me generally means loss of jobs for
11:08:01 the working person.
11:08:08 I'm a person that works out on the waterfront.
11:08:10 And proposed changes go in.
11:08:12 And I ship to a third world country.
11:08:17 And it would affect the people in another country more
11:08:20 than you would realize.
11:08:21 There is a lot of people that ship out of there.

11:08:27 There's a little shipping area out there.
11:08:29 And the next closest place to ship such items is in
11:08:35 Mobile, Alabama, and makes it unable for the public or
11:08:39 the low-end, what would it be, the low-end goods and
11:08:50 service that is we send over to that country.
11:08:52 They are not big things like bulldozers and cars and
11:08:54 all those things.
11:08:55 Mostly clothes, household items, food, stuff that they
11:08:58 need to survive.
11:08:59 And they wouldn't get that.
11:09:02 And another thing is why the city always seems -- or
11:09:09 the city's developers seems to pick on the aerials --
11:09:15 areas that are out there working, and they are part of
11:09:17 the community, and they produce -- they have been here
11:09:19 for many years, and they employ people that work,
11:09:27 thousands of people.
11:09:28 And the cities come in and say, well, we want to take
11:09:32 this and we want the cruise ships and we want to -- as
11:09:39 soon as the lease is up toss them out on their keister
11:09:43 and put cruise ships.
11:09:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Sorry to interrupt but your time is up.
11:09:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I had a question for you, sir.

11:09:54 If somebody could put up the colorful map, Randy.
11:09:58 Okay.
11:10:00 Could you look at the overhead and just identify where
11:10:02 you ship out of on this map?
11:10:08 >>> In this area.
11:10:10 >> And you see next to the, it says viper ventures.
11:10:15 Well, anyway, it's circled in yellow and says viper
11:10:21 ventures.
11:10:21 Hears our problem.
11:10:22 We didn't initiate this.
11:10:24 You heard our staff say that at the beginning, our
11:10:26 attorneys.
11:10:27 This is not something that council initiated, not
11:10:29 something the mayor or the administration initiated.
11:10:33 A company, viper ventures, I don't know who they are,
11:10:36 but they have an option, they have an option to by
11:10:40 that entire yellow circle there.
11:10:42 And that's out of our control.
11:10:45 That's a transaction between private individuals.
11:10:49 We are not part of it.
11:10:51 Once they do that, they own it.
11:10:53 They can knock everything down and just leave it raw

11:10:56 land.
11:10:57 And those also out of our control.
11:10:59 So it's really -- you know, we all totally sympathize
11:11:03 with you, I'm sure, because a lot of these working
11:11:07 jobs are leaving the city and they are leaving
11:11:10 Hillsborough County for a variety of reasons that you
11:11:12 have described.
11:11:15 >>> Look at Manatee.
11:11:16 All that was here.
11:11:17 >> Absolutely.
11:11:18 And it's going elsewhere and it's unfortunate.
11:11:21 >>> We had a port authority building and we had an
11:11:23 aquarium.
11:11:24 That's where it started right there.
11:11:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I wasn't part of that but on this
11:11:28 particular parcel because that was government doing
11:11:30 something.
11:11:31 But on this particular parcel it's private entities
11:11:35 buying and selling real estate and that sort of thing.
11:11:38 You know, it gets out of our hand.
11:11:40 We could just tell them, you know, to leave it alone
11:11:43 and that we wouldn't change anything.

11:11:46 But then they could just knock down the buildings,
11:11:48 close down those industries and leave raw land, which
11:11:51 doesn't accomplish anything either.
11:11:53 So in this case, the neighborhood said that they would
11:11:57 rather have -- to get rid of the industrial uses and
11:12:00 have residential uses because they are afraid of
11:12:06 spills or the types of gases that you are talking
11:12:08 about.
11:12:09 It's a tough one.
11:12:10 It's definitely a tough one.
11:12:12 >>> But they were in there first long before the
11:12:14 people across Westshore.
11:12:16 It was all marina at one time, okay?
11:12:20 The place that they are developing right now used to
11:12:22 be an old Westinghouse center. That was an estuary.
11:12:25 Not anymore.
11:12:26 Now it's what we call it the Westshore Yacht Club.
11:12:32 If I went down and decided I was going to cut down an
11:12:35 estuary like that, I would be in jail somewhere.
11:12:37 But, you know.
11:12:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, sir.
11:12:40 We need to wrap it up.

11:12:41 Time is up.
11:12:44 >>> Well, the question to you all is why do we need
11:12:46 more upscale housing?
11:12:50 Things out there like the marina that --
11:12:54 >>GWEN MILLER: I'm sorry, sir, your time is up.
11:12:57 You are way over your time.
11:12:59 >>> There are --
11:13:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
11:13:12 >>> Al Steenson, representing Gandy civic association.
11:13:16 I wasn't really going to speak this morning.
11:13:17 But since my name was brought up, I thought I better
11:13:21 come up --
11:13:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Are you defending yourself, Mr.
11:13:24 Steenson?
11:13:26 >>> Have a few words to say.
11:13:28 I'm just a messenger now.
11:13:34 The position the association is taking is the same one
11:13:37 that was presented to the Planning Commission August
11:13:39 11th.
11:13:40 Watts brought here to this council.
11:13:41 This will be the fourth time that I have been here.
11:13:44 I have the letter.

11:13:45 If it's not part of the record, I want to make it part
11:13:48 of the record.
11:13:49 Now, Randy used the words --
11:13:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Can I take it from you, please, so I
11:13:55 can give it to the clerk?
11:13:57 >>> Okay.
11:14:01 At this point they should be floating all over the
11:14:04 annex.
11:14:05 Randy used the term "transitional -- transition for
11:14:12 the gateway."
11:14:15 I submit to you that this administration, this
11:14:18 Planning Commission, this staff, this council, and
11:14:22 councils before you, have already started the
11:14:25 transition to the Gandy gateway.
11:14:31 Go down Westshore.
11:14:32 Look to your right.
11:14:33 Go down Tyson.
11:14:37 Look to the left and to the right.
11:14:38 If that's not transition, I don't know what transition
11:14:41 is.
11:14:42 You're right, Mr. Dingfelder, when we discussed this
11:14:44 in the association, yes.

11:14:45 One of things that we were counting on, and many of
11:14:49 the things that we are asking for here, will be taken
11:14:52 up at rezoning.
11:14:53 But, yes, we feel that those industries down there are
11:15:00 a hazard, and one of caveats is the issue of public
11:15:05 safety has to be addressed.
11:15:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Otherwise we will withdraw our support.
11:15:08 Now, LPG gas and chlorine are a matter of public
11:15:12 safety, I don't know what is.
11:15:16 And the other issue is, access to the waterfront.
11:15:20 We have seen articles in the paper recently where
11:15:23 people are losing boat slips, et cetera.
11:15:26 I notice in the ORC report they say they are going to
11:15:31 do on or before October 4, 2008, a transition study.
11:15:37 This is the time to low at whether we can come up with
11:15:39 a public-private maybe enterprise to get some boating
11:15:45 area back to the public.
11:15:48 We have lost it, tons and tons.
11:15:50 I can put my little 16-foot boat in the backyard.
11:15:53 I don't need a boat slip.
11:15:54 But, again, our position is the same as submitted in
11:16:00 our letters.

11:16:01 It's been here, and Planning Commission, and, again,
11:16:06 the transition has already started.
11:16:09 So --
11:16:13 >>CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Alvarez.
11:16:14 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Steenson, the only reason I am
11:16:17 supporting this is because I know, I'm hoping that I
11:16:21 know, maybe somebody knows something more than I know,
11:16:24 but that nothing is going to occur in here until these
11:16:30 two ventures move out.
11:16:33 And you and I will be around -- won't be around
11:16:37 because it's going to take that long.
11:16:39 >> Hopefully we'll be here.
11:16:43 >> Yeah.
11:16:44 I'm counting 20 years before anything happens.
11:16:47 >>> I'm 72.
11:16:48 92.
11:16:51 I'll still be alive.
11:16:52 >> I hope so, too, but we won't know what we are
11:16:54 doing, let me say that.
11:16:55 And I'm thinking that the public has the welfare this
11:17:02 community.
11:17:03 I struggled long and hard thinking about this thing.

11:17:05 And I read the amendments and all of that.
11:17:09 It's a hard thing because we are losing waterfront to
11:17:13 condominiums, to single-family.
11:17:18 Upscale?
11:17:19 Why don't they make it affordable where the average
11:17:22 person can go over there and live?
11:17:25 Next to the waterfront, you know?
11:17:27 Why do they have to go and make $500,000 homes?
11:17:31 Make them where anybody can afford it.
11:17:33 But that's the name of the game right now.
11:17:37 We can't say anything about it because it's private
11:17:39 property.
11:17:39 But I wish somebody would come up with an idea and
11:17:42 say, gosh, you know, maybe it would be nice to put a
11:17:45 nice area in there that anybody can afford.
11:17:48 But they don't do that.
11:17:50 So I'm with you.
11:17:54 >>> Well, my only comment to that, Ms. Alvarez, is
11:17:57 that, number one, I don't have a horse in that race.
11:18:05 Number two, we have got some time, as in the ORC
11:18:08 response, October 2008, to sit down, the city, the
11:18:12 developers, the residents, and get the input and see

11:18:15 if when can't come up with a transitional idea for the
11:18:19 Gandy gateway which does appear, I believe, on page 96
11:18:25 of the comprehensive land use plan, meaning is Gandy
11:18:29 just lick downtown?
11:18:30 It's a gateway area down there.
11:18:33 So that's the only comment I can make to that, is I'm
11:18:35 not the developer, but I do live there, and I hope to
11:18:39 be living there when I'm 92.
11:18:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:18:43 Need to close the public hearing.
11:18:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Before we do that, I believe there's
11:18:48 an issue of --
11:18:51 >>> John McKirchy, legal department, regarding the
11:18:54 changes to the ordinance.
11:18:58 The substitute, the exhibit A, is going to replace the
11:19:01 current exhibit A of the ordinance.
11:19:04 Exhibit A was handed out by Mr. Goers, entitled
11:19:07 proposed changes to the text amendments.
11:19:08 And we requested the record reflect a motion to amend
11:19:12 that substitute exhibit A, policy A-6-A .10 to delete
11:19:18 the second underlined phrase "on property designated
11:19:23 CMU-35."

11:19:25 That was reflected in the record.
11:19:27 That was the change requested by council member
11:19:29 Dingfelder.
11:19:30 I request there be a motion to reflect that.
11:19:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So the clean version on page 18 and
11:19:37 19 are the two pages that we are adopting, except that
11:19:41 we will be striking through on the sixth line the
11:19:45 words "on property designated CMU-35."
11:19:51 >> That's correct.
11:19:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is that a motion, councilman
11:19:54 Dingfelder?
11:19:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Alvarez made the motion.
11:19:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I was clarifying Ms. Alvarez's
11:19:59 motion.
11:19:59 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
11:20:01 (Motion carried).
11:20:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Question.
11:20:03 Will that be provided to council prior to the second
11:20:06 reading and adoption?
11:20:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we can put it in.
11:20:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we need to close the public
11:20:16 hearing.

11:20:17 >> So moved.
11:20:18 >> Second.
11:20:18 (Motion carried).
11:20:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Reddick, will you read that,
11:20:21 please?
11:20:25 Number 58.
11:20:26 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move an ordinance amending the Tampa
11:20:28 comprehensive plan, future land use element, section
11:20:32 IV, goals, objectives and policies, establishing an
11:20:35 objective and policies for the transition of
11:20:38 industrial lands to residential and mixed uses in a
11:20:41 specific area of the City of Tampa known as
11:20:43 Rattlesnake Point waterfront located west of Westshore
11:20:46 Boulevard and Tyson Avenue, providing for repeal of
11:20:49 all ordinances in conflict, providing for
11:20:51 severability, providing an effective date.
11:20:52 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
11:20:54 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
11:20:55 Opposed, Nay.
11:20:56 (Motion carried).
11:20:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, just for the record, I
11:21:03 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I recuse mason that.

11:21:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you have that, madam clerk?
11:21:10 Thank you.
11:21:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 61.
11:21:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I am going to support all of these
11:21:23 with great hesitancy.
11:21:25 And I say that very seriously.
11:21:28 There is a lot of mixed feelings about this
11:21:31 redevelopment plan for Rattlesnake Point.
11:21:33 But I think the most convincing thing to me to support
11:21:38 this is that Mr. Steenson is here on behalf of the
11:21:41 Gandy civic association.
11:21:43 So I know there are other neighbors here on behalf of
11:21:45 the Gandy neighborhood.
11:21:48 Sun bay south, excuse me.
11:21:51 And so the only word we have heard from this
11:21:54 neighborhood -- and this is the most directly impacted
11:21:56 neighborhood -- is they are in support of this away
11:21:59 from industrial and toward residential.
11:22:02 With that said, there will be great impact ultimately
11:22:04 when this thing is developed, thousands of units on
11:22:07 the entire South Tampa peninsula.
11:22:09 But if you live down there south of Gandy, no matter

11:22:11 where you are, you are going to be coming back up
11:22:13 through the peninsula to go somewhere.
11:22:15 And so, again, I am completely torn on this.
11:22:21 If residents from the rest of the peninsula were here
11:22:23 to give us their opinion on this, and the Gandy civic
11:22:26 association was feeling a different way, then I tell
11:22:29 you, I might be swinging a different way.
11:22:31 But so far, all we have heard is everybody is in favor
11:22:33 of this.
11:22:34 All the property owners are in favor of it.
11:22:36 The neighborhood association is in favor of it.
11:22:38 Therefore, I feel my hands are tied and ill support
11:22:42 it.
11:22:43 I move this.
11:22:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is this number 59?
11:22:48 >>MARY ALVAREZ: No, 61.
11:22:49 >>GWEN MILLER: 61.
11:22:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Number 61.
11:22:52 Move for first reading an ordinance amending the Tampa
11:22:55 comprehensive plan, future land use element, future
11:22:57 land use map for the property located in the general
11:22:59 vicinity of 5411 and 5301 west Tyson Avenue from heavy

11:23:04 industrial to community mixed use 35, providing for
11:23:07 repel of all ordinances in conflict, providing for
11:23:10 severability, providing an effective date.
11:23:11 Also, I want to restate what I said earlier, several
11:23:15 months ago, that when this comes back for rezoning,
11:23:18 and if I happen to be sitting here, I will not support
11:23:20 it unless they can figure out a way to make the needed
11:23:24 improvements to this area.
11:23:25 They have to improve Westshore.
11:23:27 They have to improve Bridge Street.
11:23:28 They have to improve Tyson Avenue and make the Tyson
11:23:32 Avenue cut through.
11:23:33 They have a lot of work to do before this thing can
11:23:36 get near re zoning.
11:23:37 That shot is across the bow for all these folks who
11:23:40 own this property.
11:23:42 >>GWEN MILLER: 20 years.
11:23:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 20 years from Mimi words will be on
11:23:50 the record I hope that some future council member will
11:23:52 read them and take the same precautions on the
11:23:54 rezoning that we are speaking to today.
11:23:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Saul-Sena?

11:23:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to thank the staff for
11:23:59 crediting a map that was absolutely helpful.
11:24:02 And for working with the private sector to develop
11:24:04 what seems to be a good compromise.
11:24:08 And my concern is -- and as a planner, it seems to me
11:24:13 logical that this area transitioned from industrial
11:24:16 uses to residential uses.
11:24:18 It's not that the Channel District for years was next
11:24:24 to the railroad, next to the port, functioned with
11:24:26 industrial uses, and now with the exception of
11:24:30 Con-Agra has transitioned to entertainment and other
11:24:34 uses that are more appropriate for an urban area.
11:24:37 We need to do this in a careful, thoughtful way and
11:24:42 need to certainly address the transportation issues
11:24:43 that Mr. Dingfelder raised.
11:24:45 But I think that looking at this from a planning
11:24:49 perspective, this is a more ultimately appropriate use
11:24:53 than what exist there is now so I support it.
11:24:55 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
11:24:56 (Motion carried).
11:24:59 >>THE CLERK: Who was the second?
11:25:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Reddick, did you second it?

11:25:05 Oh, Ms. Alvarez?
11:25:06 I'm sorry.
11:25:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Who was the maker of the motion?
11:25:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And Mr. Fletcher abstained.
11:25:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone to speak on item 62?
11:25:18 >> Move to close.
11:25:19 >> Second.
11:25:19 (Motion carried).
11:25:20 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to continue to February 8th.
11:25:32 >>> I sit here and listen to you all planning the
11:25:34 future of rattlesnake.
11:25:36 I think it's wrong.
11:25:37 I think the businesses have the right to exist.
11:25:41 They were there first.
11:25:44 I don't see why everyone has to pick on the places
11:25:49 that to live in like the ports.
11:25:53 Just leave us alone.
11:25:54 Let us work.
11:25:58 Thank you.
11:26:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 62.
11:26:04 Move to continue.
11:26:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Was the motion made to open number

11:26:08 62?
11:26:08 The gentleman just spoke.
11:26:10 And that was a motion to continue?
11:26:11 Is that what's happening?
11:26:14 Always Alvarez move to open it and then continue it.
11:26:16 I didn't know he was going to talk.
11:26:19 >>GWEN MILLER: We opened and closed it.
11:26:21 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to reopen 62.
11:26:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion to reopen.
11:26:24 (Motion carried).
11:26:26 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to continue to February.
11:26:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 5:01 p.m.?
11:26:32 >>GWEN MILLER: 5:01 p.m.
11:26:34 Is there anyone in the public to speak to 63?
11:26:39 >> Number 62 for the clerk, I want noted my
11:26:42 abstention.
11:26:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I was going to take ask the clerk to
11:26:45 take the time to record the votes.
11:26:49 Or have council announce it.
11:26:50 >>GWEN MILLER: We will.
11:26:51 63.
11:26:51 Anybody in the public want to speak on 63?

11:26:54 >> Move to close.
11:26:55 >> Second.
11:26:55 (Motion carried).
11:26:56 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move an ordinance amending the Tampa
11:27:02 comprehensive plan, future land use element, future
11:27:05 land use map, for the property located in the general
11:27:08 vicinity of 5410 west Tyson Avenue from heavy
11:27:11 industrial to community mixed use 35, providing for
11:27:15 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for
11:27:17 severability, providing an effective date.
11:27:20 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion an second. All in
11:27:22 favor of the motion say Iowa.
11:27:23 Opposed, Nay.
11:27:25 Need to open number 64.
11:27:28 >> So moved.
11:27:28 >> Second.
11:27:28 (Motion carried).
11:27:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Continue to February 8th.
11:27:31 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Are you going to ask for anybody to
11:27:35 talk?
11:27:35 >>GWEN MILLER: No, because it's continued.
11:27:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, we did the same thing with 62.

11:27:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: technically what you are doing is
11:27:43 continuing the second reading.
11:27:45 >>CHAIRMAN: Motion and second to continue item 64 to
11:27:48 February 8th.
11:27:49 >>MARY ALVAREZ: 5:01 p.m.
11:27:51 >>CHAIRMAN: Anybody in the public that wants to speak
11:27:53 on item 65?
11:27:55 >> Move to close.
11:27:56 >> Second.
11:27:56 (Motion carried).
11:27:57 >> Move an ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive
11:28:03 plan, future land use element, future land use map,
11:28:03 for the property located in the general vicinity of
11:28:06 5402 west Tyson Avenue from heavy industrial to
11:28:09 community mixed use 35 providing for repeal of all
11:28:12 ordinances in conflict providing for severability,
11:28:14 providing an effective date.
11:28:15 >> Motion and second.
11:28:16 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
11:28:17 (Motion carried)
11:28:18 Need to open item 66.
11:28:26 (Motion carried).

11:28:27 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Continue to February 8 at 5:01 p.m.
11:28:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public want to speak on
11:28:33 67?
11:28:34 >> Move to close.
11:28:34 >> Second.
11:28:35 (Motion carried).
11:28:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move an ordinance
11:28:39 amending the Tampa comprehensive plan, future land use
11:28:41 element, fought land use map for the property located
11:28:44 in the general vicinity of 5250, 5300, 5350, 5430, and
11:28:50 5440 west Tyson Avenue from heavy industrial to
11:28:53 community mixed use 35, providing for repeal of all
11:28:56 ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,
11:28:59 providing an effective date.
11:28:59 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
11:29:01 (Motion carried)
11:29:04 We need to open item 68.
11:29:05 >>: Move to open.
11:29:06 >> Second.
11:29:06 (Motion carried).
11:29:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to continue.
11:29:12 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Continue to February 8, 5:01 p.m.

11:29:16 (Motion Carried).
11:29:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Item number 59, if you will open that
11:29:25 and continue that.
11:29:26 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to open.
11:29:30 >> Second.
11:29:31 (Motion carried).
11:29:32 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to continue to February 8th,
11:29:35 5:01 p.m.
11:29:36 >> Second.
11:29:36 (Motion carried).
11:29:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Bee need to go back to the regular
11:29:40 agenda.
11:29:42 And to our audience portion.
11:29:43 Anyone in the public that would like to speak to any
11:29:47 item on the agenda not set for a public hearing.
11:29:57 Okay.
11:29:57 We need to go to item number 12 for first reading oh
11:30:01 page.
11:30:19 >> An in accordance authorizing the installation and
11:30:21 maintenance of an encroachment, canopy, by Antonakos
11:30:30 Floridan LLC over a portion of the public right-of-way
11:30:34 known as North Florida Avenue and east Cass Street

11:30:36 near the intersection of North Florida Avenue and east
11:30:38 Cass Street as more particularly described herein
11:30:41 subject to certain terms, covenants, conditions and
11:30:43 agreements as more particularly described herein
11:30:45 providing an effective date.
11:30:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This is very exciting because it
11:30:49 means the Floridan hotel will have an awning, it's
11:30:54 being renovated, and this new owner is transforming it
11:30:57 into something we can be proud of.
11:30:59 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Is he going to do a garage back there?
11:31:04 >>CHAIRMAN: Yes.
11:31:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We really need parking in that
11:31:08 area.
11:31:09 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
11:31:10 (Motion carried).
11:31:12 >> We go to committee reports.
11:31:16 Public safety.
11:31:21 Mary Alvarez.
11:31:22 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I move item 13.
11:31:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.
11:31:25 (Motion carried).
11:31:28 >> Parks and recreation, frank Reddick.

11:31:32 >> Move 14 through 17.
11:31:33 >> Second.
11:31:33 (Motion carried).
11:31:34 >>CHAIRMAN: Public works vice chair.
11:31:42 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move 18 through 24.
11:31:45 >> Second.
11:31:45 (Motion carried).
11:31:47 >> Finance, Mr. Charles Fletcher.
11:31:49 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Move items 22 through 31.
11:31:52 >> Second.
11:31:53 (Motion carried).
11:31:56 >> Building and zoning, Linda Saul-Sena.
11:31:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: With regards to items 29 through
11:32:01 31, I believe that also includes the add-on, if you
11:32:04 can just announce the petition number.
11:32:07 >>> 07-03 is also a temporary wet zoning for
11:32:11 Gasparilla.
11:32:11 >> And that was previously approved as an add-on.
11:32:15 (Motion carried).
11:32:17 >>CHAIRMAN: Building and zoning, Mrs. Linda Saul-Sena.
11:32:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move resolution 32
11:32:25 through 37.

11:32:26 >> Second.
11:32:26 (Motion carried)
11:32:32 Transportation.
11:32:32 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move 38 and 39.
11:32:37 >> Second.
11:32:37 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to set new business items 40
11:32:41 through 51.
11:32:43 >> Second.
11:32:43 (Motion Carried).
11:32:44 >>CHAIRMAN: Now we go to second reading.
11:32:52 Anyone in the public that wants to speak on 52 and 53,
11:32:55 raise your right hand.
11:32:57 All the way to 56.
11:33:00 Anyone going to speak on those items, please stand and
11:33:02 raise your right hand.
11:33:05 52 to 56.
11:33:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I see no one.
11:33:10 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion to open items 52 to
11:33:12 56.
11:33:13 All in favor say Aye.
11:33:13 (Motion carried).
11:33:15 Anyone in the public that wants to speak on item 52.

11:33:17 >> Need to close.
11:33:18 >> Second.
11:33:18 (Motion Carried).
11:33:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move to adopt the following ordinance
11:33:25 upon second reading, an ordinance of the City of
11:33:28 Tampa, Florida amending section 19-77 City of Tampa
11:33:33 code of ordinances animals as public nuisance deleting
11:33:36 section 19-77-B repealing all ordinances or parts of
11:33:40 ordinances in conflict therewith, providing for
11:33:42 severability, providing an effective date.
11:33:44 >> Motion and second.
11:33:45 Vote and record.
11:33:52 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried.
11:34:06 Dingfelder absent at vote.
11:34:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public want to speak on
11:34:10 item 53?
11:34:11 >> Move to close.
11:34:11 >> Second.
11:34:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to speak to it.
11:34:17 This is a last-ditch effort to convince my colleagues
11:34:19 that we have situations where we have residential uses
11:34:22 next to heavy commercial uses, and people in the

11:34:26 residential uses really don't want to have the
11:34:31 electric fences right next to them.
11:34:32 I think it's feign for areas where it's just all
11:34:35 industrial uses.
11:34:37 So what I would encourage you to do is not support
11:34:40 this but allow legal to change it so that if people
11:34:46 want to do this, and there's adjacent residential
11:34:48 zoning, or uses, that they have to come before council
11:34:51 for a hearing.
11:34:53 So that's why I won't be supporting this.
11:34:55 I encourage you to, also, so we can make that change.
11:34:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close.
11:34:59 (Motion carried).
11:35:01 >>MARY ALVAREZ: You know, I kind of agreed with Ms.
11:35:04 Saul-Sena on that, if it comes in on an individual
11:35:09 basis, it would probably be the better thing so I
11:35:11 won't be able to support this.
11:35:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: I wanted to echo the same comments.
11:35:18 I will not be supporting this based on the same
11:35:21 reasons that I heard.
11:35:23 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I can't believe we're here.
11:35:32 I can't belief when would change course on this.

11:35:36 >> And just so we are clear, I was the other mover on
11:35:39 this one instead of Mr. Dingfelder.
11:35:41 So that's why I'm on this one.
11:35:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
11:35:44 We are going to hold this for Mr. Dingfelder to come
11:35:46 back.
11:35:47 >> Why don't we go ahead and vote and then we can have
11:35:49 another -- I would like to call the question.
11:35:59 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
11:36:00 I want to remind council, this is a privately
11:36:02 initiated text amendment.
11:36:04 And because it's a privately initiated text amendment,
11:36:06 and as you may recall, after it came forward first,
11:36:09 there was some discussion, and there was some
11:36:11 modifications made to the privately initiated text
11:36:14 amendment to deal with some of the concerns of
11:36:15 council.
11:36:16 So if it is no longer council's wish to approve this
11:36:19 particular privately initiated text amendment, my
11:36:22 recommendation would be to deny it, and then ask staff
11:36:27 to look at part of the second round of chapter 27 at
11:36:30 this issue.

11:36:32 I am a little concerned because I don't see the people
11:36:34 here who were the ones who initiated that, even though
11:36:40 it is a public hearing, they are aware of the public
11:36:41 hearing and they should have been aware they needed to
11:36:43 be here just in case council decided to do something
11:36:46 differently.
11:36:46 So I wanted to leave those issues.
11:36:49 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Madam Chair.
11:36:53 Mrs. Saul-Sena's stick-to-it-iveness may have
11:36:56 succeeded on this one.
11:36:57 I don't have a dog in this one.
11:36:59 I really don't care.
11:37:01 But I do think that we have -- we had at least a
11:37:05 couple of public hearings on this.
11:37:06 As I recall, there was no opposition.
11:37:11 Seemed to me like maybe Randy baron from old Seminole
11:37:15 sites association was here the first time once we
11:37:17 reached a compromise which is where we are today.
11:37:20 Their opposition went away.
11:37:22 And where we are now is, we had nothing other than
11:37:29 truly no opposition from the public that has ever been
11:37:32 presented at the podium.

11:37:33 If we don't pass this today, then we will be reopening
11:37:37 this whole dough bait.
11:37:39 And I think that the dough bait has gone on long
11:37:42 enough.
11:37:46 I think that we need to respect the system of how we
11:37:49 got here today and go ahead and pass this.
11:37:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:37:53 I appreciate what you said, Mr. Harrison.
11:37:55 I know didn't -- I heard from the public and
11:38:01 residential areas who have concerns about this.
11:38:03 I would like to come up with a compromise that would
11:38:06 be satisfying.
11:38:07 And I think that would be to allow the property owners
11:38:09 who have industrial property, who have zoned
11:38:12 industrial property, who want to protect it with these
11:38:15 electric fences to do it.
11:38:16 But if it's adjacent to a residential use, which is
11:38:20 probably only a small percentage of the cases, that it
11:38:25 come before a body lick either City Council or the
11:38:28 variance review board.
11:38:29 And I leave that to legal to come back to us with a
11:38:32 suggestion which would be better.

11:38:34 So that the neighbors get a chance to weigh in.
11:38:36 Because we did hear initially from -- and I remember
11:38:38 more than just -- a number of neighbors.
11:38:42 Not a great number but, you know, a handful of
11:38:45 neighbors, that said they had concerns about it.
11:38:46 I think this will allow the additional protection that
11:38:51 the industrial people want and I think allow the
11:38:53 additional protection that the neighbors want.
11:38:54 And I think this is not so complicated we could move
11:38:57 on this pretty quickly.
11:38:58 So I encourage my colleagues to vote no on this and
11:39:01 immediately ask legal to come back to us in 30 days
11:39:06 with an improved version.
11:39:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Cole suggested maybe we withdraw
11:39:11 it.
11:39:13 >> No.
11:39:14 >>GWEN MILLER: What did you say, deny it?
11:39:17 >>JULIA COLE: I think at this point the most
11:39:19 appropriate thing would be to vote this particular
11:39:21 amendment up or down, as it was a privately initiated
11:39:23 text amendment.
11:39:24 And then what you may want to do afterwards is request

11:39:26 staff take a look at this issue again, especially in
11:39:30 light of the concerns that arose from council and
11:39:32 bring it forward as part of the text amendment in the
11:39:35 second round, which I believe will move forward in
11:39:41 July.
11:39:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Call the question.
11:39:44 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I'll read it and see what happens.
11:39:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Vote it up or down.
11:39:48 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to adopt the following
11:39:50 ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance of the
11:39:52 city of Tampa, Florida City of Tampa code of
11:39:55 ordinances chapter 27 zoning section 27-133 fence and
11:39:59 wall regulations by allowing electric fences under
11:40:01 certain conditions, providing for severability,
11:40:03 providing for re pale of all ordinances in conflict,
11:40:05 providing an effective date.
11:40:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Question on the motion.
11:40:07 Mr. Dingfelder.
11:40:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I agree wholeheartedly with Mrs.
11:40:12 Saul-Sena.
11:40:12 They made a very strong case for allowing them for
11:40:15 these unusual situations, where the property is kind

11:40:17 of isolated, they have security situations like that.
11:40:20 And I think it's completely reasonable for the city to
11:40:23 allow this.
11:40:24 But they need some oversight.
11:40:26 I think the variance review board would be perfect for
11:40:28 that type of review.
11:40:30 And so I will support the motion to deny.
11:40:33 This motion.
11:40:35 Then the subsequent motion will be to direct staff to
11:40:38 revisit this as a special use permit and to come in
11:40:41 front of the VRB.
11:40:43 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and a second.
11:40:45 Vote and record.
11:40:58 No one seconded the motion.
11:40:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
11:41:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No, no, I didn't second it.
11:41:12 Trying to get the vote up.
11:41:16 >>THE CLERK: The motion failed with Alvarez,
11:41:20 Dingfelder, Harrison voting no.
11:41:27 >>GWEN MILLER: No.
11:41:32 >> Can we just do it verbally to contained of get the
11:41:35 show on the road?

11:41:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Vote and record again.
11:41:48 Vote again.
11:41:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Madam Chair, don't mess it up.
11:41:57 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Alvarez, Dingfelder,
11:42:02 Fletcher, Miller, Reddick and Saul-Sena voting no and
11:42:07 Harrison voting yes.
11:42:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do you need an affirmative vote to
11:42:10 kill the ordinance?
11:42:11 >>GWEN MILLER: To bring it back.
11:42:13 >> Need an affirmative vote to deny the text amendment
11:42:16 request.
11:42:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move to deny the text amendment
11:42:19 request.
11:42:20 >> Second.
11:42:20 (Motion carried).
11:42:24 >>THE CLERK: Harrison, no.
11:42:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move that legal department come
11:42:30 back in 30 days with this modified so that if there is
11:42:35 an adjacent residential zoning or use that this not
11:42:42 automatically be allowed, that it go to the VRB for a
11:42:45 variance.
11:42:48 >>MARY ALVAREZ: A variance or a form of --

11:42:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to ask legal to come
11:42:54 back to us with a recommendation on that.
11:42:56 >>JULIA COLE: legal department.
11:42:57 We can bring back recommendations as relates to this
11:43:00 issue.
11:43:00 But as I stated earlier, because of chapter 7
11:43:03 requirements for the text amendment, just wouldn't be
11:43:07 able to move forward until the July cycle.
11:43:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to you bring it back now so
11:43:11 we'll have time to workshop it, everybody, the people
11:43:14 who want it, the people who don't want it so we are
11:43:17 sure of what we want.
11:43:18 >> And I would request that from the staff because
11:43:20 they are the one whose drafted this ordinance.
11:43:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Did we get a second on that?
11:43:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
11:43:34 >>> Mrs. Saul-Sena's suggestion last time that it be a
11:43:38 special use permit, that it might be easier to
11:43:44 administer.
11:43:46 >> The type that comes to us?
11:43:50 >> To talk to staff, administrative staff.
11:43:54 >>GWEN MILLER: She doesn't know what to do.

11:43:56 Bring it back to us.
11:43:59 >>> We have many potential -- all of them receive
11:44:03 notice, a 30 day notice, so they can bring it back.
11:44:06 60 days?
11:44:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Friendly amendment.
11:44:13 >> All in favor of that motion say Aye.
11:44:14 Opposed, Nay:
11:44:16 (Motion carried)
11:44:17 Item number 54.
11:44:18 >> Move to open.
11:44:20 >> Anyone in the public that wants to speak on item
11:44:22 54?
11:44:23 >> Move to close.
11:44:24 >> Second.
11:44:24 (Motion carried).
11:44:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to adopt the following ordinance
11:44:31 upon second reading.
11:44:32 An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity
11:44:34 of 3813 west Bay Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida
11:44:45 and more particularly described in section 1 from
11:44:47 zoning district classifications RS-60 residential
11:44:49 single family to RS-50 residential single family

11:44:52 providing an effective date.
11:44:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:44:56 Vote and record.
11:45:02 Mr. Fletcher, have you voted?
11:45:04 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
11:45:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
11:45:20 (off microphone).
11:45:21 >>GWEN MILLER: They are not doing it in this room.
11:45:24 Anyone in the public want to speak on item 55?
11:45:27 Motion and second to close.
11:45:29 (Motion carried).
11:45:32 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to adopt the following
11:45:34 ordinance on second reading, an ordinance rezoning
11:45:36 property in the general vicinity of 4008 east 10th
11:45:40 Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida and more
11:45:42 particularly described in section 1 from zoning
11:45:43 district classifications CG commercial general to CI
11:45:46 commercial intensive providing an effective date.
11:45:48 >> Motion and second.
11:45:52 Vote and record.
11:45:54 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
11:46:01 >> Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak

11:46:04 on item 66?
11:46:05 >> Move to close.
11:46:05 >> Second.
11:46:06 (Motion carried).
11:46:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to move the following
11:46:11 ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance rezoning
11:46:13 property in the general vicinity of 3110 and 3112 west
11:46:18 Abdela street in the city of Tampa, Florida and more
11:46:20 particularly described in section 1 from zoning
11:46:22 district classifications RS-50 residential
11:46:25 single-family to PD planned development single-family
11:46:29 detached residential providing an effective date.
11:46:31 >> Motion and second.
11:46:32 Vote and record.
11:46:35 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
11:46:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to open number 57.
11:46:45 >> So moved.
11:46:47 >> Second.
11:46:47 (Motion carried).
11:46:47 >>> John McKirchey, legal department, request this be
11:46:55 continued to February 8, 2007, 5:01 p.m.
11:47:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 60.

11:47:12 >> John McKirchy, legal department.
11:47:15 >> What number?
11:47:16 >> 60.
11:47:22 >> Request to continue to February 8, 2007, 5:01 p.m.
11:47:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just so you understand the reason for
11:47:34 that.
11:47:35 Because these all have to be, all these have to be
11:47:39 adopted on the same day per state law.
11:47:43 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open number 59.
11:47:46 >> So moved.
11:47:47 >> Second.
11:47:47 (Motion carried).
11:47:51 >>> Same request.
11:47:55 >> So moved.
11:47:55 >> Second.
11:47:55 >>GWEN MILLER: February 8, 5:01.
11:47:59 (Motion Carried)
11:48:05 >> You want to continue that to July 19th?
11:48:16 Motion and second to open.
11:48:22 July 19, 2007, 9:30.
11:48:26 Motion and second.
11:48:27 All in favor say Aye.

11:48:28 (Motion carried)
11:48:29 Number 71.
11:48:31 Public hearing continued to February 1.
11:48:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to continue to February 1st.
11:48:42 >>GWEN MILLER: At 9:30.
11:48:43 (Motion carried).
11:48:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 72.
11:48:50 Need to open.
11:48:51 >> So moved.
11:48:52 >> Second.
11:48:52 (Motion carried).
11:48:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public that's going to
11:48:56 speak on 72 through 76 please stand and raise your
11:48:58 right hand.
11:49:05 (Oath administered by Clerk).
11:49:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you, council.
11:49:11 I would ask that all written communications relative
11:49:13 to today's hearing that have been available for public
11:49:16 inspection be received and filed.
11:49:18 Do you have anything?
11:49:19 Nothing has been received?
11:49:21 Council, a reminder please to disclose any ex parte

11:49:25 communications prior to the vote.
11:49:27 And thirdly, when you do state your name, please
11:49:31 reaffirm for the record that you have been sworn.
11:49:32 Thank you.
11:49:35 >>ROLANDO SANTIAGO: What you have before you today is
11:49:39 a petition to establish a non-ad valorem
11:49:41 streetlighting assessment districted located the
11:49:46 district main and geographic area of the south
11:49:51 Fitzgerald street.
11:49:54 This will impose an assessment on the streetlighting
11:49:58 in that district for the operation, maintenance of
11:50:00 streetlights.
11:50:01 This public hearing has been noticed, also an
11:50:04 agreement with the developer to further provide notice
11:50:07 of any transfers of the property.
11:50:09 The public hearing is before you now.
11:50:11 The nuance for these particular provisions is if you
11:50:15 charges to move forward with this particular
11:50:17 resolution today, you must adopt it while the public
11:50:20 hearing is still open.
11:50:21 And adopting the resolution to establish the uniform
11:50:25 method for levy. This will come back in one.

11:50:32 That is all.
11:50:34 I have a draft resolution.
11:50:35 >> Anyone in the public that wants to speak on item
11:50:37 72?
11:50:38 Mrs. Saul-Sena?
11:50:38 >> I just have a request if petitioner is here.
11:50:45 I was just curious whether they were putting the
11:50:47 distribution lines underground.
11:50:55 >> Mr. Fletcher?
11:50:56 >> Use the uniform method of levying and collecting
11:51:18 ad valorem assessment for the City of Tampa for the
11:51:21 maintaining and operating street lights in a portion
11:51:23 of the Port Tampa city subdivision generally located
11:51:26 at the intersection of south Fitzgerald street and
11:51:32 west Idaho street, a subdivision in the City of Tampa,
11:51:34 Hillsborough County Florida the same being more fully
11:51:37 described herein providing an effective date.
11:51:38 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
11:51:39 (Motion carried).
11:51:40 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
11:51:43 >> So moved.
11:51:43 >> Second.

11:51:43 (Motion carried).
11:51:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 73.
11:51:53 Need to open that.
11:51:57 (Motion Carried).
11:52:02 >>> City preservation, here for 73, 74, 75.
11:52:04 >>CHAIRMAN: We need to open all of those.
11:52:08 >> So moved.
11:52:09 >> Second.
11:52:09 (Motion carried).
11:52:11 >>> 73 and 74, they were houses in the Ybor Historic
11:52:13 District, both moved in 2002.
11:52:16 The first one was moved from 1221 east 13th Avenue
11:52:21 to 2551 eleventh Avenue and the second within moved in
11:52:30 2002 as well from 1219 to 2553.
11:52:40 Both of these structures do meet the intent of the
11:52:44 secretary interior standards for rehabilitation and
11:52:47 listed on the national and local registers.
11:52:53 Just so you can understand, they were together prior
11:52:56 to the relocation, and they were placed side by side.
11:53:02 This is 2551, 2553, Columbus drive would be to the
11:53:07 north.
11:53:08 22nd would be to the west.

11:53:10 Palm Avenue would be to the south.
11:53:16 Also, so you get a better understanding of how they
11:53:18 look today.
11:53:19 This is after rehabilitation.
11:53:23 We were lucky enough to get some additional photos of
11:53:27 how the front porch looked.
11:53:28 I guess these were around the 40s.
11:53:30 But it shows if house at 2551.
11:53:34 The columns are in place, in the rehabilitation
11:53:40 process.
11:53:40 And you see the French doors with the shutters behind.
11:53:44 You see this is just another photo showing the transom
11:53:50 with the shutters and the columns.
11:53:53 And then the last historic photo that we have is one
11:53:57 of the porch.
11:53:58 And you see here how the siding is under the trim
11:54:03 board.
11:54:06 This is just a photo. Move and the condition of the
11:54:10 house.
11:54:14 After relocation.
11:54:15 That's the front facade.
11:54:17 This is the west and the rear.

11:54:23 And how it appears today.
11:54:28 This is a fought oft kitchen.
11:54:36 And after rehabilitation.
11:54:38 And the last one on this structure is just an interior
11:54:41 shot showing the I am appropriate paneling and floor.
11:54:46 And after rehabilitation.
11:54:50 With the wainscoting, original floors, refurbished, or
11:54:55 replaced the new flooring.
11:54:57 The ceiling heights were respected and the walls, and
11:55:01 there is a transom here where the opening is at.
11:55:07 This is the abutting house.
11:55:11 Prior to relocation.
11:55:18 And the kitchen.
11:55:21 Prior condition.
11:55:26 This is the casing.
11:55:29 The cabinetries and lighting.
11:55:33 Here once again showing the inappropriate
11:55:35 modifications.
11:55:38 And how it appears today.
11:55:43 Do you want to go ahead and comment on these and let
11:55:45 me go to the next one?
11:55:46 Because the next one is at Hyde Park.

11:55:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do these first.
11:55:51 >>MARY ALVAREZ: what I wanted to say is this is a
11:55:53 continuation of the FDOT taking responsibility for the
11:55:57 homes that they displaced, and what a great job that
11:56:00 they have done in rehabilitating these homes that were
11:56:05 so near and der to the people in the Ybor City area.
11:56:08 And I am just so honored to move this ordinance.
11:56:16 I've seen their work and I'm just absolutely amazed at
11:56:20 what they have done with the rehabilitation of these
11:56:23 structures.
11:56:27 In saving them.
11:56:35 >> Do you know what the purchase praise of these was?
11:56:38 >> I think around 130.
11:56:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What's really great is that we the
11:56:42 city get the money from the sales of these and it's
11:56:45 putting into a resolving loan fund for historic
11:56:48 preservation in the area that were impacted by the
11:56:50 interstate widening.
11:56:51 And frankly, I don't know -- I don't think we made
11:56:55 many loans that they come through council for
11:56:59 approval.
11:56:59 What I would love to do is maybe in three weeks

11:57:02 request a report.
11:57:02 It can be written.
11:57:05 I think from the administration on how much money is
11:57:07 in our Rae involving loan fund, how much we have given
11:57:11 out, and what our process is.
11:57:12 Because I think we need to publicize it a little more.
11:57:15 There's no point in this money sitting in the banks.
11:57:18 It's better spent on fixing up houses and letting them
11:57:21 pay back.
11:57:22 So my motion --
11:57:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
11:57:28 wants to speak on 73 or 74?
11:57:31 >> Move to close.
11:57:32 >> Second.
11:57:32 (Motion carried).
11:57:37 >>> An ordinance approving a historic preservation
11:57:40 property tax exemption relative to the restoration,
11:57:43 renovation, or rehabilitation of certain property
11:57:45 owned by the Florida Department of Transportation
11:57:48 located at 2551 east Meredith Avenue, Tampa, Florida
11:57:54 Ybor City historic district based on certain findings
11:57:56 providing for notice to the property appraiser for

11:57:58 Hillsborough County, providing for severability,
11:58:01 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
11:58:04 providing an effective date.
11:58:04 >> I have a motion and second.
11:58:06 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
11:58:08 Opposed?
11:58:10 We have some other ones.
11:58:14 >> We have an ordinance for 73?
11:58:19 >> Give it to me.
11:58:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead, read it.
11:58:30 >> I did both of them at the same time.
11:58:31 >> An ordinance approving preservation property tax
11:58:35 exemption application for the restoration, of certain
11:58:39 property owned by Florida Department of Transportation
11:58:41 located at 2553 east eleventh Avenue, Tampa, Florida
11:58:45 in the Ybor City historic district based on certain
11:58:48 findings providing for notice the property appraiser
11:58:51 of Hillsborough County providing for severability,
11:58:54 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
11:58:57 parathyroidectomy.
11:58:57 >>CHAIRMAN: Motion and second.
11:58:59 (Motion carried)

11:59:00 >> Now make your motion.
11:59:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to request the
11:59:03 administration in three weeks provide a report on the
11:59:06 revolving loan trust fund for including how much money
11:59:11 is in the fund, how many grants have been awarded,
11:59:16 when the next due date is for people to apply, and
11:59:19 anything else that Ms. Alvarez might want to add.
11:59:26 In three weeks under staff reports.
11:59:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Second.
11:59:30 (Motion carried).
11:59:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Now number 75.
11:59:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to open.
11:59:43 >>> This property is located at 1001 Dakota Avenue,
11:59:49 contributing structure in the Hyde Park district,
11:59:53 built in 18 -- 1918 built by Scott Fitzgerald.
11:59:57 This is located on the historic places, complies with
12:00:01 the secretary of interior standards, and Mets all the
12:00:05 criterion established.
12:00:07 This is the front elevation of the property prior to
12:00:09 relocation.
12:00:10 This property, when renovation was started was in a
12:00:15 multifamily capacity.

12:00:18 The current owner want single-family.
12:00:24 They recreated the front porch.
12:00:26 We have evidence of this through the Sanborns as well.
12:00:30 So that's what we used on the basis for the recreation
12:00:32 of the front porch.
12:00:34 And the porch above.
12:00:41 Back in the day?
12:00:42 >>> This is the north elevation.
12:00:43 This is the front here.
12:00:44 There is a front door.
12:00:45 You see multiple doors here.
12:00:48 That led to the multifamily.
12:00:50 This is that same elevation here.
12:00:54 And this is in addition.
12:00:56 That was approved by the A.R.C.
12:01:00 The photo showing the carriage house.
12:01:04 And how it's rehabilitated.
12:01:06 You can see proportions.
12:01:12 Lastly I have a couple interior photos.
12:01:13 This is the condition of one of the bathrooms.
12:01:19 Here is the cabinetry.

12:01:27 The last photo.
12:01:30 This is to show that you can do contemporary.
12:01:39 Can install contemporary fixtures while maintaining
12:01:44 the look of the day.
12:01:46 And that concludes this presentation.
12:01:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
12:01:50 wants to speak on item 75?
12:01:52 >> Move to close.
12:01:52 >> Second.
12:01:53 (Motion carried).
12:01:53 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move answer ordinance approving
12:01:57 historic property tax exemption application relative
12:02:00 to the restoration, renovation or rehabilitation of
12:02:02 certain property owned by Scott C. Fitzgerald located
12:02:06 at 1001 South Dakota Avenue Tampa, Florida in the Hyde
12:02:09 Park historic district the same being more fully
12:02:12 described in section 2 hereof providing for repeal of
12:02:16 all ordinances in conflict providing an effective
12:02:17 date.
12:02:17 >>CHAIRMAN: Motion and second.
12:02:19 (Motion carried)
12:02:20 Now, council members, it's 12:00.

12:02:22 What is your pleasure?
12:02:24 >> Move to continue till we finish.
12:02:28 Move.
12:02:29 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move we waive the rules and continue
12:02:30 on till we finish the agenda.
12:02:32 >>MARY ALVAREZ: It shouldn't take long.
12:02:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Are we having appeal hearing number
12:02:38 79?
12:02:39 >> Yes.
12:02:39 We'll get through that.
12:02:41 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
12:02:42 (Motion carried)
12:02:44 We need to open item number 76.
12:02:47 >> So moved.
12:02:48 >> Second.
12:02:48 (Motion carried)
12:02:56 >>> Kathy Ginster on behalf of the legal department
12:02:58 here today.
12:03:00 This is the first of two required public hearings
12:03:03 scheduled on the application for brownfield
12:03:06 designation.
12:03:08 The application is for the former TECO power plant

12:03:12 property, which is located in hackers point area.
12:03:17 Staff is recommending the designation of the
12:03:18 brownfield be approved.
12:03:20 There will be a report on file with the city clerk's
12:03:23 office for anyone to review entitled staff report on
12:03:28 the former TECO power plant application for brownfield
12:03:34 designation.
12:03:35 And the next public hearing is scheduled for February
12:03:37 8th at 5:30 p.m.
12:03:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public want to speak on
12:03:44 item 76?
12:03:45 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.
12:03:47 >> Second.
12:03:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Just move the resolution?
12:03:51 Okay.
12:03:51 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move the resolution.
12:04:01 >>> Present it to you on February 8th for
12:04:03 approval.
12:04:04 >>GWEN MILLER: We don't do anything today?
12:04:07 >>> In a.
12:04:07 >>GWEN MILLER: We move on to item number 77.
12:04:09 A continued public hearing.

12:04:11 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
12:04:13 City Council requested that this be continued for one
12:04:14 week for us to try to provide an alternative to give
12:04:18 City Council some assurances about this wet zoning.
12:04:22 City Council probably recalls this is the third time
12:04:25 requesting a permanent wet zoning on this site.
12:04:27 Two years ago they came in for permanent wet zoning
12:04:29 and were advised that they in fact did not have the
12:04:31 correct zoning.
12:04:32 They were granted a continuance that year and advised
12:04:35 to come back the next year requesting permanent, in
12:04:39 conjunction with the rezoning request.
12:04:40 They did that last year.
12:04:42 In fact, rezoning changed.
12:04:44 However, at the public hearing it came to everyone's
12:04:47 attention that the wet zoning would dry up.
12:04:51 They were going to another conditional and City
12:04:53 Council asked staff and legal department to come back
12:04:55 with an amendment to chapter 3, which would address
12:04:58 situations such as MOSI that have only part-time
12:05:05 providing cultural benefits to the community.
12:05:07 We did that and City Council approved that amendment.

12:05:09 So currently, public parks facilities, which this is
12:05:13 one, are not subject to chapter 390 provisions.
12:05:17 I would like to call it to City Council's attention
12:05:20 that they are a 4(COP-X).
12:05:24 However because they need waivers the sale of
12:05:26 alcoholic beverages must always be incidental to the
12:05:29 primary use of business.
12:05:31 If council needs additional assurances we could add a
12:05:34 condition to the wet zoning ordinance which sites that
12:05:38 the sale of alcoholic beverages must be incidental to
12:05:41 the use of the facility of the public facility.
12:05:45 I have a draft of that ordinance ready today if that's
12:05:49 the wish of City Council.
12:05:50 >>SHAWN HARRISON: And that would allow to all of the
12:05:52 land zoned here.
12:05:54 So, for instance, I think it's all owned by
12:05:57 Hillsborough County anyway.
12:06:00 But if Hillsborough County decided to sell off a
12:06:02 little sliver somewhere, how would that impact that
12:06:06 little piece of land?
12:06:07 Because it still had the wet zoning but would still
12:06:10 have that condition that no matter what that sliver is

12:06:13 you have to have an agricultural center there or else
12:06:15 you can't sell alcohol?
12:06:16 >> The wet zoning would have to be amended.
12:06:24 >> As long as we are protected.
12:06:26 >> And I don't believe you took public comment.
12:06:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
12:06:30 wants to speak on item 77?
12:06:32 >> Move to close.
12:06:33 >> Second.
12:06:33 (Motion carried).
12:06:53 >> Move AP ordinance repealing ordinance number
12:06:55 2006-32 making lawful the sale of beverages containing
12:06:58 alcohol regardless of alcoholic content, beer wine and
12:07:00 liquor, 4(COP-X), for consumption on premises only at
12:07:03 or from that certain lot, plot or tract of land
12:07:05 located at 4601 and 4615 east Fowler Avenue and 11315
12:07:11 north 46th street, Tampa, Florida, as more
12:07:13 particularly described in section 3 hereof waiving
12:07:15 certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain
12:07:18 findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
12:07:20 conflict, providing an effective date.
12:07:22 And I want to commend staff and legal for coming up

12:07:24 with this.
12:07:25 This solves the concerns we had earlier.
12:07:28 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
12:07:29 (Motion carried)
12:07:32 Item 78 to be continued to February 1 at 9:30.
12:07:38 >> So moved.
12:07:39 >> Second.
12:07:39 (Motion carried).
12:07:40 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open number 79.
12:07:42 >> So moved.
12:07:43 >> Second.
12:07:47 >> Anyone in the public that wants to speak on item 79
12:07:49 please stand and raise your right hand.
12:07:51 Anybody that's going to speak on 79, please stand and
12:07:54 raise your right hand.
12:08:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, traditionally at an appeal
12:08:16 hearing, this is an appeal from a decision of the
12:08:19 variance review board, property at 4605 south Gaines
12:08:26 road.
12:08:28 Customarily council has allowed 15 minutes to present
12:08:30 the case and 3 minute rebuttal at the conclusion of
12:08:33 testimony.

12:08:34 Again to refresh your recollection, I'm sure you are
12:08:36 familiar with the basis for the appeal.
12:08:37 It is a certiorari basis.
12:08:40 And your choice at this stage is to either affirm the
12:08:45 decision of the VRB or to remand with instructions.
12:08:51 You have to rely on the evidence below.
12:08:55 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We typically have someone from our
12:08:57 staff to sort of give us an overview of what happened
12:09:00 at the VRB so we have an idea before we launch right
12:09:03 into the appellant's --
12:09:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If it's council's choice to do that.
12:09:14 >>MARTY BOYLE McDONALD: If that's your choice, legal
12:09:16 has directed us to not go ahead and give a
12:09:21 presentation and let the full presentation be by the
12:09:23 petitioner.
12:09:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, go ahead then.
12:09:28 >>> Good afternoon.
12:09:29 I appreciate having the opportunity --
12:09:32 >> Put your name on the record for me first.
12:09:34 >>> My name is Carolyn Wolfe.
12:09:36 I have been sworn.
12:09:37 I appreciate having the opportunity to address the

12:09:39 council with my concerns.
12:09:42 Regarding the denial of the VRB-06-126.
12:09:47 The process applying for variance has been very
12:09:51 stressful and frustrating for the average citizen.
12:10:01 I thought teaching hi school students was frustrating
12:10:04 but this really has been.
12:10:06 Considering what the board considers as hardship is
12:10:08 difficult.
12:10:08 As written, I'm not sure anyone can meet all of the
12:10:12 criteria. Land development indicated to me that the
12:10:14 hardship is currently being reevaluated.
12:10:17 Had I known that before I applied, I probably would
12:10:21 have waited.
12:10:22 I'm requesting a second Variance Review Board hearing
12:10:25 in order to clarify some issues that were raised and
12:10:28 to emphasize the original written responses that could
12:10:32 have been given more consideration at the hearing.
12:10:36 I don't foal that the evidence presented in the
12:10:37 paperwork was carefully examined by the board.
12:10:41 If you will look at exhibit C-1 on the statement of
12:10:45 variance hardship cases, a large air conditioning
12:10:50 handler was stated as the reason for needing to move

12:10:53 the garage forward five feet and to the side nine
12:10:56 feet.
12:11:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I ask a quick question?
12:11:04 We have some documents but could you back up a few
12:11:06 steps and tell us what it was you were looking for and
12:11:08 what they denied?
12:11:10 Things I'm sure you told them and they are all in the
12:11:12 record but we need a little more background before we
12:11:14 get started on what they did wrong.
12:11:18 >>> Carolyn Wolfe: I have a sub standard garage.
12:11:23 At present I can't get a single car into it.
12:11:25 Maybe I can squeeze it in but not safely.
12:11:31 I was asking to go three and a half feet into the side
12:11:36 yard setback which is on the south side of the
12:11:39 property, the direction incorrectly given during the
12:11:43 hearing.
12:11:44 Although it's clear on the survey that it's part of
12:11:48 the paperwork.
12:11:49 I would like to come forward four feet into the front
12:11:52 yard setback, which is on the east side of the
12:11:54 building that was given as the west side.
12:11:59 In the denial paper.

12:12:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: do you have a picture?
12:12:03 >>> Yes, I do.
12:12:04 >> Do you want to put it up?
12:12:07 A picture is worth a thousand words.
12:12:15 >>> All you see is a large branch of the tree that's
12:12:18 directly in front of the garage.
12:12:20 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mrs. Wolf, excuse me.
12:12:24 Which is your house?
12:12:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point your finger there.
12:12:32 >>MARY ALVAREZ: That's your house.
12:12:34 And whose car is that?
12:12:36 >>> That's my neighbor's car.
12:12:38 And this is my garage.
12:12:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I thought it was a carport.
12:12:46 So you want to butt out the side of your wall.
12:12:48 And that's a single car garage you have right now?
12:12:51 >>> Yes.
12:12:51 It's nine feet wide, the interior.
12:12:54 >> Can you raise it up so we can see the second
12:12:56 picture?
12:12:57 If that's relevant?
12:13:02 >>> I would rather keep on this picture to make my

12:13:04 point.
12:13:05 If I could, I have a picture of this tree that shows
12:13:07 more clearly the tree in front of the garage.
12:13:09 This was taken really in front of my neighbor's house
12:13:12 at an angle.
12:13:14 >> Part of the record that you did below.
12:13:16 You know, if you submitted that picture to the VRB?
12:13:20 >>> The one I'm about to show you?
12:13:21 No.
12:13:26 >> On the site plan you can see the position of the
12:13:28 tree.
12:13:28 It's directly in front of where the expansion would be
12:13:32 for the side.
12:13:42 The expansion would be here.
12:13:44 The tree is right here.
12:13:50 You would have to angle the car in front of the tree
12:13:52 to do that so it needs to be wider than just the five
12:13:55 and a half feet going into the setback.
12:14:04 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Which setback?
12:14:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The garage.
12:14:08 >>> The garage.
12:14:08 Four and a half feet setback and three and a half FET

12:14:10 to the south side.
12:14:13 67 and saying you need to move the tree so you have
12:14:16 that space.
12:14:17 Is that what you are saying?
12:14:18 >>> I don't want to move my tree.
12:14:19 >>MARY ALVAREZ: In a, she wants the tree.
12:14:25 >> She needs to have a larger garage because of the
12:14:26 tree and the angle necessary to get into that unit.
12:14:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Move it around the tree?
12:14:32 >>> Around the tree, right.
12:14:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To have a larger garage I could very
12:14:37 easily go backward more than 20 feet in my backyard
12:14:41 without any variance whatsoever, but I have a grand
12:14:44 oak right here.
12:14:46 So unless I take down the tree, which I certainly
12:14:48 don't want to do, and the city doesn't want to lose
12:14:51 one of its beautiful grand oak trees.
12:15:00 Now my nature mayor.
12:15:01 But I really value having the tree.
12:15:03 It makes sense to come forward four feet.
12:15:10 The second picture here shows that a neighbor one
12:15:12 block down, and on the corner, apparently at some time

12:15:16 got a variance to build eight to nine feet in the
12:15:19 front yard setback.
12:15:21 And that was brought up at the hearing.
12:15:26 >> Does your neighbor to the left going to be
12:15:29 immediately impacted? What's their position about
12:15:31 this?
12:15:32 >> Every neighbor on this block looked at my plan and
12:15:37 approved it.
12:15:38 The neighborhood association did.
12:15:39 >> Is that in the record?
12:15:43 >> Yes.
12:15:44 We have signatures from people that I was neighbors
12:15:47 with for 40 years.
12:15:49 >> And just so it's clear, it's part of the transcript
12:15:51 that was received by the variance review board, and
12:15:54 they accepted that, commented on that.
12:15:58 >>> Yes.
12:15:59 And there's also a letter from the president of
12:16:01 bayside west neighborhood association, Jerry trihouser
12:16:09 and he approved this also.
12:16:10 I had many conversation was Cathy best, parks and
12:16:14 recreation.

12:16:15 She has been extremely supportive and she was very
12:16:17 splice surprised that this was denied.
12:16:22 In the trap script, it clearly says she had no
12:16:25 opposition to the variance.
12:16:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: May I suggest if there's anybody
12:16:30 else here to speak on this?
12:16:34 Just see if there's anybody else here to speak on it.
12:16:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Only one person was standing to get
12:16:40 sworn in and it's her.
12:16:41 Does staff want to say something?
12:16:48 Okay.
12:16:49 Do you want to move?
12:16:50 Mr. Fletcher?
12:16:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move to close.
12:16:55 And I think we may be able to help you out a little
12:16:59 bit, at least from my perspective.
12:17:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close.
12:17:04 (Motion carried)
12:17:05 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I would move we remand it to the
12:17:20 variance review board.
12:17:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
12:17:22 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: With the direction, if it's

12:17:25 appropriate, in this instance where you have two grand
12:17:27 oaks limiting access to a structure, and a proposed
12:17:31 garage is a classic, that is appropriate for a
12:17:35 variance, and that we believe that legally that based
12:17:39 on these facts that is the appropriate result, and ask
12:17:43 them to reconsider their decision.
12:17:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
12:17:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
12:17:48 (Motion carried).
12:17:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And Mrs. Wolf, I want to speak on
12:17:53 behalf of council, that we have made a motion, and we
12:17:55 are in the process of amending that criteria.
12:17:59 Because what happens is that criteria is kind of
12:18:02 antiquated and we sort of boxed in the VRB with
12:18:05 language that doesn't give them a lot of flexibility.
12:18:07 >>> I understand.
12:18:08 >> So I don't want to blame them.
12:18:09 They listen to the code, and they are kind of stuck
12:18:11 with it.
12:18:12 So we are trying to fix that.
12:18:16 >>> Thank you.
12:18:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Before you go, I just want to be able

12:18:20 to clarify, council.
12:18:21 From what I hear, obviously you cannot direct variance
12:18:24 review board to take specific action.
12:18:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: To reconsider.
12:18:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe the finding that the grand
12:18:34 trees constituted a hardship.
12:18:37 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Both grand trees.
12:18:39 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Placement of the two grand trees.
12:18:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you very much.
12:18:44 Now we go to information by council members.
12:18:46 Mr. Fletcher, do you have anything?
12:18:47 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: No, thank you.
12:18:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to pass out this and
12:18:56 discuss in the two weeks.
12:18:57 Currently, there are different opinions about how much
12:19:00 water should flow down the Hillsborough River.
12:19:04 It's a very hot topic.
12:19:06 They are going to be important decisions made in the
12:19:08 next month.
12:19:10 My personal opinion as a member of the Tampa Bay
12:19:13 estuary board is that the recommendation of the EPC
12:19:16 for a minimum flow is a good one.

12:19:18 Currently the city administration does not agree with
12:19:21 that.
12:19:22 I would like them to reconsider.
12:19:23 I think this is an important issue.
12:19:26 River flows through every district of City Council.
12:19:29 And I would like my colleagues to inform themselves
12:19:31 and weigh in.
12:19:32 So I would like to set this for discussion in two
12:19:34 weeks.
12:19:39 There's three articles and two editorials, for
12:19:42 starters.
12:19:43 I'm sorry if you didn't get the whole thing.
12:19:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What is it we are discussing?
12:19:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's been a discussion about
12:19:51 whether there should be a minimum daily flow down the
12:19:53 Hillsborough River.
12:19:55 Environmental Protection Commission believes that
12:19:56 there should be.
12:19:58 The friends of the river think there should be. The
12:20:01 Tampa Bay estuary board thinks there should be.
12:20:03 The board on which you serve, Mr. Dingfelder, the
12:20:05 river board thinks there should be.

12:20:07 Somehow the only folks that don't necessarily agree
12:20:09 with this is the city administration.
12:20:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm not arguing it but isn't that
12:20:16 issue being wrestled with by SWFWMD right now terms of
12:20:20 regulatory --
12:20:22 >> Yes but --
12:20:23 >>> Let me finish.
12:20:24 In terms of regulatory permit and I thought we were
12:20:27 waiting for them to come back with their
12:20:30 recommendation before we wrestled with it.
12:20:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Dingfelder, the city
12:20:33 administration is taking an opinion.
12:20:35 Their opinion to this conversation.
12:20:37 And I'm suggesting that as a policy board of the city
12:20:40 that City Council might have a different opinion.
12:20:43 I personally have a different opinion.
12:20:45 And I think it would be very responsible of us to
12:20:48 consider this and weigh in.
12:20:49 The position of the city administration is not
12:20:52 necessarily monolithic.
12:20:55 And I think it would be appropriate, this is something
12:20:58 that affects all constituents, constituents have

12:21:00 strong feelings, and I'm saying I think we should have
12:21:03 a discussion on this and provide input as a City
12:21:06 Council.
12:21:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just trying to figure out the
12:21:09 appropriate timing for the input.
12:21:11 >> Sooner.
12:21:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Are we giving inputs so SWFWMD
12:21:14 makes a different decision?
12:21:16 That's what your point is?
12:21:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
12:21:23 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: To clarify a little bit.
12:21:24 There's a process going through for many, many years
12:21:27 now, proposed a minimum flow and level a couple times
12:21:29 now.
12:21:29 There has been a scientific study that's been done to
12:21:33 determine the appropriate minimum flow and level.
12:21:36 It's under a peer review process now.
12:21:38 When that is completed, it's going to be pushing
12:21:41 shortly, maybe done by now.
12:21:44 It will go back to their governing board for a vote on
12:21:47 establishing a rule setting that minimum flow and
12:21:49 level.

12:21:51 I'm not going to weigh in at this point on what that
12:21:54 level should be.
12:21:54 But SWFWMD will ultimately set that.
12:21:58 And it will be up to the city and all these other
12:22:00 interest groups to try and work with SWFWMD to get the
12:22:05 governing board to set what they think is appropriate.
12:22:08 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chair, I'm all in favor of us
12:22:11 having a discussion and weighing in as the policy
12:22:13 making board for the City of Tampa.
12:22:15 I just want it to be effective and I want it to be
12:22:20 timed appropriately.
12:22:21 I don't think any of us want to sit around for a
12:22:23 couple of hours and just talk about it.
12:22:25 So I want to make sure that we can actually accomplish
12:22:31 something when we take this up.
12:22:35 And maybe if you determine that it will come back next
12:22:38 week, that we need to revise a little bit about what
12:22:41 we are trying to do here, and hold a different type of
12:22:45 meeting, I'm okay with that.
12:22:47 I don't want to have a discussion for a couple of
12:22:50 hours and then let us say, okay, now we need to
12:22:53 discuss it more when we actually need to take a policy

12:22:55 action.
12:22:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why don't I come back with a
12:23:01 calendar, when the SWFWMD meeting is so we have to
12:23:05 provide information prior to that?
12:23:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I don't know if you noticed, but the
12:23:11 next two months are going to be horrendous meetings.
12:23:17 All kinds of zoning, rezonings, more things on the
12:23:23 agenda than we know what to do with.
12:23:25 And you all can do after that after March 31st.
12:23:29 I would love that.
12:23:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'll find out when SWFWMD --
12:23:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Cut you a break?
12:23:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, we will probably be midnight and
12:23:40 2:00 in the morning.
12:23:41 I'm too old for that.
12:23:43 [ Laughter ]
12:23:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We think you are very useful.
12:23:46 I'll come back with when the SWFWMD meeting date is.
12:23:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison?
12:23:53 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes.
12:23:53 To continue Ms. Saul-Sena's environmental discussion,
12:23:58 I would like a report from the administration in two

12:24:00 weeks as to what the city's plans are for converting
12:24:05 our fleet to cleaner-burning fuel vehicles.
12:24:12 It seems like we have some sort of experimental
12:24:14 program, or there is some movement we are making in
12:24:16 that direction.
12:24:18 So let's find out what we are doing.
12:24:20 I also would like an update on the green building
12:24:24 initiative or the lead initiative, whatever that is
12:24:27 that we heard a little bit about.
12:24:31 >> Second.
12:24:32 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I read something on the national
12:24:34 news this week that there is almost if not unanimous
12:24:38 support in the scientific community about the effect
12:24:40 of global warming.
12:24:41 And since there's really no debate about that anymore,
12:24:44 it seems like everybody ought to get on board with
12:24:46 trying to do something about it.
12:24:49 >> The little penguins.
12:24:53 >> Polar bears.
12:24:54 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We don't have any of those around
12:24:58 these parts but we ought to be doing what we can so in
12:25:02 two weeks have the administration come in and update

12:25:04 us.
12:25:04 (Motion carried)
12:25:06 The second thing, I would like a commendation for the
12:25:08 Grand Hampton community.
12:25:09 They donated 150 light poles at a cost of $100,000 to
12:25:18 the is the city.
12:25:21 (Motion Carried).
12:25:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Just one thing that I guess everybody
12:25:24 knows now that the Centro Espanol has been sold to the
12:25:29 city and I'm really excited about that.
12:25:31 I think now they will have a home and this is what I
12:25:37 am preaching and pleading for.
12:25:44 Mr. Harrison, did you have something?
12:25:46 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I think that we should do everything
12:25:47 we can between now and the time that you do leave to
12:25:51 make that a reality.
12:25:52 Because it's something that you have worked on and
12:25:54 something that we heard her and her daughter, the week
12:26:00 before Mrs. Rivers died, and they made a very
12:26:02 emotional plea for that.
12:26:03 And you do that and we'll support you.
12:26:06 >>MARY ALVAREZ: thank you very much.

12:26:08 I would then lick to have someone from the
12:26:10 administration come and talk to us about their plans
12:26:12 for -- to make sure that it includes the Virginia
12:26:16 rivers theater and that would be my motion, in a
12:26:21 couple of weeks.
12:26:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
12:26:25 (Motion carried).
12:26:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That was two weeks, correct?
12:26:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Two weeks.
12:26:30 >>MARY ALVAREZ: That is it.
12:26:31 Thank you for your support on that.
12:26:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A couple of things.
12:26:39 I think most of us know attorney Mark Marchetti, and
12:26:49 he had an unfortunate accident, her daughter wasn't
12:26:52 wearing a seat belt.
12:26:56 He and his wife and others are up in Tallahassee
12:26:58 trying to pass a law.
12:26:59 They have Senate bill 484 and in the house bill 27,
12:27:03 safety belt law enforcement act.
12:27:06 And I would like Mr. Shelby to take a look at those
12:27:12 two bills and draft a resolution, an appropriate
12:27:18 resolution in support of those two bills from this

12:27:21 council, bring it back next week.
12:27:23 >> I would second that.
12:27:25 I'm familiar with that legislation.
12:27:27 Folks have been trying to get that passed for at least
12:27:30 six years.
12:27:30 And it's already a requirement to wear seat belts but
12:27:34 it's not directly enforceable action where police can
12:27:37 stop for not wearing a seat belt.
12:27:39 So I would second that.
12:27:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
12:27:41 (Motion carried)
12:27:45 Anything else, Mr. Dingfelder?
12:27:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.
12:27:47 A few weeks ago, we did a motion to ask coach wiener
12:27:51 and the plant hi school football team to come in.
12:27:53 They are available to come in with Mr. Football,
12:28:01 Robert Marves.
12:28:05 Move to put that on our calendar.
12:28:07 >> Second.
12:28:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and sec.
12:28:08 (Motion carried).
12:28:09 >> And then I'd like to move to present or to prepare

12:28:14 a commendation to Tyler Worth Stinson for achieving
12:28:20 the rank of goal scout.
12:28:21 He's already received it at a ceremony so I'll just
12:28:24 present it at his meeting.
12:28:25 >> Motion and second.
12:28:26 (Motion carried).
12:28:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A little public service
12:28:30 announcement for the Stewards foundation, the ones who
12:28:34 are operating the rowing down on the Hillsborough
12:28:37 River.
12:28:38 And they have got a facility that we lease out to
12:28:41 them.
12:28:41 As a matter of fact, it's on our agenda today.
12:28:44 They are holding a free event to the public on
12:28:47 February 3rd from 8 in the morning to 1 p.m.
12:28:51 And if anybody in the public wants to learn how to
12:28:54 row.
12:28:54 I tried it for about a month or two but my knees gave
12:28:57 out.
12:28:58 It does involve your Nease as well as your arms.
12:29:02 It's great fun and great exercise.
12:29:04 February 3rd.

12:29:04 You can contact the Steward's foundation at 205-4013.
12:29:09 It's a wonderful recreation.
12:29:12 And it's also wonderful for the river.
12:29:14 As a recreational opportunity on the river.
12:29:18 And that's it.
12:29:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: Madam Chair, I have just one item.
12:29:25 The main street business initiative next month, the
12:29:31 African-American history, and I'm requesting a
12:29:33 commendation to recognize them for that.
12:29:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
12:29:38 >> Second.
12:29:38 (Motion carried).
12:29:39 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to give a commendation to
12:29:43 step-up Florida organization.
12:29:44 This organization works with the Florida Department of
12:29:47 Health in Hillsborough County health department, in
12:29:50 order to promote healthier, safe lives.
12:29:54 And they are going to have a walk on February 24th
12:29:59 at Lowry Park.
12:30:01 Anyone who wants to go out and walk with them on the
12:30:03 24th, you can go out to Lowry Park.
12:30:06 And give them a commendation.

12:30:08 We have a motion and second.
12:30:09 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
12:30:11 (Motion carried)
12:30:13 Anything from Mr. Shelby?
12:30:14 Clerk?
12:30:16 >> Motion to receive and file.
12:30:17 >> Second.
12:30:18 >>THE CLERK: Mo made the motion?
12:30:24 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Me.
12:30:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience to speak?
12:30:27 We stand adjourned until 5:01.