Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

09:20:11 Tampa City Council
09:20:11 Thursday, May 17, 2007
09:20:11 DISCLAIMER:
09:20:11 The following represents an unedited version of
09:20:11 realtime captioning which should neither be relied

09:20:11 upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
09:20:11 transcript.
09:20:11 The original of this transcript was produced in all
09:20:11 capital letters and any variation thereto may be a
09:20:11 result of third party edits and software compatibility
09:20:11 issues.
09:20:11 Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
09:20:11 proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.
09:20:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
09:27:20 The chair will yield to Mr. Joseph Caetano.
09:27:24 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: This morning, we have Rabbi levy
09:27:31 from Tampa SHALOM in New Tampa who is going to give our
09:27:36 invocation and we will stand for the pledge of
09:27:38 allegiance immediately after.
09:27:47 >> Our God and God of our fathers,.
09:27:53 We are assembled together as free men in a society
09:27:56 dedicated to the cause of freedom for all.
09:28:01 Ours is the task to ask ourselves the profound question
09:28:05 of how do we legislate properly to fulfill the ideal of
09:28:10 freedom for all?
09:28:12 We look about in our world, made up of citizens,
09:28:16 immigrants, residents from digress backgrounds, many
09:28:21 countries, and the multitude of cultures and

09:28:24 civilizations.
09:28:26 We see inequities in our Tampa world, varieties of
09:28:30 education, background and finances.
09:28:34 We see color, racial and religious differences.
09:28:40 All these people of God live in our world and deserve
09:28:43 the best that we can legislate for them.
09:28:48 Ours then is the task and goal to eliminate
09:28:52 discrimination, segregation, and all those elements
09:28:55 that make it more difficult for people to raise their
09:28:59 family and live without fear of discrimination.
09:29:05 We are all people, children of Lord, each individual
09:29:08 regardless as to who he is deserves only the best that
09:29:13 our community may offer.
09:29:15 May Lord almighty bless our hands and work so that
09:29:18 equality and freedom aren't merely words but a living
09:29:24 reality for all.
09:29:25 Amen.
09:29:27 [ Pledge of Allegiance ]
09:29:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
09:29:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:29:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:29:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.

09:29:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:29:54 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
09:29:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:29:57 Before we start our agenda I would like to put on the
09:30:00 record that Mr. John Dingfelder will not be in
09:30:02 attendance at our meeting this morning.
09:30:03 At this time I am going to recognize Reverend Scott to
09:30:07 do the Officer of the Month.
09:30:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Chair.
09:30:23 Thank you, Madam Chair, council members.
09:30:26 I am going to turn it over to Chief Hogue who will come
09:30:29 and make a presentation.
09:30:32 >>CHIEF HOGUE: Thank you.
09:30:33 Good morning, council.
09:30:34 Once again I would like to say thank you for giving
09:30:37 us -- providing the opportunity to recognize our
09:30:39 Officer of the Month, which is Alex Rahmings for May of
09:30:45 2007.
09:30:46 You see Alex standing over here in the green suit.
09:30:48 He's an undercover police officer with us.
09:30:55 His wife is a police officer at Tampa International
09:30:57 Airport, will step forward and accept the awards for

09:31:00 him and make a statement on his behalf, because we
09:31:03 would prefer that he not be on television.
09:31:06 Alex accomplished a significant investigation per the
09:31:12 Tampa Police Department in the City of Tampa.
09:31:16 He started off with a 7-gram purchase of marijuana on
09:31:21 the streets of Tampa and ended up confiscating over 150
09:31:27 kilos of cocaine and disrupting an organization that we
09:31:30 estimate brought 2,000 kilos of cocaine into the United
09:31:35 States each year.
09:31:37 And, in fact, this is the largest and most involved and
09:31:41 most complex investigation, narcotics investigation
09:31:46 that the Tampa Police Department ever has done, and
09:31:49 Alex was the individual who was our case agent or lead
09:31:54 investigator on it and managed the whole investigation.
09:32:00 These investigations start off small, and as you can
09:32:03 tell by the magnitude of what we shut down, it has far
09:32:09 reaching implications.
09:32:10 And before it was all over, we were up on 13 wiretaps
09:32:15 at one time, more than we have ever run.
09:32:17 I can't even remember running more than two or three at
09:32:19 any given time.
09:32:20 We had 13 run over a six-month investigation that Alex

09:32:28 was involved in.
09:32:31 This investigation stretched to Miami, to Texas, to
09:32:35 Atlanta, and even up into the northeast before it was
09:32:38 all over.
09:32:40 It was a significant investigation.
09:32:45 And one of the things that we are particularly proud of
09:32:48 is that we intercepted some vehicles that in fact we
09:32:54 thought contained narcotics or maybe money, and what we
09:32:57 found in there were eleven assault rifles that were on
09:33:02 their way to drug dealers that they were using ago
09:33:04 payment.
09:33:05 So those are eleven weapon some of which were fully
09:33:09 automatic, some of them were high capacity assault
09:33:11 weapons, and we were very pleased to get those.
09:33:16 So it's an unprecedented investigation.
09:33:19 Alex did a fabulous job, and probably literally worked
09:33:25 15 hours to 18 hours every day for six months.
09:33:30 He managed over 40 detectives, and police officers that
09:33:33 had assisted in this investigation, and it was a
09:33:37 monumental feat and task and did he an excellent job
09:33:41 and that's why we are recognizing him.
09:33:46 [ Applause ]

09:33:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: On behalf of the Tampa City Council and
09:34:04 our chairman I want to present to you on behalf of your
09:34:06 husband the detective Alexander Rahmings, Officer of
09:34:15 the Month for May 2007.
09:34:20 The lead investigator, resulting in the three drug
09:34:24 trafficking organizations and arrest of 30 drug
09:34:26 traffickers.
09:34:31 The City Council of the City of Tampa, on behalf of
09:34:34 City Council, present this to you.
09:34:36 And when you talk about a person putting his life on
09:34:40 the line going undercover, on this kind of assignment,
09:34:45 really deserves this kind of recognition.
09:34:47 So thank you.
09:34:49 [ Applause ]
09:34:55 Before you make any comment, I think there are other
09:34:57 presentations.
09:35:04 >>> Danny Lewis from Bill Currie Ford.
09:35:07 On behalf of the Bill Currie family, present this watch
09:35:11 to your husband.
09:35:17 He might not want to wear it on duty.
09:35:21 [ Laughter ]
09:35:28 >>> I represent Tampa Lowry Park Zoo.

09:35:31 We want to invite you to come enjoy the zoo on us.
09:35:36 Thank you very much.
09:35:38 [ Applause ]
09:35:42 >>> Steve Stickley representing Stepps towing.
09:35:46 On behalf of Jim and Judy Stepp, we would like to
09:35:49 present to your husband this statue and also a gift
09:35:52 certificate.
09:35:55 Congratulate your husband for us.
09:35:56 Thank you very much.
09:35:58 [ Applause ]
09:36:03 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Keep shifting this way I won't have
09:36:07 any room over here.
09:36:08 You have to be careful with this one gift here.
09:36:11 It's a photographic package for you and your family at
09:36:13 Bryn Allen studios.
09:36:15 You have to be very careful with that one.
09:36:18 Anyway, Bryn Allen would like to present you that and
09:36:22 your family.
09:36:22 The Hillsborough County towing association would like
09:36:24 to present with you a $350 gift certificate to Outback.
09:36:29 The folks at list development and Bern's steakhouse are
09:36:32 going to provide you with a $100 gift certificate to

09:36:35 enjoy dinner at Bern's steakhouse.
09:36:37 And this is that careful one about having pictures
09:36:39 taken.
09:36:40 Be real careful how you use that one.
09:36:43 And Stepp's towing gave you the statue.
09:36:48 Again we are very proud of you and your husband for
09:36:50 what you do for this community.
09:36:53 >>> Thank you very much.
09:36:56 [ Applause ]
09:37:00 I'm looking for the next one.
09:37:02 [ Laughter ]
09:37:03 Really, I want to thank you all so much for recognizing
09:37:06 my husband for his hard work and dedication.
09:37:13 We really work hard.
09:37:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you for being here.
09:37:19 At this time we are going to have another commendation
09:37:26 for the Lockhart middle school.
09:37:32 >> I would like to call up the Lockhart gifted and
09:37:35 talented crew if you would come up to the microphone.
09:37:43 The odyssey of the mind is a fabulous program
09:37:45 throughout our school, and the talented team from
09:37:49 lockhart won first place.

09:38:05 This is presented for their first place win in creative
09:38:08 problem solving of the Florida State odyssey of the
09:38:12 mind competition on April 14th, 2007.
09:38:14 I would like to give it to the teacher and introduce
09:38:21 the children.
09:38:21 >> Good morning.
09:38:23 We thank you.
09:38:23 We are thrilled to be here and thank you.
09:38:28 We have two teams from lockhart.
09:38:30 This is Clinton Nicholson.
09:38:34 Darby carver.
09:38:37 Amelia DUBERS.
09:38:40 Savannah fuller.
09:38:44 Brownlynn Miller Jones.
09:38:47 Jenkins.
09:38:48 Elton PETIT.
09:38:51 Michelle Nicholson.
09:38:55 Emily.
09:39:00 Jason.
09:39:09 Martha LaVonne.
09:39:13 Matty.
09:39:15 This is James, our other coach and Michelle Cumming.

09:39:22 And we also have our principal.
09:39:28 We thank you for the honor that you have given us.
09:39:30 And we will hang this up at school.
09:39:43 >> We also want to recognize and honor our creative
09:39:47 youngsters who will be the thinkers who hopefully help
09:39:51 us lead this world on a better path.
09:39:53 Congratulations to all of you and thank you for coming
09:39:54 down to City Council today.
09:39:55 Thank you.
09:39:56 [ Applause ]
09:40:03 It is now my pleasure to recognize you all.
09:40:11 It's now my pleasure to recognize the odyssey of the
09:40:14 mind team from freedom high school who similarly were
09:40:19 successful in winning a first place award in the state
09:40:22 for the odyssey of the mind competition.
09:40:24 I would like them to come up at this point.
09:40:41 >> Most of them were in my fifth grade class and I
09:40:43 coached them when -- well, two.
09:40:46 Charlie and Ann have been doing odyssey of the mind
09:40:50 since kindergarten and are now in high school.
09:40:53 They both have won scholarships for odyssey of the
09:40:58 mind.

09:41:00 I'll start with Steven because I didn't ever get to
09:41:03 teach him, I'm sorry.
09:41:07 This is Charlie Nichols.
09:41:09 His mother Elaine is the coach of the team and has
09:41:11 coached them since kindergarten.
09:41:14 This is Chelsea whitehead who is going to be majoring
09:41:19 in theater so it's been a perfect thing for Chelsea and
09:41:23 for Ann.
09:41:24 The other members of the team who are not.
09:41:32 >> Thank you so much for coming down today.
09:41:34 Thank you for bringing honor to our community with or
09:41:37 creative problem solving.
09:41:38 And we congratulate you.
09:41:40 >> Linda, I would like to say one thing.
09:41:42 Chelsea whitehead is one of my employees and makes a
09:41:46 great Cappuccino.
09:41:52 [ Applause ]
09:41:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we go to approval of the agenda.
09:42:02 Any items need to be pulled?
09:42:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I guess we'll take it up when it
09:42:15 comes on the agenda.
09:42:16 I know that -- we'll just deal with it when we get to

09:42:20 it.
09:42:21 >> We have a motion and second to approve the agenda.
09:42:23 All in favor of the motion?
09:42:25 (Motion carried).
09:42:26 Item number 3 is asking for a continuance for two
09:42:29 weeks.
09:42:29 Need a motion.
09:42:33 >> So moved.
09:42:34 >> Second.
09:42:34 (Motion carried).
09:42:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 4.
09:42:36 Is anyone here from administration to talk about that?
09:42:39 Okay.
09:42:45 >>> Good morning.
09:42:49 From legal here to provide an update, as requested at
09:42:51 the council meeting on this subject, the monitoring of
09:42:58 the proposed crossland landfill in southeast Pasco
09:43:02 County called Angelo's landfill.
09:43:05 This particular landfill has an application into the
09:43:09 department of environmental protection, and also
09:43:12 requests for change in conditional use to Pasco County.
09:43:17 Since I last appeared here, we submitted at your

09:43:20 direction two letters from both the county and to
09:43:25 provide us notice with any proposed action to be taken
09:43:27 on both the application and if conditional use.
09:43:30 Just to give you an update, you may have seen the
09:43:32 article in the paper.
09:43:34 Last Monday evening, there was a rather large -- there
09:43:37 was a workshop held with a rather large turnout up in
09:43:41 Dade city that was to provide information to the
09:43:44 citizens and take input from them.
09:43:47 About 500 people attended that workshop.
09:43:50 So they received significant input on the status of
09:43:57 with regard to the proposed landfill.
09:43:59 And, in addition, there was some letters that had been
09:44:03 sent to the Tampa Bay water requesting them to provide
09:44:06 information to the citizens with regard to any impact
09:44:10 to the proposed -- that the proposed landfill would
09:44:12 have to the source waters on Tampa Bay water, and there
09:44:15 was -- I can give you copies, just received in the last
09:44:21 couple of days, and I apologize that you have not
09:44:23 received a copy but I'll make sure that you get them.
09:44:27 The response from Tampa Bay water is that they have
09:44:30 reviewed the applications and conditional use, and they

09:44:33 do not see that they will have -- that the landfill
09:44:40 will have any impact to the head waters of the river
09:44:43 from which they withdraw as well as we do.
09:44:47 We go down to provide some additional information as to
09:44:50 what I was including in the review, but the conclusion
09:44:55 is that they don't anticipate that the landfill would
09:44:57 have any impact.
09:45:00 That's important because as we go through the important
09:45:02 monitoring of these issues, that determination by Tampa
09:45:04 Bay water would coordinate with ours as far as whether
09:45:09 it would have any impact from the Hillsborough River.
09:45:12 And at this time, I see there's a question.
09:45:16 To conclude we'll continue to monitor this and
09:45:20 throughout the process both of the application and
09:45:23 condition of use change.
09:45:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for this report.
09:45:26 Because as we know, everything that affects the river
09:45:29 and all its head waters affect us ultimately.
09:45:32 Along those lines in this morning's paper, it said that
09:45:35 the Cypress Creek mall has been approved, but that
09:45:39 there might be some opposition to it.
09:45:43 I just wondered if the city -- previously City Council

09:45:46 had voiced official opposition, expressed concerns
09:45:51 about the Cypress Creek mall and its potential for
09:45:54 affecting the head waters of the Hillsborough River.
09:45:57 And I wondered if you were monitoring that.
09:46:02 >>> I have not been monitoring it officially.
09:46:04 I happen to live in that area so I do monitor
09:46:07 personally and I only did see the headlines this
09:46:09 morning that the Army Corps of Engineers had approved
09:46:12 the permit for the wetland impact for the mall.
09:46:17 In my understanding that would be the last permitting
09:46:20 hurdle that the mall needed.
09:46:23 I certainly can look into it.
09:46:25 But I have not, on behalf of the city, done any
09:46:29 monitoring of that.
09:46:30 >> If you could, if there are any concerns that you
09:46:33 have, and there's any opportunity for us to weigh in
09:46:35 just to be protected of our water source.
09:46:38 We are interested in being protective.
09:46:43 >>> Would you like me to provide that as --
09:46:46 >>GWEN MILLER: A written report will be fine.
09:46:48 >>> Written report?
09:46:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like a motion then to

09:46:51 provide a written report.
09:46:52 You can have 30 days.
09:46:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
09:46:54 (Motion carried).
09:46:55 Thank you.
09:46:58 Item number 5.
09:46:59 City clerk.
09:47:10 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Good morning, honorable
09:47:12 council.
09:47:12 I'm here -- my name is Shirley Foxx-Knowles and I'm the
09:47:16 city clerk.
09:47:17 I'm here in reference to your motion to report on
09:47:21 vacancies on various boards and committees that are
09:47:25 appointed bit by council.
09:47:27 I sent awe report regarding the same, noting that
09:47:31 revised ordinances for both the architectural review
09:47:34 and Historic Preservation Commission are on the agenda.
09:47:39 Council may want to wait until the ordinance is upheld
09:47:43 before making any appointments.
09:47:46 As I understand, there is currently in a problem with
09:47:49 having a quorum on either of the commissions.
09:47:52 I don't know if you want to wait for a couple of weeks

09:47:55 to make any appointment.
09:47:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman?
09:47:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Are you finished?
09:48:01 >>> Yes.
09:48:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Now, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
09:48:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
09:48:04 My concern is that time wise, I believe we advertise
09:48:09 vacancies, and then we give people a few weeks to
09:48:11 respond back.
09:48:12 I don't see any problem with going ahead and
09:48:14 advertising these vacancies for all of the vacancies
09:48:19 that are listed here.
09:48:20 And what I would like to do, because I don't want any
09:48:23 committees not to be able to function or boards for
09:48:26 lack of a quorum, and we just heard at the T.H.A.N.
09:48:28 meeting the other night that John white is moving so
09:48:35 that's a vacancy, but that we advertise and put on our
09:48:38 agenda for like the first meeting in June the council
09:48:42 decision making on the vacancies that we have the
09:48:44 opportunity to appoint.
09:48:48 Does that work with your time frame in terms of getting
09:48:50 the word out, getting resumes back?

09:48:52 Would the second meeting in June be better?
09:48:55 >>> A second meeting in June is fine.
09:48:56 We do have some applications.
09:49:01 >> Perhaps, Madam Chairman, we can say that people need
09:49:03 to get their applications in by the first meeting in
09:49:06 June, and the city clerk to distribute the resumes, and
09:49:10 we'll make a decision at the second meeting in June.
09:49:13 >> Second.
09:49:14 (Motion carried).
09:49:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 6.
09:49:19 We received a written report.
09:49:31 Need to receive and file.
09:49:32 >> So moved.
09:49:33 >> Second.
09:49:33 (Motion carried).
09:49:33 Ment.
09:49:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The same thing on that written
09:49:38 report. The district that I represent, I call it the
09:49:41 ditch district, that's with a "D."
09:49:51 Sometimes I mumble a little bit but not in this case.
09:49:53 There are more ditches in that district than anywhere
09:49:56 else in the city.

09:49:57 And I know that's a problem on Curtis.
09:50:00 It is a problem all of West Tampa.
09:50:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other comments?
09:50:05 All right.
09:50:06 We go to item number 7.
09:50:08 Mr. David McCary, director of solid waste.
09:50:16 >>> Good morning, City Council.
09:50:17 I hope everyone is doing well.
09:50:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Fine.
09:50:18 How about you?
09:50:19 >>> Great.
09:50:20 My name is David McCary, the director of solid waste
09:50:22 and environmental program management.
09:50:25 I have a report to bring back to you.
09:50:27 These are the green steps that our city is taking to
09:50:31 further advance our commitment to green in our city.
09:50:35 I actually have a PowerPoint presentation I would love
09:50:37 to share with you, but I think you will find it
09:50:40 interesting, if I could get staff to bring it up.
09:50:43 Thank you.
09:50:44 We have a quest for sustainable government.
09:50:48 We are will go to groan our city.

09:50:50 As a part of our new endeavor, we wanted to make
09:50:52 certain that everybody understood that government has
09:50:56 the greatest responsibility of leading by example to
09:50:59 create a sustainable city.
09:51:01 This means both local, state, as well as the federal
09:51:05 levels have that commitment.
09:51:08 Our mayor here recently signed the U.S. mayors
09:51:14 agreement, and as part of their assigning that she
09:51:16 became the 393rd mayor to sign this agreement.
09:51:21 Currently today we have approximately 500 across the
09:51:25 nation that signed and have taken on this
09:51:27 responsibility, which is what I'm very proud of as our
09:51:31 commitment to city government.
09:51:34 One of the things that I think is important that we
09:51:36 share with you this morning is that we want to not only
09:51:39 awaken the consciousness of our city, but we want to do
09:51:42 it through education.
09:51:44 It is imperative that everyone understand that we have
09:51:48 finite resources, we need to prepare to take care of
09:51:51 our city for our children, and our children's children.
09:51:56 You may recall that in 2003, the mayor provided for us
09:52:00 strategic goals.

09:52:02 I would like to share with you those strategic goals,
09:52:04 just so that we can kind of bring you up to speed as we
09:52:07 move forward with greening our city.
09:52:11 Our first strategic goal was investing in
09:52:13 neighborhoods.
09:52:14 City of the arts.
09:52:15 Creating a downtown residential community, economic
09:52:18 development in our most challenged areas, efficient
09:52:21 city government, customer service and the most recently
09:52:25 added mass transit.
09:52:29 Part of our strategic plan and what we have already
09:52:31 adopted in these last few years, it aligns perfectly
09:52:36 with our ability to green our city.
09:52:38 We have established for your benefit a city green team.
09:52:44 Part of that city green team and part of our strategy
09:52:47 allows us to have objective managers that will be part
09:52:51 of six core elements that I will go through briefly
09:52:54 with you so that you will understand how these networks
09:52:57 are able to come in to communicate and have a clear
09:53:00 understanding as we come to you each quarter, what each
09:53:03 one of these core elements is doing.
09:53:08 Again, we want to look forward to not only assessing

09:53:11 our footprint, but at the same time how we live is key.
09:53:16 We do have fine it resources.
09:53:19 Here's our approach.
09:53:20 We will start off by first things first, measuring our
09:53:27 footprint.
09:53:27 Not only will we do that but it will allow us an
09:53:30 ability to look at short and long-range goals.
09:53:32 At the same time we will offer a commonsense approach
09:53:34 that we feel is key.
09:53:36 We will design a methodology to help citizens
09:53:39 understand how they impact and play a vital role
09:53:42 through this endeavor.
09:53:44 At the same time, we want to awaken the environmental
09:53:47 consciousness of our community to lead for the future,
09:53:52 and empower individuals.
09:53:54 Again, our goal is to reduce our emissions, but at the
09:53:58 same time we want to awaken the consciousness for a
09:54:02 greener city.
09:54:04 Our department of solid waste and environmental program
09:54:06 management will take the lead in coordinating these
09:54:09 efforts as well as implementation of our city green
09:54:14 team.

09:54:15 Here are the six core elements that when feel are key
09:54:18 to our success.
09:54:19 You will have your green policy, greenways and trails,
09:54:23 water quality, renewable energy and recycling, you will
09:54:26 have green buildings, as well as air quality.
09:54:29 Let me break each one of those down for you because I
09:54:32 think it's going to be critical that you understand
09:54:34 that Tampa has been on the front end of our leadership
09:54:38 in green for over two decades now.
09:54:40 And I'll share some specifics.
09:54:43 When we talk about green policies, and you see in the
09:54:46 first core elements you have green spearman which is
09:54:50 our purchasing director.
09:54:51 He will be an objective manager and not only lead but
09:54:55 in terms of what can we do reference to policy and
09:54:57 practice.
09:54:58 Classic example: If you were to have a contract, say,
09:55:02 cleaning supplies, and we have spoken about this
09:55:04 before, what would be the harm in making a requirement
09:55:07 that they provide nontoxic chemicals?
09:55:10 Again, it's where you start.
09:55:12 It's not so much how fast you go but where you start.

09:55:15 When we look at air quality, here recently we have
09:55:19 taken on the pilot of hybrid cars.
09:55:21 You have Ford Escapes, there are eight Ford Escapes.
09:55:27 We are looking at a comparison how well they perform.
09:55:30 At the same time, we are looking at bio fuel for a lot
09:55:33 of our large trucks and equipment.
09:55:36 When we look at green buildings, and a lost you have
09:55:39 always asked the fundamental question.
09:55:42 Thom Snelling would be the objective manager along
09:55:44 that, and they have already had a series of meetings.
09:55:46 But we want to be able to tie in with that for you as
09:55:50 well.
09:55:52 At the same time, we have had our greenways and trails
09:55:54 presentation.
09:55:55 When you look at that, you are also knowing that we are
09:55:58 going to continue to plant trees.
09:55:59 You have already seen a thousand trees each year, but
09:56:02 the greeneries, the trail we are trying to preserve our
09:56:06 resources.
09:56:06 Renewable energy.
09:56:08 Here we had our energy facility for over two decade
09:56:11 now.

09:56:12 Enough fuel to power 20,000 homes.
09:56:15 Tampa has always been on the cutting edge of doing
09:56:17 things outside of the dumpster, as we call it, or
09:56:20 outside the box.
09:56:21 But then you have your responses program.
09:56:25 Just this past year we greened Gasparilla.
09:56:27 The green the Gasparilla is a monumental task.
09:56:30 When you look at water quality, the conservation,
09:56:33 reclaimed.
09:56:33 Here you have water department, water and stormwater
09:56:36 working in unison to create conservation.
09:56:41 Here is something that you may be aware of.
09:56:43 Since 1993, compared to 2004, they have actually
09:56:47 reduced the gallons per day used per capita by 22%.
09:56:53 That's by capita.
09:56:56 That's something that's very measurable.
09:56:58 As we talk about calculated steps, it's important for
09:57:00 us to honor and respect our stakeholders, which is our
09:57:04 community.
09:57:05 We have our assets that we need to preserve.
09:57:08 One of the things I have to caution you on as you look
09:57:12 at some of the things we talked about.

09:57:14 Classic example.
09:57:15 When you look at the hybrid cars, the Ford Escapes, we
09:57:19 actually spent $6600 more for the hybrid car, which is
09:57:24 within reason.
09:57:25 We had a manager the other day that came to us wanting
09:57:28 to get a hybrid 2.35-ton vehicle.
09:57:32 He wanted to have the flexibility that when he's
09:57:34 working in the field and the PTO is on that he not use
09:57:37 so much energy to get up to do his daily task because a
09:57:42 lot of the work is not based on mileage but the actual
09:57:44 work at hand in the field.
09:57:47 That particular vehicle cost $60,000.
09:57:51 Just for the sake of calling it green, the hybrid
09:57:55 version of it increased the price by 100%.
09:57:59 Now you have $120,000 vehicle.
09:58:02 This is what I mean when I say calculated steps.
09:58:05 We have to be stewards of your dollars and our
09:58:08 taxpayers dollars and all of our user fees.
09:58:13 It's imperative that each of these core managers are
09:58:19 managers that you will be able to meet and tag in
09:58:21 innocent you see the need to talk to them.
09:58:23 It will be coordinated.

09:58:24 And we have individuals that come forth and want
09:58:28 recommendations, they want to talk about hydrogen and
09:58:31 other renewable sources.
09:58:32 We coordinate those meetings.
09:58:34 We make certain they take place.
09:58:35 We want to hear from everyone.
09:58:37 So you just have to understand that some of the
09:58:39 technology is new.
09:58:41 Some is more advanced than others.
09:58:42 But, at the same time, if we look at best practices,
09:58:46 and we look at benchmarking ourselves early on, I think
09:58:49 we'll have a successful program.
09:58:51 One of the other things that we want to share with you
09:58:54 that you are aware of is the mayor's environmental
09:58:57 round table.
09:58:57 I'm telling you as part of the coordination with that,
09:59:00 I have seen some of the best and brightest just with
09:59:03 that group alone.
09:59:05 I am very encouraged and very impressed with what I see
09:59:09 as a city and collectively coming together.
09:59:12 As you look at the focused areas that they have
09:59:14 established, all of this intertwines together so that

09:59:19 we can move our city forward.
09:59:21 Once again, our city green team sets the framework for
09:59:24 the city to inspire, inform and enable our communities
09:59:28 to improve the quality of life and increase economic
09:59:31 prosperity through environmental responsibility.
09:59:35 That is our quest.
09:59:35 That is our challenge for each and every one of us.
09:59:39 We even had some individuals that have volunteered to
09:59:41 help.
09:59:42 We have a lady by the name of Roberta Fernandez who has
09:59:46 done exceptional in bringing it to the City of Tampa
09:59:49 and sharing ideas with us.
09:59:50 We are also looking to take our program on a regional
09:59:54 basis.
09:59:54 I think we need to continue to do more.
09:59:58 The city of Sarasota is a classic example.
10:00:01 They have been working on green initiatives since the
10:00:04 year 2000ed and even better, and they have made some
10:00:07 good policy changes.
10:00:08 So we are going to be benchmarking ourselves and
10:00:11 looking at some of those best practices.
10:00:13 Once again, I thank you for your time and the

10:00:15 opportunity to speak before you.
10:00:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for the up-front excellent
10:00:24 presentation.
10:00:24 Recently the Chamber of Commerce had a sold-out
10:00:26 luncheon to talk about specifically green buildings and
10:00:29 the county made us aware of their initiative the idea
10:00:40 of getting good ideas from our neighbors is a wonderful
10:00:44 one and I hope you continue to pursue it.
10:00:46 This is an excellent presentation and lie forward to
10:00:48 the quarterly updates.
10:00:50 Thank you.
10:00:53 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Very good presentation.
10:00:54 What are your increased fixed costs in this program?
10:01:02 >>> None.
10:01:02 What we have done is we have utilized our resources
10:01:05 within the department of solid waste and environmental
10:01:07 program management.
10:01:09 Part of my team worked on environmental programs to
10:01:12 begin with.
10:01:13 Barbara Heineken is part of our recycling and waste
10:01:18 reduction management team.
10:01:19 Part of our renewable energy is Nancy McCann.

10:01:22 She is a part of that.
10:01:26 One of the great appeals to this process is you don't
10:01:28 take a professional out of their element.
10:01:30 You just stretch their ability to think outside the
10:01:33 dumpster once again.
10:01:35 We are moving forward as a city.
10:01:37 But in terms of cost impact, I don't see the cost being
10:01:42 a factor to get the program up and running where you
10:01:45 can see the comparison of cost will be based on each
10:01:49 core element.
10:01:49 So if you are spending a little more for a hybrid car,
10:01:54 say Fordscapes in our cases 6600, then you have to
10:01:58 compare that with the benefit.
10:02:00 The exciting part about measuring our public footprint,
10:02:04 that part we are not certain if there may not be an
10:02:08 added cost to that because remember the selected
10:02:11 organizations that are willing to help us soap our
10:02:14 footprints.
10:02:14 So I would be a little pulling the trigger too fast if
10:02:17 there is an increase in cost.
10:02:19 Because my strategy is to move forward with little or
10:02:23 no cost at this point.

10:02:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wonder if we are immediately
10:02:30 looking at our own maintenance costs of our existing
10:02:33 buildings like turning off the lights at night,
10:02:35 lowering the thermostat at night, making sure that any
10:02:38 additional city reconstruction or new construction is
10:02:44 as energy friendly and gren as possible.
10:02:46 I don't remember that being specifically part of your
10:02:48 presentation.
10:02:49 Are you working with David Vaughan and whoever is in
10:02:52 charge of our overall maintenance of the buildings,
10:02:54 looking at cutting those costs?
10:02:57 >>> Yes.
10:02:57 In fact, David Vaughan is part of two groups.
10:02:59 One would be green buildings, as well as air quality.
10:03:03 So that when you move forward to see about your
10:03:05 buildings, urban Lee, public works director, he's
10:03:11 responsible for the bio fuel but he's also responsible
10:03:13 for what happens with our light and light switches.
10:03:18 One of the things we have done internally within our
10:03:20 department is we have created a green staff team that
10:03:24 will allow us to look at what we do within our own
10:03:27 department.

10:03:28 We want to be the example of the future and I think it
10:03:34 takes us to make those calls.
10:03:38 I appreciate your question.
10:03:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. McCary, my question was going to
10:03:42 be, and I will ask you this at the end, if you know
10:03:44 what kind of savings we are getting with the new hybrid
10:03:47 vehicles that you are buying.
10:03:48 What do you project, maybe how long will it take to pay
10:03:51 back that extra $6,000?
10:03:54 To get that payback and energy savings and purchasing
10:03:58 fuel.
10:03:59 But further than that, to what you just said, do each
10:04:06 of these teams have a responsibility, or something in
10:04:10 place so that they can track what the costs are, and
10:04:14 what the cost savings, especially with conservation, so
10:04:20 that we can show the public that this is not just a
10:04:23 matter of spending more money initially, but what our
10:04:26 savings are, and how long it will take to get to that
10:04:29 point where it's paying for itself, or actually saving
10:04:32 money.
10:04:34 >>> Yes, that's a good point.
10:04:35 I appreciate that.

10:04:36 Each objective manager as a part of the strategic plan
10:04:40 and our goal has to do a write-up and report each month
10:04:43 of their success.
10:04:44 What they will do is they will describe their
10:04:48 challenges as a particular task.
10:04:51 One of the things of our strategic plan that has
10:04:55 aligned us under the past four years under this
10:04:57 administration has allowed to us evaluate and to look
10:04:59 into that.
10:05:01 To answer your question about the $6.6 thousand
10:05:07 difference, this is one of the reasons that particular
10:05:10 core element, that manager will be able to follow
10:05:12 through with that report and come back at some point in
10:05:14 time.
10:05:14 One of the reasons why we called it a pilot is because
10:05:17 we want to assess what those cost benefits are, and to
10:05:22 look at the future of some topical considerations.
10:05:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Some other questions?
10:05:29 Thank you, Mr. McCary for an excellent report.
10:05:34 Next report you can give us a written report.
10:05:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, Madam Chairman.
10:05:39 I'm sorry.

10:05:40 I think it's very important we have the opportunity to
10:05:42 discuss the progress we are making.
10:05:43 This is probably one of the most important issues
10:05:45 before the city and I think we need it to be presented
10:05:49 orally by Mr. McCary.
10:05:52 >>> Well, if you recall, your last direction to us was
10:05:54 that when provide you each quarter where we stand.
10:05:57 Now the good part about that is with the six core
10:06:00 elements, we can tag in any of the elements at any
10:06:03 given time to present to you.
10:06:05 This is the beauty of what you have asked for on a
10:06:07 quarterly basis.
10:06:08 I did provide you with a copy of the PowerPoint
10:06:10 presentation for your review and consideration.
10:06:16 Thank you.
10:06:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 8.
10:06:19 Mr. Steve Daignault asking that he have a written by
10:06:25 July 17th.
10:06:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
10:06:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Second?
10:06:32 We have a motion and second.
10:06:33 (Motion carried).

10:06:34 Item number 9.
10:06:36 Administration to talk about --
10:06:45 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
10:06:46 Ms. Miller did submit the staff report with the code
10:06:49 sections that apply dealing with the river and setbacks
10:06:54 and construction a longs the river.
10:06:56 And that will be through the July cycle for code
10:07:00 amendments.
10:07:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
10:07:02 Item number 10.
10:07:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We have a number of people here to
10:07:11 speak on both 9 and 10.
10:07:13 So I would like to make a motion -- Madam Chairman,
10:07:22 this is presenting an ordinance to us.
10:07:24 And what I would really prefer to do is allow the
10:07:27 public to speak on this ordinance without us moving on
10:07:30 it and then hearing from the public what they thought
10:07:32 of our action.
10:07:33 So my motion would be to waive the rules on number 9
10:07:35 and 10 or to take them out of the staff portion.
10:07:38 This is when I was questioning the sequence of this so
10:07:41 that we have an opportunity to hear from the public

10:07:44 before we take any action.
10:07:48 My motion would be to take 9 and 10 out of the staff
10:07:51 review portion or to allow -- my motion will be allow
10:07:55 to allow the public to speak on these proposed revised
10:07:58 ordinances.
10:08:01 >> 10 and 11.
10:08:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 10 and 11.
10:08:04 I'm sorry.
10:08:04 >>GWEN MILLER: The motion fails because of lack of a
10:08:07 second.
10:08:07 We now hear from city staff, Mr. Thom Snelling.
10:08:11 You may give your report now.
10:08:16 >>THOM SNELLING: Growth management.
10:08:22 I am going to speak on item number 10. Two weeks ago,
10:08:25 we presented council first-time discussion of some of
10:08:28 the changes to the A.R.C. as well as HPC.
10:08:32 I am here to speak to the A.R.C. portions of those.
10:08:35 Council crafted a motion that we revise some of the
10:08:38 language that was originally discussed in the hearing,
10:08:42 and we have done that, and very quickly I can highlight
10:08:46 those specific changes that council had asked us to do.
10:08:52 The first change, one of the areas has to do with the

10:08:57 recommendations for rezonings and land use changes.
10:09:01 The original proposal was to have back level.
10:09:05 Council had asked us to change the language in the code
10:09:07 so that it would be in front of the A.R.C. board itself
10:09:11 and then the A.R.C. board itself would be making a
10:09:13 recommendation to the City Council on particular
10:09:15 rezoning, special uses, and land use changes and public
10:09:19 hearings like that.
10:09:21 We have gone ahead and incorporated that change into
10:09:23 section 27-213 so that change has been made.
10:09:32 Do you all have a copy?
10:09:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
10:09:37 >>THOM SNELLING: That particular change is on page 7.
10:09:39 It's item J if you look at that.
10:09:43 I'm sorry, it's on page 7 if you look at item J.
10:09:48 Says with regard to applications, rezoning changes,
10:09:51 land use classification.
10:09:54 As you see, the authority of the A.R.C. board itself.
10:09:59 So that change has been made in accordance with what
10:10:01 council had asked.
10:10:12 The next change would allow for electronic submittals
10:10:15 to be turned into city staff to make things a little

10:10:18 easier, and depending on what happens or what types of
10:10:21 submittals are available, we made an option to the
10:10:24 people trying to turn those into the A.R.C. staff to
10:10:27 make sure those kind of submittals are handled in an
10:10:30 expeditious way and handled electronically if they so
10:10:34 desire.
10:10:35 Okay.
10:10:37 The other very big change had to do with some of the
10:10:40 specific changes or specific authority of A.R.C. staff.
10:10:45 If you go to page 32 on your document, these were kind
10:10:50 of in the order of some of the importance.
10:10:55 The specific changes had 20 to do with we had
10:10:58 originally talked about affecting the public and
10:11:04 council wanted to us limit that kind of review and
10:11:06 approval.
10:11:07 We have adopted that language.
10:11:09 And if you look on page 32, the specific language, item
10:11:14 A, installation of a wood fence that does not require a
10:11:17 variance.
10:11:19 It specifies that that's really the only thing.
10:11:21 Other types of things, wrought iron, monumental kinds
10:11:25 of things that could actually affect the district and

10:11:28 how some of the architecture to the A.R.C. board
10:11:34 itself.
10:11:35 The other thing that had to do with limiting the
10:11:37 exterior -- originally we just said, at a talked about
10:11:40 the exterior roofing material to be appropriate to the
10:11:43 style of architecture.
10:11:44 The significance there is that it was felt that some of
10:11:48 the roof pitch, some of the materials used could have
10:11:51 been out of character a little bit, just say roofs.
10:11:54 This is really a clarification, which we have done.
10:11:56 Saying just the roofing material, and has to be
10:11:58 appropriate architecturally appropriate.
10:12:11 And then one specific thing had come up and it had to
10:12:14 do with the background on the item is with some of the
10:12:18 variances, everybody agreed that the ability to rebuild
10:12:23 and replace a historic structure on the same footprint
10:12:28 without having to get a variance should be allowed, the
10:12:32 people in the historic neighborhoods want that, city
10:12:34 staff wants that.
10:12:35 What we have done is we have crafted a footnote that
10:12:40 asks that, that that be allowed in 27-77.
10:12:45 There's one area that -- this is a bit of a moving

10:12:50 target, very quickly, one area that they really need
10:12:54 the historic preservation groups have asked us to try
10:12:57 to really limit what that means, and to specify that is
10:13:02 the existing footprint for the replacement building,
10:13:04 and by replacing that specific footprint to that
10:13:07 building, it also did not increase the density.
10:13:09 And we are willing to make that change between first
10:13:11 and second reading, the legal department says we can do
10:13:14 that without it having to go back to a whole new
10:13:17 reading.
10:13:17 So the change will allow for the replacement of an
10:13:21 accessory structure, replacement of a principal
10:13:24 structure to rebuild on its current orientation in its
10:13:28 current setback delineations.
10:13:35 Those are all the changes.
10:13:36 All the other changes we have adopted as council
10:13:38 pointed out.
10:13:39 Those were the specific changes that we were asked to
10:13:41 make and we have done that.
10:13:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
10:13:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
10:13:46 Mr. Snelling, the thing that you just mentioned, the

10:13:48 footprint, that's not the back averaging.
10:13:56 >>> No.
10:13:57 >> I think all council members received an e-mail from
10:14:00 Beth Johnson requesting that if the staff is allowed to
10:14:06 do the setback averaging that it just be allowed for
10:14:10 residential uses rather than any other kind of uses.
10:14:15 And then talking about back averaging.
10:14:19 Did you receive this e-mail?
10:14:20 >>> I got it this morning as I came in.
10:14:22 I haven't really had time to look at it.
10:14:24 >> It's a pretty minor change.
10:14:28 >>> What we did not want to do, currently the zoning
10:14:30 administrator can look at setback averaging.
10:14:34 And that's been in the code for about eight years.
10:14:37 >> Right.
10:14:37 But it wouldn't go to the A.R.C.
10:14:39 It would go just to the administrator but it would only
10:14:42 be for residential uses as opposed to multifamily.
10:14:45 >>> It's for uses, ma'am.
10:14:46 It doesn't specify multifamily versus single-family.
10:14:49 >> I know.
10:14:50 What I'm saying is, I think it should just be for

10:14:52 residential.
10:14:53 >>> That would be a change that would be different than
10:14:56 what's currently, because now you are changing the code
10:15:00 that was never proposed to be changed in the first
10:15:02 place.
10:15:04 I understand what you're saying, though.
10:15:05 And --
10:15:06 >> Did you have a chance to read this?
10:15:09 >>> No, I have not.
10:15:10 Not to digest it, no.
10:15:11 I understand it because it's gone back and forth.
10:15:15 I know there was a good deal of concern about replacing
10:15:18 the structure and about increasing the density.
10:15:22 And I know that they wanted to expand it perhaps
10:15:23 because they were looking at that entire section.
10:15:25 I know initially -- that entire footnote, the entire
10:15:29 footnote was not proposed to be changed since that
10:15:32 small addition to allow the replacement of the
10:15:37 infrastructure would be requested to clarify a variance
10:15:40 procedure.
10:15:40 >> That was it.
10:15:41 Okay K.that be limited to just single-family?

10:15:45 I mean, why not?
10:15:47 >>> They can certainly look at it and -- for the
10:15:50 replacement stuff in the historic districts that may be
10:15:53 more appropriate.
10:15:53 But you have to understand also if it's a multifamily,
10:15:55 a small little apartment building or something like
10:15:58 that, that multifamily, I would hate to not have the
10:16:01 ability to replace a multifamily historic thing
10:16:03 because -- can't do multifamily.
10:16:07 >> That isn't, I believe, what's being proposed.
10:16:09 >>> And I'm not sure it is either, ma'am.
10:16:11 I agree with you.
10:16:12 I want to make sure whatever language is crafted, I
10:16:14 have learned over my many years here that you have got
10:16:16 to be real specific in terms of what you are saying and
10:16:18 how it fits in there.
10:16:19 So we want to step carefully.
10:16:21 I think I understand what you're trying to get across.
10:16:24 I believe I understand what some of the historic
10:16:28 preservation group is trying to require.
10:16:31 And we'll get something that will agree with on that
10:16:33 and we'll make that minor change prior to going back to

10:16:36 in front of City Council in 30 days, I think it is.
10:16:42 >> It will be coming back in 30 days with the first
10:16:45 draft, first reading?
10:16:48 >>> What's the timing on that?
10:16:50 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
10:16:56 We will need meet between first and second reading, we
10:17:01 will need a minimum of 30 days.
10:17:02 They get 30 days for review.
10:17:05 So in 30-something days it will come back for second
10:17:08 reading.
10:17:11 >> Madam Chairman, I think it's little unclear if we
10:17:14 put this in now it's part of our ordinance.
10:17:16 If we make a change it would go back to first reading?
10:17:21 >>> It would depend on what the change was.
10:17:22 Between first and second reading I don't think we can
10:17:25 come back with something brand new.
10:17:26 I think we would need direction at first reading and
10:17:28 then substitute --
10:17:30 >> Which is today?
10:17:31 >>> Yes.
10:17:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would again like to waive our
10:17:35 rules to allow the public to speak because this is a

10:17:38 big deal, we would be putting this on first reading and
10:17:40 the draft before has changes from the last time we
10:17:43 discussed things.
10:17:53 >> That we hear from our staff and attorneys, and then
10:17:59 take no action.
10:18:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Fine.
10:18:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.
10:18:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My motion was to allow public
10:18:14 comment.
10:18:15 That would work with what Reverend Scott is saying.
10:18:19 I'm just saying let's not act now under staff reports.
10:18:21 Let's wait until we have an opportunity to hear from
10:18:23 the public.
10:18:24 But I would like the staff to stick around because I
10:18:26 want to be able to have them respond to things that the
10:18:29 public says.
10:18:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Are we doing first reading today?
10:18:36 >>THOM SNELLING: I believe that's what's proposed.
10:18:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you have any more to present?
10:18:41 >>THOM SNELLING: That covers everything that you asked
10:18:43 of me.
10:18:44 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to item number 11.

10:18:46 Who is doing that?
10:18:55 >> Item 11.
10:18:56 Do you want to move to item 11?
10:18:58 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
10:18:59 What I would like to do is distribute to you some
10:19:02 materials that will help you follow along with the
10:19:04 discussion.
10:19:08 I need at least eight.
10:19:21 One for the clerk.
10:19:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, while he's passing
10:19:25 that out, I think it's a little confusing that this is
10:19:27 listed under staff reports and unfinished business
10:19:30 rather than at a different place in our agenda.
10:19:32 I think that when we have something for first reading
10:19:36 consideration, it should be placed under ordinances for
10:19:38 first reading.
10:19:39 This is just to direct the city clerk to place it
10:19:44 there.
10:19:44 Because we need to be able to hear from the public on
10:19:48 first reading.
10:19:49 The other motion I'll make is that -- well, we'll
10:19:53 discuss workshop but I think we should have discussion

10:19:57 during first reading rather than second reading.
10:19:59 It makes a lot more sense.
10:20:01 >>DAVID SMITH: Good morning again.
10:20:04 David Smith.
10:20:04 What is being handed out to you is two sets of papers.
10:20:07 The first one, which is a little bit thicker, has a
10:20:11 series of changes proposed by the historic preservation
10:20:16 folks.
10:20:17 Let me qualify that.
10:20:18 You have a variety of views among that group.
10:20:22 This is really the product of some discussions I have
10:20:25 had with MORA Lockett which she has had some discussion
10:20:30 was people in the community, I'm not sure all, but the
10:20:34 point is I think this addresses the issues that were
10:20:36 mostly discussed the last time we were down here.
10:20:40 So what I would like to do is walk you through those,
10:20:43 have you give us guidance in that regard, and then that
10:20:45 will be in essence what you will -- we will send
10:20:49 forward after first reading.
10:20:51 And let me walk you through those.
10:20:53 If you look -- if you take the thicker packet first, at
10:20:56 the very top of the page, subpart B, this is a change

10:21:01 in which we made clear that this paragraph does solely
10:21:05 with the value of the property.
10:21:07 There's a little confusion in here, because we
10:21:09 previously had language that's actually addressed in
10:21:12 subpart 6 and 7.
10:21:13 This is a request to change by Ms. Lockett, and we
10:21:18 agree.
10:21:18 We think it makes sense.
10:21:19 So that it is clear.
10:21:21 We are comparing the property value prior to
10:21:23 designation and after designation.
10:21:26 It's a pretty tough burden for a property owner to
10:21:28 prove but I think it is what we are trying to say, the
10:21:30 property has lost value.
10:21:32 If you can't prove it, you may have a hard time proving
10:21:34 economic hardship.
10:21:35 If you turn to the second page -- and this is a
10:21:37 significant issue.
10:21:38 You look at paragraph F down at the bottom.
10:21:42 The request that's being made by the preservation
10:21:45 community to you all at least is that the determination
10:21:49 on economic hardship be made by the HPC.

10:21:53 So it goes in front of the Historic Preservation
10:21:54 Commission.
10:21:56 There's a full evidentiary hearing.
10:21:59 It doesn't come back to City Council.
10:22:02 If it's going to be appealed by anybody, it is appealed
10:22:05 directly to circuit court and in the nature of a writ
10:22:08 of certiorari.
10:22:09 Certiorari means the determination is made based on the
10:22:11 evidence.
10:22:12 So the issues here for this council to determine is
10:22:16 whether you want to be the appellate body from HPC or
10:22:23 not. If you want to be the appellate body, the second
10:22:26 determination is whether you want to have an appeal
10:22:28 de novo, which means all of the evidence, all of the
10:22:32 witnesses, all of the experts, et cetera, come back
10:22:34 down and you go through another anywhere from five to
10:22:37 twelve-hour hearing depending on how difficult the
10:22:39 issue is, or if you want to be the appellate body you
10:22:42 can limit to the certiorari which means it's based on
10:22:45 the record, you don't go through as much, but you have
10:22:49 a difficult process of reading the record and
10:22:52 discerning the issues and making a determination based

10:22:55 on that record.
10:22:56 So the first issue you will need to determine is
10:23:00 whether this council wants to be the appellate body
10:23:02 from HPC.
10:23:04 Second, if you do, what level of appeal?
10:23:08 Let me go through all of them and come back one at a
10:23:11 time because I am going to recommend about four or five
10:23:13 of these are fine.
10:23:14 Let's get done the parts that we can get done so we can
10:23:17 move on.
10:23:18 The next change if you turn your page is at the top of
10:23:20 the page.
10:23:22 And this deals with an affidavit provided by the Tampa
10:23:25 building official or neighborhood improvement manager.
10:23:28 The request here was that the affidavit provider would
10:23:32 not the end of the issue and this was about whether or
10:23:36 not the property is in compliance with our own
10:23:38 ordinance sections 5 and 9.
10:23:43 I don't have my full copy.
10:23:45 Basically, 5 and 19, which means it's in compliance
10:23:48 with code.
10:23:49 The preservation folks wanted to make sure that they

10:23:53 could be heard on that issue as well.
10:23:55 So it's simply admissible if not dispositive.
10:23:58 Again that's something we can clearly agree to.
10:24:01 If you turn the page again, if you look at the bottom
10:24:04 subpart C down there, this is the companion provision
10:24:09 with only the -- the companion provision with the
10:24:13 appeal issue meaning if you decide you don't want to be
10:24:15 the appellate body, we have to insert the fact that
10:24:18 appeal goes to the circuit court, and that's what
10:24:21 paragraph C does.
10:24:24 Now, turning the page, we come to the economic hardship
10:24:26 issue.
10:24:27 I would like to discuss that separately.
10:24:29 That's an area of a lot of contention.
10:24:32 And I think we need to discuss that a little more in
10:24:35 detail.
10:24:36 Turning to page yet again, you will see at the very top
10:24:39 of the page, third line down, all we have done here is
10:24:41 added section 27-231.5.
10:24:45 That was simply an omission.
10:24:47 That too includes the criteria dealing with
10:24:49 designation.

10:24:50 So once again we believe that is a good change.
10:24:53 Turning the page one more time, second to the last.
10:24:58 The definition of the term "object" has believe it or
10:25:02 not been somewhat contentious.
10:25:05 The provision you have in front of you is the provision
10:25:08 that Laurel has indicated to me is the definition
10:25:15 contained and I guess the national register documents.
10:25:18 We checked with Dennis, and Dennis says it is not.
10:25:21 The definition of "object" is the one we have in the
10:25:24 ordinance before you.
10:25:25 So his recommendation is that do you not change that.
10:25:30 Basically, it's not a huge issue.
10:25:33 It's whatever the definition is, it is.
10:25:35 So maybe Dennis can address that issue for you.
10:25:38 Lastly, on the last page is the definition of the term
10:25:42 "related owner."
10:25:45 Ms. Lockett has suggested we add language "or operated
10:25:47 by" or "under the control of," and we agree with that.
10:25:53 Now what I would like to do if we can do it this way is
10:25:56 to see if we can approve the ordinance as we have
10:25:59 before you, with the changes we all can concur in, get
10:26:04 that approved, and then go back and deal with the

10:26:07 somewhat more involved issues one at a time, and let
10:26:10 you make your determination.
10:26:12 So if that would be the case, what I would be seeking
10:26:14 to have is a motion, approving the ordinance as
10:26:19 drafted, and making changes 1, 3, 6 and 8 on the packet
10:26:26 that's in front of you.
10:26:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena?
10:26:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:26:34 Mr. Smith, I think to respect our process, we'll keep
10:26:40 that in our heads but I think he would want to hear
10:26:43 from the public before we take any official action.
10:26:47 >>DAVID SMITH: If the council wants to do that.
10:26:49 Let me go back and talk about each of the controversial
10:26:51 issues a little more in detail.
10:26:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So the issues that you raise in the
10:26:56 agreement --
10:26:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
10:27:02 >>> The four that I mentioned were all in agreement.
10:27:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If we are all in agreement why wouldn't
10:27:07 we go ahead and pass that portion and then let the
10:27:09 audience come and speak to those other issues that
10:27:12 there is no agreement?

10:27:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you want to make a motion?
10:27:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Then I will move that he would approve
10:27:19 all those items that you just specified that we are all
10:27:23 in agreement on.
10:27:26 >>DAVID SMITH: 1, 3, 6 and 8.
10:27:30 >> Yes.
10:27:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we have a second?
10:27:32 >> Second for discussion.
10:27:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just need to hear from the public
10:27:36 that they agree.
10:27:36 And I think it's presumptuous of us to assume that
10:27:39 nobody wants to speak on this.
10:27:41 So it's a process question.
10:27:43 I want to hear from the public before we vote.
10:27:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Could we have one person from the
10:27:50 public speak on those items?
10:27:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Which person?
10:27:56 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Have we already voted?
10:27:58 How did we approve 1, 3, 6 and 8?
10:28:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We haven't.
10:28:03 >>GWEN MILLER: We are going to vote on that now.
10:28:04 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't see why when don't wait and

10:28:07 vote on the entire ordinance after we have had all the
10:28:11 discussion and presentation from you, too.
10:28:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have a motion on the floor.
10:28:18 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of that motion say Aye.
10:28:20 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I voted yes.
10:28:28 >>GWEN MILLER: So we just passed.
10:28:32 >>MARY MULHERN: Can we have voice roll call?
10:28:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.
10:28:40 I want to hear from the public first.
10:28:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
10:28:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
10:28:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
10:28:49 >>MARY MULHERN: No.
10:28:52 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes.
10:28:53 >>GWEN MILLER: We passed whatever you said.
10:29:01 >>DAVID SMITH: 1, 3, 6 and 8.
10:29:03 Item number 2 and 4 are linked.
10:29:06 And that's the appeal issue.
10:29:07 And that is whether or not this council is going to be
10:29:09 the appellate body.
10:29:11 And if it's not, there has to be some appeal, and the
10:29:16 recommendation we received from Laura Lockett is it

10:29:19 goes directly to circuit court F.this council is going
10:29:22 to be the appellate body --
10:29:32 >> The third option, legal department, that you
10:29:35 maintain it as it currently is.
10:29:37 The HPC makes a recommendation to you.
10:29:39 You make the decision.
10:29:40 And then it is appealed to circuit court from you.
10:29:44 That's the third option.
10:29:47 >>DAVID SMITH: That would be similar to an appeal
10:29:50 de novo which means you would be hearing from all of
10:29:53 the same people who are below at HPC.
10:29:56 So you need to determine whether you -- first whether
10:30:00 you want to be the appellate body or not, and if you
10:30:03 do, what type of appeal you want to have.
10:30:08 An there was discussion on this last week, as you
10:30:10 remember.
10:30:11 And I had Mr. Dingfelder, who isn't here, wanted to
10:30:13 have the language stricken that made it clear that the
10:30:17 HPC made the determination.
10:30:19 And his preference at least at that point, I think, was
10:30:22 to have it come to council.
10:30:23 But he's not here.

10:30:24 So we need some direction.
10:30:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Help me understand what is the process
10:30:31 now?
10:30:31 What is the process now?
10:30:33 >>DAVID SMITH: The process in the ordinance before you,
10:30:36 you want to go back before we made the changes, the
10:30:39 current ordinance, before we change it?
10:30:42 Currently the HPC makes a determination.
10:30:44 It comes to City Council.
10:30:46 And City Council gets to be heard on that.
10:30:50 The issue that came up, as you had a series of criteria
10:30:53 that had no flexibility.
10:30:55 And most of the time we would tell you HPC found it to
10:30:59 be historic.
10:31:00 You didn't have much discretion.
10:31:01 Because pretty much the fact question of whether they
10:31:04 had crafted it before.
10:31:05 So that's part of what led to the changes in the
10:31:07 ordinance was to try to bring a little more council
10:31:10 discretion into the process.
10:31:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So the council then was not the
10:31:15 appellate body then before?

10:31:18 >>DAVID SMITH: It was.
10:31:19 It was, but your discretion was very limited.
10:31:21 It was pretty much A or B.
10:31:25 A, you couldn't say -- that's why City Council would
10:31:30 have at that time direct us to come back with an owner
10:31:33 opt-out.
10:31:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern?
10:31:37 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to ask for reconsideration
10:31:39 of the motion that just passed because I'm not
10:31:42 comfortable with this, even a normal part of the
10:31:45 process of passing an ordinance.
10:31:49 I would like to ask Mr. Shelby to maybe advise me on
10:31:54 that, that we have not heard from the public why we are
10:31:58 passing an ordinance.
10:31:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, obviously it would have to be
10:32:01 a motion to reconsider would have to be from somebody
10:32:04 on the prevailing side, if they wish to take up Ms.
10:32:06 Mulhern's concerns.
10:32:07 Council, my understanding of the motion that was passed
10:32:13 was to adopt certain provisions.
10:32:16 It still has not passed as amended for first reading.
10:32:21 And I believe that will be held till after the public

10:32:24 comment.
10:32:24 I believe that will be the effect of the motion.
10:32:27 And a reminder, council, that obviously, after it
10:32:30 passes for first reading it will be sent to the state,
10:32:33 it will be coming back and you will have a second
10:32:36 adoption, a second reading and adoption full public
10:32:41 hearing on that particular ordinance.
10:32:42 You will have another opportunity to raise issues at
10:32:45 that point.
10:32:47 >>MARY MULHERN: I didn't say that correctly.
10:32:49 I know we were talking about a certain provision.
10:32:51 I can rephrase that if anyone is willing to reconsider
10:32:53 that.
10:32:54 We have not heard from the public or the historic
10:32:57 preservation community, whether they are actually
10:33:02 saying that they are in favor of these items.
10:33:03 So I would like to hear from them.
10:33:06 And that's why I'm asking someone to reconsider.
10:33:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Members of council, that's why process
10:33:17 is so important.
10:33:19 We haven't passed the ordinance but we say, okay, we
10:33:23 agree in concept.

10:33:25 The public will have an opportunity to speak and speak
10:33:27 on anything in regards to this issue.
10:33:30 If they want to raise that up they can do that.
10:33:33 I say we simply agree on what council has presented to
10:33:36 us in concept, moving forward with those issues that
10:33:39 are a little more complicated, a little more
10:33:43 controversial, and address those issues.
10:33:46 That's my understanding of what we have just done.
10:33:48 Not that we have approval of.
10:33:50 Not that the public can't still address those other
10:33:52 issues.
10:33:52 Is that right, council?
10:33:55 >>DAVID SMITH: That's correct.
10:33:56 Your process contemplates your public hearing is your
10:33:58 second hearing, not yours first hearing as I think Mr.
10:34:01 Shelby pointed out to you.
10:34:03 So no ordinance is final, under Florida law, required
10:34:08 by statute, until you have both hearings, one of which
10:34:12 has to be public.
10:34:14 What we have historically done is made the second
10:34:16 hearing the public hearing.
10:34:17 Changes can still be made at the second hearing.

10:34:21 You can waive your rules if you want to hear direct
10:34:25 information from others now.
10:34:28 Or you can hear it at public comment which will be
10:34:30 following shortly after this.
10:34:31 And I'm not trying to tell you that these are exactly
10:34:34 agreed to by every member of the preservation
10:34:37 community.
10:34:38 They don't agree among themselves on a lot of these
10:34:40 provisions.
10:34:41 I'm simply telling you what came out of the discussions
10:34:45 between Laurel Lockett and me over the last several
10:34:49 evenings.
10:34:50 And these changes that I'm recommending that you agree
10:34:53 to are changes suggested by Ms. Lockett that we think
10:34:58 makes sense.
10:34:58 It's a very limited issue at this point.
10:35:03 Anyway, you already voted.
10:35:06 I guess my motion to re-- on the motion to reconsider.
10:35:10 The next issue is what a Pell at process do you want to
10:35:15 see applied to the HPC's initial either recommendation
10:35:17 or determination.
10:35:19 Do you want the HPC to determine it?

10:35:21 And then it can be appealed to circuit court?
10:35:23 Or do you want them to make a recommendation?
10:35:27 Or you want to make a determination it's appeal able to
10:35:31 council?
10:35:31 Those are your three different options as Mrs. Wysong
10:35:38 indicated to you, the third option as a recommendation.
10:35:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, if I can chime in.
10:35:46 That is a major policy decision ultimately and each one
10:35:49 has ramifications.
10:35:50 Whether you want to act as an appellate body, whether
10:35:53 you want to hear everything de novo and here all the
10:35:56 facts all over again.
10:35:57 Obviously, that's a significant decision.
10:36:01 How is it in the ordinance you have before you
10:36:03 currently?
10:36:04 >>DAVID SMITH: The HPC makes a recommendation.
10:36:08 Comes to council.
10:36:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And the proposal doesn't change that?
10:36:17 >>DAVID SMITH: 4 is a decision on an economic
10:36:20 feasibility determination.
10:36:21 That's what we are talking about.
10:36:22 Then subpart 5 says appeal of the HPC decision.

10:36:27 So it is characterized as an appeal in the ordinance.
10:36:31 Characterized.
10:36:32 Any preservation or neighborhood group who participated
10:36:35 at the public hearing may take an appeal of the HPCs
10:36:40 decision and the courts section 27-373-C.
10:36:47 Is that certiorari or de novo?
10:36:50 That's certiorari meaning the record is determined by
10:36:52 the record presented in front of the HPC.
10:36:55 That's what you currently have.
10:36:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And that's what I'm more inclined to
10:37:01 support.
10:37:02 It's generally what happens with a zoning hearing
10:37:04 master.
10:37:05 You only take evidence based on the record.
10:37:08 No new evidence cannot be introduced.
10:37:11 That's right.
10:37:12 So I'm more inclined that it come to council on an
10:37:19 appellate issue or process and we stick to the record.
10:37:22 Because otherwise, once you start opening it all up
10:37:24 again, and person is still not satisfied, then they are
10:37:28 going to end up in circuit court anyway.
10:37:30 But still they should limit the record to the facts.

10:37:33 So I'm more inclined to support that.
10:37:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, I don't remember it being part of
10:37:41 what we talked about earlier, so I don't understand why
10:37:44 this is coming up as an issue.
10:37:47 >>DAVID SMITH: It was raised by the preservationists
10:37:50 last night.
10:37:52 >> And they want a change to it?
10:37:53 >>> What was indicated by Ms. Lockett, I need to
10:37:56 qualify the facts, was that they would like to have the
10:37:58 determination made by HPC and then have the appeal go
10:38:04 to the circuit court so this body would not have a role
10:38:06 in the process.
10:38:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I know what we don't want, based on
10:38:13 having taken things de novo which means you go back to
10:38:16 ground zero and that's really exhausting and I don't
10:38:19 think that we are the experts on this.
10:38:20 So I kind of like the idea -- I want to hear from the
10:38:24 public before we do anything on this.
10:38:25 Thank you.
10:38:26 >>DAVID SMITH: And let me be clear.
10:38:29 Legally any of these options are okay.
10:38:31 I'm not saying one of these is legally flawed.

10:38:34 You can do any one of the three.
10:38:35 I would recommend you not have a de novo hearing for
10:38:38 the reasons stated.
10:38:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I just find it interesting that on one
10:38:45 hand, the citizens want to comment, on the other hand
10:38:51 they don't.
10:38:53 I'm just telling you.
10:38:55 If you have a process that's consistent with the law
10:39:03 and move forward.
10:39:04 Otherwise, you may be telling us today that it may not
10:39:06 be legal but what happens when it goes to circuit
10:39:09 court?
10:39:09 Circuit court could find that it is flawed.
10:39:11 Am I not right?
10:39:12 >>DAVID SMITH: Circuit court could certainly address
10:39:14 any such issue that's raised.
10:39:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand de novo is new, you
10:39:21 start from the beginning again, and it's very
10:39:23 cumbersome and very sometimes -- but the problem I
10:39:27 think that we are log at -- and I agree that the HPC,
10:39:33 it makes out of any surprises.
10:39:37 The record stands on its own.

10:39:38 It's based on its merits.
10:39:40 It's not based on idealism of political ambitions or
10:39:46 not ambitions.
10:39:47 And I hate to use those kind of words like that.
10:39:49 But that's what we are.
10:39:51 So to me, like it, don't like it, both sides can appeal
10:39:57 it to the courts, and have your day in court, and have
10:40:01 a much quicker hearing than what we will give you.
10:40:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: A very persuasive argument, counsel.
10:40:18 And it takes the political -- it takes the political
10:40:22 application out of the situation.
10:40:24 So that's why.
10:40:27 I just want to stress that point.
10:40:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else, Mr. Smith?
10:40:34 >>DAVID SMITH: Yes.
10:40:37 I don't know what -- which will add two more of
10:40:46 components with regard to what Ms. Lockett and I spoke
10:40:49 about.
10:40:50 Now, the issue on object, I think that's a minor thing.
10:40:54 And maybe we can have Stephani, Dennis -- have you
10:40:59 talked to Stephani?
10:41:02 Deny kiss speak to that issue.

10:41:04 That's certainly not my area.
10:41:08 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: Historic preservation manager.
10:41:10 I have reviewed the definition that was provided from
10:41:13 the earlier drafts by the preservation advocates.
10:41:15 I think that is the substantial definition.
10:41:19 However, in the quest to keep consistent with the
10:41:23 national register bulletin, typically we take all of
10:41:26 our definitions and processes out of this particular
10:41:29 document, which does give the definition of object as
10:41:34 we have in the ordinance before you.
10:41:36 However, there could be other competing publications
10:41:40 out there by the National Park Service that I may be
10:41:43 unaware of, so we might need to get that clarified
10:41:46 during the public participation portion of the hearing.
10:41:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else, Mr. Smith?
10:41:52 >>DAVID SMITH: Yes, ma'am.
10:41:57 What I would like to do is walk you through other sheet
10:41:59 you have in your possession which is the economic
10:42:01 hardship definition.
10:42:07 You have two sheets. The front sheet is a version that
10:42:09 was sent to me by Ms. Lockett.
10:42:11 And it defines economic hardship takes inability of a

10:42:15 property to be put to reasonable beneficial use.
10:42:18 And in the case of an income producing property, the
10:42:20 inability of the owner to obtain a reasonable
10:42:22 investment expectation.
10:42:26 The definition of reasonable beneficial use, which is a
10:42:28 permitted or legal nonconform use or activity on a
10:42:32 parcel of real property conducted in accordance with
10:42:35 the current zoning for that property, including periods
10:42:37 of inactivity which are normally associated with
10:42:40 ordinance dental to the nature or type of use or
10:42:44 activity.
10:42:45 The second is the economic hardship definition.
10:42:50 Very similar to what you have in the ordinance.
10:42:52 But I made some changes in it.
10:42:55 This is the one that is recommended by the legal
10:42:57 department.
10:42:59 In the change that -- throws two.
10:43:02 I would like to point those out.
10:43:04 They are in your ordinance.
10:43:05 You have a parenthetical definition of vested right.
10:43:09 That is deleted from here.
10:43:11 It just says invested right.

10:43:13 Whatever it is, it is.
10:43:15 The parenthetical was the parenthetical from chapter
10:43:18 70.001 which says a vested right as determined by
10:43:22 equitable estoppel, or due process.
10:43:27 We don't really need to say that.
10:43:29 You have a vested right, you have a vested right.
10:43:31 If you don't, you don't.
10:43:32 If there's some other basis for it be it statutory or
10:43:35 Constitutional, then you have it.
10:43:37 So I took that out.
10:43:38 The other thing added here is that the last sentence
10:43:41 which was a request by a property owner representative
10:43:50 says for purposes of this definition, a designation
10:43:52 under section 231.3 shall be deemed permanent.
10:43:54 The reason he requested that change was because the
10:43:58 test up above is that there's a permanent inability to
10:44:02 obtain a reasonable use.
10:44:03 So the view was if we don't indicate that the
10:44:06 designation is of that character, then we get bogged
10:44:10 down in an argument about what constitutes permanence.
10:44:15 You know, that's my big issue.
10:44:16 What I tried to do and what I have in the ordinance

10:44:19 before you was I pretty much tracked 70.001.
10:44:24 Now, 70.001 is the Burt Harris Act. Why didn't we do
10:44:29 that?
10:44:29 Why are we recommending that?
10:44:30 We are recommending that because that's the applicable
10:44:32 standard anyway.
10:44:34 If someone decides to take your decision, or the HPC's
10:44:38 decision to court, that's going to be the standard they
10:44:41 are going to apply in the Burt Harris.
10:44:43 So our view is, why would we have a standard different
10:44:46 than what applies in the statute?
10:44:48 Now, you will find -- and I assume from some of the
10:44:51 discussion you are going to hear from the public, and
10:44:53 they should speak for themselves in this regard, but
10:44:56 their concern is I believe the term I heard was it
10:44:59 opens the flood gates.
10:45:00 I'll tell you, I don't share that anxiety but I
10:45:03 understand anxiety sometimes have a good basis and
10:45:06 sometimes just founded in fear.
10:45:08 But I think irrespective of that we are stuck with the
10:45:11 standard anyway.
10:45:11 So I don't see it as a big deal.

10:45:14 And I see it as what we are going to have to apply
10:45:17 anyway if we are going to confirm with the law so
10:45:20 that's why I recommend it as your standard.
10:45:21 .
10:45:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Smith, using the existing
10:45:34 wording have we had a challenge?
10:45:35 >>> It's never even had a an economic hardship
10:45:37 determination.
10:45:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I mean, the concern is speculative.
10:45:43 >>> Exactly.
10:45:44 The idea that the standard --
10:45:46 >> But your concern is speculative --
10:45:49 >>> It existed prior to the enactment of our new
10:45:53 ordinance. The point is you make the point exactly.
10:45:55 The standard is there.
10:45:56 No one has availed themselves of it yet so it's not
10:46:00 highly likely.
10:46:01 I don't see the flood gates being open.
10:46:03 This existed prior to that.
10:46:04 Not under our ordinance but under general law.
10:46:07 Anybody who wanted to challenge the determination were
10:46:09 free to do so and yet didn't.

10:46:11 So I think that's empirical evidence that is not a
10:46:14 risk.
10:46:15 >> But what you are proposing is watering down our
10:46:19 existing wording, and there's no -- I don't see any
10:46:26 reason to do it.
10:46:28 >>> What I'm suggesting is you use the standard that
10:46:30 you're subject to anyway.
10:46:31 That's what I'm suggesting.
10:46:32 It really comes down to the policy which is the
10:46:37 council's which is whether or not you want a process
10:46:39 that's a little bit more property owner friendly.
10:46:41 That was the direction we previously received.
10:46:44 That's what we came back here to you with.
10:46:46 If you don't want to make itself that property owner
10:46:50 friendly, then you don't do so.
10:46:52 But they still have the ability to appeal any decision
10:46:55 you or HPC makes in this regard that's final under
10:46:59 70.01.
10:47:00 I just don't want to mislead you in terms of the
10:47:02 applicable standard.
10:47:03 It will be the standard if they follow Burt Harris.
10:47:07 >>CHAIRMAN: Anything else to add?

10:47:13 That's it?
10:47:13 Okay.
10:47:14 We are going to move to item number 12.
10:47:20 >> Cindy Miller, director of growth management
10:47:22 development services for item number 12.
10:47:23 There was a memo distribute to your offices.
10:47:27 I have extra copies.
10:47:41 I have one for Mr. Michelini as well.
10:47:46 Council, I am not going to read the entire memo to you,
10:47:49 but I would basically suggest that for the first item
10:47:53 as to transportation impact fees, you have a workshop
10:47:56 already scheduled with the Planning Commission to
10:47:58 discuss the comprehensive plan and the process.
10:48:01 My recommendation is that basically this information is
10:48:03 provided to you at a time and that it become one of
10:48:06 your agenda items as you are discussing with Planning
10:48:09 Commission staff, the comprehensive plan update, that
10:48:13 will be a multi-month effort on yours and their part
10:48:18 and into this year and next year for 2008.
10:48:23 >> So we put the impact fee of transportation as part
10:48:25 of our comp plan conversation.
10:48:27 >> Second.

10:48:27 (Motion carried).
10:48:31 >>> And the second item is we look at updating chapter
10:48:34 27 as to various other purposes.
10:48:36 I wanted to share with you that Catherine Coyle of Land
10:48:40 Development Coordination is already in discussion with
10:48:42 the various neighborhoods in Seminole Heights.
10:48:44 I believe there are five different neighborhood
10:48:46 associations.
10:48:47 Utilizing that neighborhood as for planning process
10:48:51 that will be again many months, and with public
10:48:54 discussion, to look at parking, landscaping, et cetera.
10:48:57 So at this point I really don't recommend any action on
10:48:59 council's part.
10:49:00 But ask you to receive and file the memo.
10:49:02 And as Ms. Coyle has updates she will be very happy to
10:49:06 provide those to you.
10:49:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman?
10:49:10 I had an opportunity to meet with Ms. Miller.
10:49:13 I'm frustrated that it's going to take to the spring of
10:49:17 '08 to get there but at least it's movement.
10:49:20 So I'm going to hold onto this and I think it's modest.
10:49:27 I don't think it's an aggressive time frame but I

10:49:30 certainly don't want a delay beyond it.
10:49:33 So I'll hold onto this and hopefully in spring of '08
10:49:37 see these things spring as ordinances.
10:49:40 >>GWEN MILLER: At this time would anyone like to
10:49:42 request reconsideration for a legislative matter?
10:49:44 Anyone like to request?
10:49:47 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America plaza.
10:49:54 This morning, representing racetrack petroleum.
10:50:07 This morning I am joined by Mr. Philip Compton of
10:50:12 RaceTrac.
10:50:12 This was Busch Boulevard, plan amendment Z-06-18.
10:50:17 The request was to amend the planned designation on the
10:50:20 property from res 10 to CMU 35 and it was denied.
10:50:38 The risk is the comp plan was denied last week and that
10:50:40 of course happened.
10:50:41 There was neighborhood opposition to the plan
10:50:42 amendment.
10:50:43 Our client would like to have the opportunity to have
10:50:45 you rehear the plan amendment at your convenience, and
10:50:50 in the meantime, we would meet with the neighborhood on
10:50:53 the PD site plan and see if we can come to an accord on
10:50:57 the PD site plan.

10:50:59 Hopefully that would occur.
10:51:01 Then when we come forward on the plan amendment they
10:51:03 would be in support of the plan amendment, and
10:51:06 hopefully would be approved.
10:51:08 Thereafter we come back to you on the PD. The PD would
10:51:11 address buffering, neighborhood impact, and would bring
10:51:14 the project further back off of Busch Boulevard rather
10:51:18 than forcing the project to the forward of Busch
10:51:21 Boulevard which is currently what they are going to
10:51:23 have to do because of the plan amendment denial.
10:51:25 In a nutshell we would like to have a rehearing at your
10:51:28 convenience.
10:51:29 I do not have the authority or the right to get into
10:51:33 the essence of the plan amendment last week.
10:51:35 We are just asking if you would like to reconsider.
10:51:40 Mr. Compton would like to speak with you a moment.
10:51:44 He's with RaceTrac petroleum.
10:51:47 >>> Good morning members of the council.
10:51:48 Fill I am Compton, senior engineering, project manager,
10:51:52 3225 Cumberland Boulevard, Atlanta, Georgia.
10:51:56 As property owner I would respectfully request your
10:51:59 reconsideration of our application TA 06-18.

10:52:03 We would like to put it before you for the following
10:52:05 reasons.
10:52:06 One, it gives us an opportunity to further explore our
10:52:09 impact on the site into neighborhood as suggested by
10:52:12 some of your members last Thursday, give some
10:52:15 opportunity to better explore this Boulevard
10:52:20 beautification standard, and finally, gives the
10:52:24 opportunity to make the current PD which is currently
10:52:26 in place better for not only the City of Tampa, the
10:52:30 local community, but RaceTrac ourselves.
10:52:33 The way it's currently allowed, it puts the property
10:52:39 extremely close to Busch Boulevard.
10:52:41 A reconsideration would give us an opportunity to
10:52:43 explore an opportunity to make Busch Boulevard corridor
10:52:48 a much more attractive area.
10:52:50 I appreciate your time this morning.
10:52:53 And I would be happy to answer any questions you may
10:52:55 have.
10:52:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I remember distinctly, if I recall,
10:53:02 it was conversation that we did meet with the
10:53:04 neighborhood, and in fact the neighborhood said they
10:53:10 had been met with and I was on the prevailing side that

10:53:13 voted against the change in the comp plan, because it
10:53:16 went back an additional, if I recall, 125 feet from the
10:53:21 norm of Busch Boulevard.
10:53:25 There was projects that had been built on North
10:53:27 Boulevard that came back, I'll say 150 feet for the
10:53:32 sake of argument, but that there was an extension to
10:53:34 that of 125 feet.
10:53:37 And the primary concern that I had was that, of course,
10:53:42 we listened to both sides.
10:53:44 But that the neighborhood in essence had not been
10:53:49 brought up to speed at that current time as to what was
10:53:52 going on.
10:53:53 If I remember, the two drawings, again going by memory,
10:53:58 one had like 24 pumps, the other one, if I remember the
10:54:02 scaled down version, had like 14 pumps.
10:54:05 Am I correct?
10:54:09 >>> Both versions had 24 pumps. The one that would
10:54:11 meet the current PD twists everything this way,
10:54:17 sideways, instead of facing this way.
10:54:20 That's the big difference.
10:54:23 And also to clarify one issue.
10:54:29 In January 2007 we had a neighborhood meeting at the

10:54:34 hotel on Busch Boulevard, I believe it's the Comfort
10:54:36 Inn right there at the interstate.
10:54:39 We invited the entire neighborhood.
10:54:41 We had one family show up that was direct property
10:54:43 owners.
10:54:44 The rest of the community did not show up at that
10:54:47 meeting at that time.
10:54:50 >> I understand that.
10:54:51 That's an after thought.
10:54:53 I think you have to make a more concerted effort to get
10:54:57 door to door.
10:54:57 You know who the individuals were that strongly stood
10:54:59 up and said there are were not notified and those
10:55:02 neighbors that lived across the street, I remember one
10:55:04 gentleman said I bought a house, I live there alone,
10:55:07 I'm happy, and I'm not speaking for anyone in the
10:55:11 neighborhood, but their concern was not RaceTrac.
10:55:15 Their concern was the amount of space that RaceTrac was
10:55:18 coming back, if I recall all that.
10:55:20 So I'm not opposed to giving you a second shot at the
10:55:23 apple, even though I don't do that too often.
10:55:25 But I think your sincerity and the way do you this,

10:55:30 you're moving like somebody from West Tampa.
10:55:32 That's nice.
10:55:35 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
10:55:37 Question on the motion.
10:55:38 Ms. Saul-Sena.
10:55:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I will not support this because the
10:55:40 Planning Commission very strongly recommended denial.
10:55:44 The Planning Commission said this is not the pattern of
10:55:46 development in the area, it intrudes north -- south
10:55:51 into the residential neighborhood, and I don't think
10:55:55 the Planning Commission is going to change their mind.
10:55:57 So based on their very, very clear strong
10:56:02 recommendation of disapproval I won't support rehearing
10:56:04 it.
10:56:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern?
10:56:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I also don't understand why you are
10:56:08 talking about moving it further back from Busch
10:56:10 Boulevard.
10:56:10 Because the concerns were the people that lived on the
10:56:14 side and in the back of the property.
10:56:16 So I don't think you're making a good argument for
10:56:19 coming back to us, because you are not addressing --

10:56:22 you are not even suggesting that you are going to
10:56:25 address the concerns that came up.
10:56:26 So I'm not going to support this either.
10:56:30 >>> Actually, if I could, I would like to bring my
10:56:32 throw points back.
10:56:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to support the motion but keep
10:56:42 in mind that does not mean when it comes back I am
10:56:44 going to change my vote.
10:56:46 >>> I certainly understand that.
10:56:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me say this to council.
10:56:49 Here again I went by the site.
10:56:50 And the property is deep into the neighborhood.
10:56:54 It's deep.
10:56:55 You are talking about going back.
10:56:56 You have got some major problems.
10:56:57 You are going back to change some things, to improve
10:57:00 it, to satisfy.
10:57:04 You might come back with a better plan, that the
10:57:07 Planning Commissional prove and staff.
10:57:09 I'm telling you, that property goes deep into their
10:57:12 neighborhood.
10:57:12 And I have some issues in terms of that.

10:57:15 So I am just letting you know.
10:57:17 I'll support the motion.
10:57:20 It doesn't mean I am going to change my vote.
10:57:22 >>> I appreciate it.
10:57:24 >>GWEN MILLER: When you meet with the community, why
10:57:26 don't you find a place that would be conducive for
10:57:28 them?
10:57:28 I think that was a little too far the Comfort Inn way
10:57:33 down on that corner.
10:57:34 Meet at the Temple Crest church or something.
10:57:37 Meet where the neighbors would like to meet. The
10:57:39 property is too far and that's why they didn't show up.
10:57:41 When they show up let them know how deep.
10:57:45 Let them tell you if you want to go north or whatever.
10:57:48 And I think work things out that way.
10:57:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My concern is that what you are
10:57:54 doing is taking a template that you developed in
10:57:56 Atlanta, Georgia, for RaceTrac all through the
10:57:59 southeast that's based on proximity to an interstate,
10:58:02 and this location is a neighborhood.
10:58:07 This isn't just a gigantic piece of property off the
10:58:11 interstate.

10:58:11 There's an established neighborhood to your south and
10:58:13 you might have to modify your plan to respect the
10:58:17 neighborhood and move closer to the commercial corridor
10:58:21 and less far from the neighborhood.
10:58:22 And I know that that requires some rethinking.
10:58:24 But that's the kind of thinking you need to do if you
10:58:27 are going to come back at all.
10:58:29 >>> That's what I'm asking for today.
10:58:30 >>GWEN MILLER: I'm going to -- Julia Cole.
10:58:34 >>JULIA COLE: If I could make a suggestion if you are
10:58:37 inclined to rehear this as part of the chapter 27
10:58:40 amendment. The opportunity to allow a rezoning to run
10:58:43 concurrent with a plan amendment, so long as that re
10:58:46 zoning application isn't approved 30 days after the
10:58:52 plan amendment and maybe a good opportunity to deal
10:58:54 with this issue, assuming you have that process then my
10:59:00 recommendation is if you do this, you do it to come
10:59:02 back no earlier than July 1st allowing this
10:59:05 applicant to avail themselves of that process.
10:59:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Madam Chair again, like Reverend
10:59:12 Scott, this is not to say that I am going to support
10:59:15 the motion, to do what you have to do to come back, and

10:59:23 support the plan of zoning.
10:59:26 I am just giving you a second opportunity in which I
10:59:28 felt there was some communication discrepancies that I
10:59:32 couldn't understand because one side said we met, the
10:59:35 other side said we didn't meet and those were the two
10:59:40 sides that were supposed to have met.
10:59:41 So maybe some neighbors have met, others have not.
10:59:43 But the ones that were here, I think we ought to have
10:59:46 the obligation to notify them, and if you can get that
10:59:50 from the clerk's office, and make sure that those
10:59:52 individuals are notified, because those are the ones
10:59:56 that determine.
10:59:56 As far as your structure, I can't tell you what to
10:59:59 build or not to build but I can tell you one thing,
11:00:01 it's a lot nicer looking than the one I see on west
11:00:05 Hillsborough Avenue and town and country.
11:00:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me say also while you are doing it
11:00:11 if you will go down a couple of blocks, I think there's
11:00:13 a taco bell there, it might be an ideal location.
11:00:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Call for the question.
11:00:21 All in favor say Aye.
11:00:22 Opposed, Nay.

11:00:25 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena and Mulhern
11:00:28 voting no.
11:00:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Now we need to make a motion and bring
11:00:30 it back before July 1st?
11:00:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: After July 1st, council.
11:00:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved --
11:00:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I think we need a day meeting?
11:00:48 >>GWEN MILLER: We'll be on vacation the first two weeks
11:00:49 of July.
11:00:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you wish to add that to a night
11:00:52 meeting?
11:00:53 >>GWEN MILLER: The 19th?
11:00:56 >> Are we free?
11:00:57 The number of cases?
11:00:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: July 19th.
11:01:04 >>THE CLERK: You have five land rezonings that evening.
11:01:08 >>GWEN MILLER: That's okay.
11:01:10 That will be fine.
11:01:11 Need a motion.
11:01:12 6 p.m.
11:01:13 Get a motion?
11:01:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I make the motion.

11:01:17 (Motion carried).
11:01:19 >>> I personally thank each of you for your time and
11:01:23 personally thank each of you for your opinion.
11:01:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Remember to meet with the neighbors,
11:01:27 within the neighborhood so they can all participate.
11:01:31 >>> Okay, ma'am.
11:01:31 Thank you.
11:01:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:01:33 Now we go to our audience portion.
11:01:38 Anyone in the public that would like to speak to any
11:01:41 item on the agenda not set for public hearing.
11:01:43 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I'm her on item number 12 which I
11:01:46 had brought to council before as a result of a couple
11:01:49 of different rezoning hearings.
11:01:51 I have looked at this schedule.
11:01:52 And obviously it's not a very aggressive schedule.
11:01:56 You are looking at in-fill development which is very
11:01:58 time sensitive.
11:02:00 And if you will recall what prompted this was cap
11:02:05 Pi's-oh -- cappy's in Seminole Heights.
11:02:10 I hoped this report would not preclude an independent
11:02:14 proposal coming before you for an ordinance that would

11:02:16 amend certain sections of the code that would
11:02:18 specifically address these issues.
11:02:20 And I'll be happy to go back to the neighborhood
11:02:23 associations and engage me and working with me and I
11:02:26 committed to work with them to bring those things
11:02:29 forward to you.
11:02:30 But saying it's going to come back to you in two years,
11:02:33 it not going to provide the kind of relief in the
11:02:35 redevelopment areas and in these transportation
11:02:38 development corridors that desperately need attention
11:02:40 now.
11:02:41 I understand their interest in postponing this and
11:02:48 making it part of the report which is no way of telling
11:02:50 how long it's going to take to adopt although they are
11:02:53 projecting two years.
11:02:54 I think that in itself is probably an aggressive
11:02:57 schedule.
11:02:57 So I would like to be able to come back to you with a
11:03:00 proposal on how specifically some recommendations could
11:03:03 be adopted that will alleviate these concerns regarding
11:03:06 transportation impact fees, regarding landscaping
11:03:10 requirements, the technical standards and variety of

11:03:13 other measures that are precluding or in many cases
11:03:19 absolutely preventing and making it prohibitive for
11:03:21 redevelopment to occur in some of these corridors.
11:03:25 But I specifically request the ability to come back
11:03:27 before you with those proposals.
11:03:28 >>GWEN MILLER: You are going to meet with the
11:03:30 neighborhood?
11:03:31 >>> I will be meeting with them, Randy baron and the
11:03:33 other folks I was working with initially to bring some
11:03:35 of those proposals back to you.
11:03:37 >> How long will that take, a couple of weeks?
11:03:39 >>> Hopefully I'll have it back to you before you go on
11:03:41 your break.
11:03:42 Two weeks perhaps.
11:03:43 >> Two weeks.
11:03:44 Okay.
11:03:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we need a motion for that?
11:03:48 Make a motion.
11:03:48 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: As chairman of that committee,
11:03:51 perhaps we can set up a discussion meeting in a few
11:03:55 weeks.
11:03:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Two weeks?

11:04:00 >>> That will be fine.
11:04:00 I'll work with council to work that out.
11:04:04 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor?
11:04:06 Opposed?
11:04:07 (Motion carried)
11:04:08 Thank you.
11:04:11 >>> Seth Nelson, 3305 west Palm Avenue, Tampa, Florida
11:04:15 32611.
11:04:17 I was coming before you to discuss the report by the
11:04:20 clerk's office on number 5.
11:04:22 As you are aware there's a VRB opening for a
11:04:26 neighborhood representative.
11:04:27 A member of the Florida Bar and I'm currently serving
11:04:29 as an alternate on the VRB.
11:04:32 I understand they come before you later in June but I
11:04:36 just wanted to introduce myself and let now I agree
11:04:39 with Reverend Scott when comes to process.
11:04:41 I work hard on that board to make sure that the process
11:04:43 is proper, especially knowing that a lot of people come
11:04:46 before us without representation.
11:04:48 And making sure that they understand the process.
11:04:51 Because I have learned on our board when they

11:04:53 understand the process even if we rule against their
11:04:56 petition, they seem to understand and accept it better
11:05:00 than when they don't understand the process.
11:05:04 And I just if you ask us to come and make
11:05:09 representations for VRB I hope you will look favorably
11:05:13 on my application.
11:05:14 On a side note you guys hear a lot of problems, but I
11:05:17 think I can speak for my fellow board members that
11:05:21 Donna Wysong, assistant city attorney who represents us
11:05:25 on the board has been doing a fantastic job in helping
11:05:28 with us the intricacies of that process, and also Marty
11:05:31 Boyle, the clerk, has been giving an excellent report
11:05:33 and really helps run a more fluid meeting.
11:05:36 I just want to let you guys know they are doing a great
11:05:39 job.
11:05:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What's your name again?
11:05:46 >>> Seth Nelson.
11:05:47 >> Spencer Cass, north Howard Avenue, here to speak on
11:05:51 item number 3 which is supposed to be a city staff
11:05:52 report about the impact of the proposed budget changes
11:05:57 from Tallahassee.
11:05:58 First I just want to point out to council that as a

11:06:01 common courtesy to the public it would be nice if these
11:06:03 things are going to be continued, and this has already
11:06:06 been continued once before, if the public was notified,
11:06:08 well in advance, could have the clerk publish that
11:06:13 pretty easily.
11:06:14 Next I would like to point out that through the many
11:06:17 conversations I have had with various people both in
11:06:19 the city, basically what we heard is that the only way
11:06:24 the city is able to come up with the money it needs is
11:06:26 by cutting police and firefighters.
11:06:29 I have to tell you that as someone who reviews the
11:06:32 budget every year, I found those types of claims
11:06:35 completely outrageous.
11:06:36 So in order to assist council and hopefully assist with
11:06:40 this report that will be coming back to you, I have
11:06:42 provided you with 24 methods without curtailing any
11:06:48 city services to the public whatsoever.
11:06:50 If I could have the Elmo, please.
11:06:59 I'll provide copies of this to council as well and the
11:07:02 clerk
11:07:10 I am going to run through them very quickly.
11:07:13 Anyhow, just so they are on the record.

11:07:14 Some of these are controversial but I think everything
11:07:17 needs to be considered given the current budget
11:07:19 environment.
11:07:20 First I would like to suggest that you eliminate four
11:07:24 bonus payments including longevity and awards,
11:07:28 eliminate all city overtime which not only reduces the
11:07:31 overtime costs but pension costs.
11:07:34 Next, immediately eliminate the automatic raises that
11:07:36 were put in place for both the mayor and City Council.
11:07:40 Look for economy of scale by merging department was the
11:07:43 county such as the contracting department.
11:07:44 Look at cost savings by privatizing some city
11:07:47 departments such as utility billing, city pension
11:07:50 department of human resources.
11:07:52 Look to start selling land at the highest possible
11:07:56 price.
11:07:56 Stop using an RFP procedure but an auction process
11:08:00 created as an open auction process and then dictate
11:08:03 land use restrictions on the land you are trying to get
11:08:05 rid of to maximize income.
11:08:09 Have the CRA repay the $133 million that was taken out
11:08:13 of the general fund to cover convention center debt.

11:08:17 Look to the city for a guarantee on Centro Ybor.
11:08:22 As now Centro Ybor was partially sold to its new
11:08:25 owners.
11:08:26 As far as I have been able to tell the city received in
11:08:28 a money for that.
11:08:30 Since they are looking to expanded and redevelop that
11:08:31 property I think it would be an ideal time for the city
11:08:33 to get out from having to make those payments.
11:08:36 Increase the speed at which you approve new
11:08:39 construction to capture fees faster and increase your
11:08:42 tax base.
11:08:42 Expand automated garbage collection system for the
11:08:48 entire city instead of transferring those people to
11:08:50 other departments, elimination the positions, install
11:08:54 GPS devices to monitor employees and look for
11:08:57 efficiencies.
11:08:59 Again, I am going to skip at this time.
11:09:03 Explain how the cities just spent $660,000 on plans for
11:09:08 stormwater and now you are not going to implement the
11:09:10 plan and if there WAS a level of concern to begin with
11:09:13 why did it go so far as the city invested $650,000 in
11:09:17 plans.

11:09:18 If I could have an extra minute I would appreciate it.
11:09:20 >>GWEN MILLER: That's it.
11:09:23 >>> For the record, just wanted to be aware should city
11:09:27 staff have any questions.
11:09:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:09:31 Next speaker.
11:09:39 >> Barbara deacon.
11:09:40 I reside at 1408 south DeSoto Avenue in Tampa.
11:09:44 First of all I would like to say we are grateful for --
11:09:47 I'm here speaking on items 10 and 11.
11:09:49 And I would like to first say that we are grateful to
11:09:53 Mr. Saline and Ms. Kert for working on the A.R.C.
11:09:58 ordinance with the preservation community.
11:09:59 We have come a long way with a lot of positive changes.
11:10:02 However, we do have one remaining concern.
11:10:05 And on behalf of the -- Elizabeth Johnson, she is ill
11:10:10 and has a child that's ill so I'm here to read a
11:10:13 statement that she has prepared.
11:10:16 Dear members of City Council: Some of my neighbors in
11:10:20 Hyde Park we do not support a new change that has been
11:10:23 proposed by 27-77.
11:10:26 Essentially the change proposed would allow the zoning

11:10:29 administrator to approve a reduction or waiver of the
11:10:32 required yard setback for replacement principle or
11:10:36 accessory structure in a historic district when in
11:10:39 doing so would be in conformity with the historical and
11:10:42 precedent patterns of building setbacks for other
11:10:45 similarly situated properties.
11:10:48 Early Wednesday morning after being sent the proposed
11:10:50 change late Tuesday night, I spoke with assistant city
11:10:54 attorney Rebecca Kert to convey my concerns about the
11:10:57 proposed change because it could possibly enable own
11:11:01 towers replace their structures outside the existing
11:11:03 historical footprint that now exists for so many of our
11:11:06 multi-zoned properties within our historic district.
11:11:10 Properties such as the Georgian and DeSoto apartments
11:11:13 in Hyde Park are the two examples where old-fashioned
11:11:18 courtyards and open spaces provide present-day zoning.
11:11:22 The idea that those properties could simply be replaced
11:11:25 some day with a bulky building that takes advantage of
11:11:27 modern zoning and offer as a waiver on yard setback is
11:11:31 very concerning.
11:11:33 At 4:40 p.m. on Wednesday Rebecca Kert called me to say
11:11:36 that Mr. Snelling will propose an additional limitation

11:11:39 stating that the replacement of structures approved by
11:11:41 the zoning administrator must match the historical
11:11:45 footprint.
11:11:45 This is good.
11:11:47 Please make sure this happens.
11:11:49 Unfortunately, my neighbors and I are still concerned
11:11:52 that too much authority on replacement has been
11:11:54 delegated to the zoning administrator.
11:11:57 After talking with our neighborhood association
11:11:59 president, Roger blanky, who appears before the A.R.C.
11:12:03 frequently, he and I believe that the zoning
11:12:04 administrator should not be determining whether
11:12:08 appropriate replacement property in our historic
11:12:10 district when a building goes down or there needs to be
11:12:14 replacement construction.
11:12:15 He and I, along with other neighbors, have felt that
11:12:18 the A.R.C. is not where the problem lies.
11:12:20 Rather, the A.R.C. understands our historic district
11:12:23 and responds accordingly.
11:12:25 The problem has been with zoning departments and other
11:12:28 departments such as transportation which do not always
11:12:30 appreciate the historical patterns.

11:12:32 Roger is sea Florida trust event and I am not likely to
11:12:38 be here in person at City Council this morning because
11:12:39 one of my children is home sick.
11:12:41 Please do not accept the other proposed change to
11:12:45 27-77.
11:12:46 If you must accept the proposed change, and I would
11:12:49 hope that you will not, please limit to the single
11:12:51 family properties only.
11:12:52 We understand that City Council's charge to the
11:12:54 administration was to try to streamline the process for
11:12:58 the single-family home owner and make the single-family
11:13:01 home owner eager to liver in our district.
11:13:04 To the extent that the zoning administrator will not
11:13:05 have expanded authority to make determinations on
11:13:08 commercial and multifamily zoned property, this is
11:13:11 particularly concerning.
11:13:13 It seems to be the opposite of what you charge the
11:13:15 administration to do.
11:13:16 The bottom line is that 27-77 deserves our significant
11:13:21 attention, having seen it for the first time Tuesday
11:13:23 evening we are concerned about it.
11:13:25 Although we are grateful that at least some of our

11:13:27 concerns are being considered, the eve of City Council
11:13:31 meeting is not the time to make significant changes to
11:13:37 chapter 27.
11:13:38 >>GWEN MILLER: How much more do you have to read?
11:13:40 >>> One sentence.
11:13:41 Please ask the tough questions of 27-77 and reject this
11:13:43 proposed change.
11:13:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:13:45 Next speaker.
11:13:52 >>> Ely Montague, I'm trying to think how to start my
11:13:56 talk today.
11:13:57 And slipping and sliding and dancing around.
11:14:04 You know, I have worked on stormwater for all these
11:14:06 years.
11:14:07 And I am going to read you my cover letter.
11:14:14 I gave each of you a copy of all of this.
11:14:16 There's only one copy of pictures showing a little bit
11:14:19 of the debris in the water at Dundee.
11:14:25 I wrote to our homeowners, and people pretty much said
11:14:32 there's nothing being done west of Westshore being
11:14:36 dumped on by the city and not being maintained.
11:14:39 You have heard me speak about this for over 30 years.

11:14:42 Finally environmental congressional grant was awarded
11:14:46 for sediment removal from the estuaries of the head
11:14:49 waters of several natural and man-made canals in the
11:14:52 west side of the Interbay peninsula and on Davis
11:14:56 Island.
11:14:56 Failure to treat these estuaries will cause diminishing
11:15:00 environmental quality of adjacent water bodies
11:15:03 including the entire bay, in addition to removing silt
11:15:09 from the estuaries described would involve methods to
11:15:13 improve speculation of the water hardening the
11:15:18 shoreline for establishment of areas and habitats to
11:15:22 sea life and construction, additional sediments in the
11:15:26 upstream bases to reduce future silt depositions, Mayor
11:15:32 Pam Iorio in a letter to the honorable Jim Davis in
11:15:37 2004 asking for $1.3 million grant that was gotten
11:15:41 specifically and earmarked for dredging channels in
11:15:47 Lake Kipling and canals.
11:15:50 My message is to do otherwise would be -- my feeling
11:15:55 would be miss appropriation of funds and certainly
11:15:59 inappropriate.
11:15:59 Most certainly the canals should be cleaned. I have a
11:16:02 letter from my wonderful attorney John Thomas that is

11:16:06 too long to print in this newsletter but you may
11:16:08 contact me and I will e-mail you a copy
11:16:15 Please make sure they are responsible for dredge wag
11:16:17 they have been responsible for.
11:16:18 The sediment in the storm sewer system.
11:16:21 The sediment comes from properties all over the
11:16:24 watershed and runs through the storm and Westshore area
11:16:31 as intended by the city stormwater sewer.
11:16:33 For this reason, it's up to the city to assign
11:16:38 responsibility for dredging the waterfront properties
11:16:40 along.
11:16:42 Members of the city the filtration study, they were
11:16:48 trying to say we were responsible.
11:16:50 We found that.
11:16:51 And we paid money for filtration experts.
11:16:58 These are property owners who pay much higher taxes.
11:17:01 Because the properties are waterfront in the first
11:17:03 place, it is extremely unfair, invalid and unlawful.
11:17:11 We urge City Council to employ common sense typically
11:17:15 for leadership and environmental stewardship and reject
11:17:17 the city's use of federal grant funds and special
11:17:21 assessment process.

11:17:22 Instead is city should require the utility department
11:17:25 to --
11:17:27 (Bell sounds).
11:17:27 I gave you all those copies.
11:17:28 >>GWEN MILLER: We have your copies.
11:17:31 >>> They are not just dancing around and sliding and
11:17:33 slipping and whatever that song says.
11:17:35 It is unbelievable.
11:17:37 We are trying to get answers from them.
11:17:38 They won't meet with us.
11:17:40 They meet only with the canal people, 15 at a time,
11:17:43 small groups, trying to con them into thinking that
11:17:46 they get that million, $2 million that they can pay the
11:17:51 rest of it.
11:17:52 It's unfair to people who can't afford it.
11:17:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, Mrs. Montague.
11:17:57 Mrs. Saul-Sena.
11:17:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for coming here today,
11:18:00 Mrs. Montague.
11:18:01 I would encourage all the City Council members to go
11:18:03 out and visit with Mrs. Montague at Lake Kipling and
11:18:07 see the work that needs to be done and have her give

11:18:09 you the executive summary of this 30-year saga to clean
11:18:14 up this lake which used to be a lake and is now
11:18:16 considered like a drainage, retention pond or
11:18:19 something.
11:18:19 It has been not treated properly
11:18:21 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I think about three years ago I
11:18:30 saw something on TV and City Council.
11:18:33 Didn't awe choir money to clean up Lake Kipling this.
11:18:36 >> Yes.
11:18:37 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: What's taken it so long?
11:18:39 >> May I speak to that?
11:18:40 The issue is that the money that was acquired through
11:18:43 Mrs. Montague's efforts, private fund-raising to hire
11:18:46 an attorney, to force the city -- anyway, the bottom
11:18:49 line is the city is considering, in my opinion, the
11:18:54 city is considering spending some of that money on
11:18:56 canal dredging, and the question is, isn't the priority
11:19:00 and the direction Kipling?
11:19:02 I think it would be appropriate for council to ask for
11:19:04 a report in two weeks on exactly where we stand with
11:19:08 the Lake Kipling project and what moneys are being
11:19:11 spent on it and what the time frame is.

11:19:13 >> If that money is allocated for Lake Kipling why
11:19:17 isn't it being spent there?
11:19:18 You can't transfer it.
11:19:19 That comes to this City Council.
11:19:23 >> That's why we are going to get a report.
11:19:24 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Okay.
11:19:27 >> So my motion is to get a report from city staff in
11:19:29 two weeks and have them show up in person to discuss
11:19:32 what's happening with the improvement that is need to
11:19:34 be made with Lake Kipling, what money is being spent on
11:19:37 it and what's the time frame.
11:19:39 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Second the motion.
11:19:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:19:41 (Motion carried).
11:19:43 Thank you.
11:19:47 Next.
11:19:52 >>> Stephani Ferrell.
11:19:54 Good morning, council members.
11:19:56 I'm here to speak about item 11 on the agenda, the
11:19:59 Historic Preservation Commission ordinance.
11:20:01 And one aspect of it only, which is the economic
11:20:05 hardship definition.

11:20:08 I am here to say that I believe that we should keep the
11:20:12 language that exists in the current ordinance, which
11:20:16 defines economic hardship as reasonable -- the owners
11:20:23 ability to obtain reasonable beneficial use of the
11:20:26 property.
11:20:26 And I believe that that should not change until
11:20:32 transfer development rights in place.
11:20:33 And I am going to show you an example of one that I am
11:20:37 quite familiar with, and it is the Arlington hotel
11:20:40 building.
11:20:41 I am going to maybe put a photograph on the Elmo to
11:20:44 show you.
11:20:47 This is a building that is typical of the north end of
11:20:52 downtown Tampa.
11:20:53 It is the Arlington park hotel.
11:20:55 It is a two-story building actually with partial third
11:21:00 story penthouse.
11:21:02 The zoning in that area is CBD1.
11:21:06 If the criteria for economic hardship were to change
11:21:10 for a building like this that was undesignated, the
11:21:14 owner would be able to build up to 120 feet in height,
11:21:18 which is a 10 to 12-story building.

11:21:22 A reasonable expectation by a developer for this
11:21:26 property would be not to retain this historic building,
11:21:30 but instead to demolish it.
11:21:32 Because you can build ten stories.
11:21:34 So I am urging you, until we have a way to deal with
11:21:38 that gap in the two-story building versus the, say, the
11:21:42 ten-story available use to a developer, through TDRs,
11:21:48 that we keep the language the way it is, which says
11:21:51 reasonable beneficial use of the property.
11:21:53 Reasonable beneficial use to me as an architect and as
11:21:58 a developer means that you can use the property as it
11:22:02 is, or after redevelopment, and make a reasonable
11:22:05 return on the property.
11:22:07 And I would say, yes, one can on a building like this.
11:22:11 But if you have to compare it to a ten-story building,
11:22:14 it really can't compare.
11:22:15 So again I urge you to keep the language as it is,
11:22:18 which is reasonable beneficial use, until such time as
11:22:22 we have TDRs in place, and in hand, and useful to
11:22:26 buildings such as this.
11:22:28 And this is the building that is typical of buildings
11:22:32 that we would find scattered throughout Tampa that

11:22:35 would be eligible for landmark designation.
11:22:38 So this is not hypothetical.
11:22:40 This is very much real.
11:22:41 I would be happy to answer any questions.
11:22:43 Thank you very much.
11:22:48 >>MARY MULHERN: I think that is one of the list on
11:22:50 design awards that we got today, was it?
11:22:53 >>> Yes, it is.
11:22:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:22:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Congratulations.
11:22:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
11:23:00 >>> Laurel Lockett, 836 South Dakota.
11:23:04 I want to thank again Mr. Smith and staff for working
11:23:07 with us.
11:23:08 And we continue to make tremendous progress over the
11:23:11 last couple of weeks on this.
11:23:12 Just a couple of quick comments.
11:23:14 On the A.R.C. ordinance, the last time we were here we
11:23:18 were sort of grappling with sort of dialing in the
11:23:21 right -- streamlining and public notice and public
11:23:27 comments.
11:23:27 And on this one issue on the variance, I think we have

11:23:31 not come to any kind of conclusion.
11:23:35 Staff has graciously thrown out ideas.
11:23:39 We have seen the language.
11:23:40 I think we need to set the balance kind of where you
11:23:42 did on the balance of the ordinance.
11:23:44 And I think for anything more than a single-family
11:23:46 residential, that needs to have sort of the full
11:23:50 process, and not kind of a streamlined process that can
11:23:53 be criticized.
11:23:56 On the HPC ordinance, I think I like the direction you
11:24:00 are going in on this.
11:24:05 By Mr. Miranda and Mr. Scott.
11:24:09 From my speaker respective it should be a decision
11:24:12 that's made once, and then I don't think it's worth
11:24:15 city resources for Todd Pressman then have the whole
11:24:19 de novo in front of you all.
11:24:21 The time of the applicant, I just think that's the
11:24:24 wrong way to go.
11:24:25 My understanding is that generally the trend now, the
11:24:28 areas that have just go directly to court and I think
11:24:31 that's the way we ought to go.
11:24:33 The economic hardship definition is just is a harder

11:24:39 issue.
11:24:39 We have a standard right now, the beneficial use
11:24:44 standard, has been on the books for ten years, never
11:24:46 been a problem.
11:24:52 I'm asking that you wait until we have TDRs in place
11:24:56 before you change it.
11:24:57 It isn't worth risking losing something like a cigar
11:25:01 factory on Arlington.
11:25:03 What we ought to do is kind of keep the pressure on all
11:25:05 of us, the community, legal, get the TDR in place, so
11:25:11 when the HPC considers a hardship determination, and in
11:25:15 that context, it's required to waive maybe incentives
11:25:19 and access that are available.
11:25:20 Those incentives are on the table so we don't lose
11:25:22 something.
11:25:25 I disagree with Mr. Smith on one issue of
11:25:29 characterization.
11:25:30 The standard is out there, the Burt Harris standard.
11:25:33 That's a standard of damages.
11:25:36 The issue here, if we make a mistake with this, and a
11:25:39 demolition permit is issued, that's the end of it.
11:25:41 It's done.

11:25:43 I don't think it's going to kill us to wait another
11:25:45 three months on this particular issue to do right.
11:25:51 Basically.
11:25:52 So I am asking, just leave the definition the way it is
11:25:56 right now in the ordinance.
11:25:59 Then we are going to give it our best shot to come back
11:26:01 to you with a PDR proposal that makes sense.
11:26:05 And then when someone has to do that balancing act.
11:26:11 Thank you.
11:26:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
11:26:23 >>> Madam Chair, council.
11:26:27 I'm here both happy and sad.
11:26:30 I'm happy because we are ultimately, I believe, coming
11:26:33 to the end of this long saga.
11:26:35 I'm sure you are glad that we are reaching that point,
11:26:38 too.
11:26:39 As many, many people have contributed to that.
11:26:42 Your staff people, Darrell and Dennis with city legal
11:26:47 staff, David Smith, Cindy Miller, and then Thom
11:26:51 Snelling, and all of the people, all those who spent
11:26:57 many hours working towards getting to this point of
11:27:00 having an ordinance that meets the needs of the entire

11:27:03 community.
11:27:04 And I think we are there.
11:27:05 I think we are that far from it.
11:27:10 I'm sad because in the last minute, the definition of
11:27:15 economic hardship got modified slightly, and that
11:27:20 opened a huge loop hole, a loop hole you can drive a
11:27:27 Mack truck through, and that is, as Stephani just
11:27:31 described for you, the change allows the definition of
11:27:34 economic hardship to include building to the maximum
11:27:39 extent possible.
11:27:42 That is going to destroy all of the hard work that all
11:27:47 of us have spent so many hours doing.
11:27:51 What we recommend is that you leave that wording the
11:27:56 way it is in the current ordinance, and that we work
11:28:00 towards the TDRs so that we can then have a balance.
11:28:05 And at that point, we relook at the language.
11:28:08 But to change it at this point, without the TDRs, is
11:28:15 opening that massive loop hole, and we will lose many,
11:28:19 many buildings.
11:28:21 You know, a building is like a person, especially a
11:28:25 historic building, is like a person on the operating
11:28:28 table.

11:28:29 You make a mistake, and it's too late.
11:28:31 It's all over.
11:28:32 You don't bring them back.
11:28:33 You don't bring back a historic building once you
11:28:37 demolish it.
11:28:38 And so don't open that loop hole.
11:28:40 Don't allow at this last minute that we negate all of
11:28:46 the good work that we have done.
11:28:49 Thank you for all your efforts and all your support for
11:28:53 the good work that everyone has done, and we are very
11:28:56 happy with the result once this modification is made.
11:29:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Put your name on the record.
11:29:04 >>> My name is GAS -- Gus pass, 3908 San Miguel.
11:29:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to recognize the enormous
11:29:15 time that Mr. Pass, Ms. Lockett, has put into the
11:29:24 improvements, the legal staff, thank them for it and
11:29:29 there's general consensus that it's resulting in a
11:29:32 better ordinance and I think it's pretty great in this
11:29:34 point in the 8-year process there's only one or two
11:29:37 sticking points.
11:29:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
11:29:45 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza.

11:29:50 I have a few brief comments.
11:29:54 I agree with the suggestion from Mr. Smith and also Ms.
11:29:58 Lockett that you have the economical determination at
11:30:00 the HPC level and that you go from there to circuit
11:30:03 court.
11:30:04 I think it makes it very objective.
11:30:07 It takes a lot of subjectivity out of the process.
11:30:10 And that's a -- subjectivity out of the process.
11:30:14 And that's a workable process.
11:30:17 The definition of economic hardship, which is being
11:30:20 explained in terms of the Bert Harris Act, let me back
11:30:22 up one second and tell you that the Bert Harris Act was
11:30:25 passed as chapter 7 of Florida statutes to create a
11:30:28 middle ground where an ordinance was passed that was
11:30:32 not quite a taking but did burden a property owner, and
11:30:35 the legislature, gentleman named Burt Harris from
11:30:38 Wauchula, proposed this ordinance, proposed a statute
11:30:42 to create some compromise.
11:30:44 I think it is a masterful job of legal advice by Mr.
11:30:48 Smith's office to have your ordinance track the very
11:30:50 statute that you are subject to.
11:30:52 There's no mistake on what the rule is.

11:30:56 If the city or the county or any municipality in the
11:30:58 state violates the Bert Harris Act, there is relief and
11:31:03 that's where you go.
11:31:04 I think it remains muddled if you continue with the
11:31:06 same definition of reasonable beneficial use, and you
11:31:09 still have to be subject to the statute, because one
11:31:12 way or another, you are going to get in front of a
11:31:14 court on that statute.
11:31:16 Whether it's by property owner or by preservationist
11:31:20 groups.
11:31:20 I think it's a masterful job to have it track the
11:31:23 statute.
11:31:24 Now we know it's a ruling.
11:31:26 Ms. Lockett, I agree with her on the issue of the
11:31:28 appeal to circuit court.
11:31:29 She explained in some amount of desperation that once a
11:31:33 demolition permit is issued, it's over.
11:31:35 Well, it's not over.
11:31:37 If a demolition permit is issued by the city,
11:31:40 preservation, if anyone else was standing within the
11:31:43 city can go to -- withstanding in the city can go to
11:31:47 circuit court and get an I am junction, if they can

11:31:49 persuade a circuit judge that there's eminent danger
11:31:53 they have to file an injunction bond so the money costs
11:31:56 start going on but there is relief if there's a
11:31:59 demolition permit issued.
11:32:01 I have litigated demolition permits that have been
11:32:04 challenged by preservationists and maybe you have to go
11:32:06 to circuit court but that does not mean the building
11:32:09 automatically comes down the next day.
11:32:11 An injunction can be requested.
11:32:15 I have in a other issues with the job that's been done
11:32:19 by everyone involved.
11:32:20 I appreciate being part of the process.
11:32:22 And I urge to you pass the ordinance.
11:32:23 Thank you.
11:32:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
11:32:26 Reverend Scott?
11:32:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Grandoff, if you can come back up.
11:32:31 Now where are you?
11:32:37 It seems you have an appreciate for -- appreciation for
11:32:40 what the city attorney has done in terms of the
11:32:42 economic hardship.
11:32:43 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Yes.

11:32:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What legal a is saying, I guess, to
11:32:50 include the Burt Harris statute into the ordinance,
11:32:57 from a preservation stand you shouldn't do that, you
11:32:59 should leave that as it is.
11:33:01 >>> Right.
11:33:01 >> Who do you represent?
11:33:02 >>> I represent several property owners.
11:33:04 I represent several cigar factory owners, many of whom
11:33:07 are with me this morning, and I represent several
11:33:10 property owners in the city, the Merasol building on
11:33:14 Davis Island, in West Tampa, another cigar factory
11:33:22 being remodeled.
11:33:23 Several other clients that do not want to be disclosed
11:33:25 for obvious reasons.
11:33:26 I am basically representing the property rights.
11:33:30 I agree with Mrs. Lockett that at the economic
11:33:32 determination level at the HPC level, if you have an
11:33:35 issue with that, you go to circuit court
11:33:41 I think the only remaining bone of contention between
11:33:45 my clients and the preservationists is the definition
11:33:47 of the economic hardship process.
11:33:49 And I'm suggesting to you that if you track the

11:33:54 statute, which is what it does, and which is what I
11:33:57 think is the right way to go, then you cannot go wrong.
11:34:00 You complied with the state legislature.
11:34:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:34:06 And the preservation community, do you have an attorney
11:34:08 there?
11:34:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Laura Lockett is an attorney.
11:34:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Can I ask her one question?
11:34:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Would you come up, please?
11:34:24 Ms. Lockett, thank you.
11:34:27 I'm just trying to get some information, some
11:34:29 understanding how it came in the -- I kind of came in
11:34:32 the middle of the process.
11:34:33 So in your opinion, as an attorney, then you think that
11:34:37 the recommendation by the city attorney opens
11:34:39 everything up for demolition of the property?
11:34:45 >>> I think the problem is really that you have -- and
11:34:48 I understand where David is coming from, and I think
11:34:51 ultimately -- ultimately I'm in favor of a standard
11:34:55 there that kind of matches up with the Burt Harris
11:34:58 standard.
11:35:01 And before David's time, I guess, we had had a

11:35:04 definition that has gone through workshop after
11:35:06 workshop, input, round table, that with the hybrid
11:35:11 definition, something between the reasonable beneficial
11:35:14 use and the Burt Harris.
11:35:15 That was in fact a definition that came to City Council
11:35:19 last year.
11:35:21 And it's only in most recent revisions as of 2007, that
11:35:27 that was tweaked.
11:35:28 And that's really where we had the hardship or the
11:35:32 heartache.
11:35:33 All I'm saying at this point, ten years with this.
11:35:37 Let's just hold off for three months and get the TDRs
11:35:41 in place so he would don't --
11:35:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: But my question, though, is based on
11:35:46 his conclusion of the Burt Harris statute, into the
11:35:49 ordinance, does that allow --
11:35:56 >> I think that does damage.
11:35:57 Because when the H PC evaluates whether or not there's
11:36:02 been a hardship, one of the things that they consider
11:36:05 are what are the counterbalancing economic incentives
11:36:08 that are there, like the ad valorem tax issue, any
11:36:12 grant money.

11:36:12 You know, when you look at an example, like a small
11:36:18 building versus a ten-story building, you can't
11:36:20 overcome that with a tax credit.
11:36:22 You need the TDR.
11:36:24 So really, the issue is just ultimately, I think we
11:36:30 should be going in that direction.
11:36:32 But I think to do it now before you have those other
11:36:36 things.
11:36:36 What I would like to you do is put us all under, you
11:36:39 know, a squeeze here to get the TDR done right away, no
11:36:45 excuses, and then we make the adjustment in the
11:36:48 definition and the TDR is in place.
11:36:52 >> When you come back, basically at this point we have
11:36:56 two attorneys and two different views on the
11:37:00 implications of what will happen.
11:37:05 >>> We are arguing, and believe me it's very good
11:37:07 humored.
11:37:08 It's just policy.
11:37:11 >> I want to make sure that, one, that I'm fair.
11:37:13 Two that we are on good solid legal ground.
11:37:17 And what you have to understand now is from my
11:37:24 experience, first of all, the one that's got to argue

11:37:34 before any court.
11:37:35 Do you follow me?
11:37:36 So I have to weigh his opinion very heavily or her
11:37:39 opinion very heavily.
11:37:40 I just want to be clear on that.
11:37:45 Thank you.
11:37:45 >> for the record I don't represent the preservation
11:37:49 community.
11:37:50 Because I was on the H PC and practice I have been sort
11:37:54 of a conduit.
11:37:55 But kind of come down -- I am not really representing
11:37:59 people.
11:38:00 I'm just trying to be a voice.
11:38:07 >> We mentioned those TDRs quite frequently in the
11:38:10 last 45 minutes to an hour.
11:38:11 Can you explain to the public what they are?
11:38:13 Because I don't think it's a light
11:38:22 But the concept is that value that you are giving up,
11:38:25 that development value, like in Stephani's example
11:38:29 between the two-story and the ten-story, that density
11:38:32 and that value can be transferred to some other
11:38:34 property.

11:38:35 For example, it would be a tool for you all.
11:38:39 You might want to do affordable housing and not going
11:38:41 to allow to you -- you might take a geographical area
11:38:45 of the city.
11:38:46 We want to retarget this for redevelopment, and so we
11:38:49 are going to allow some increased density or we are
11:38:51 going to allow that transfer of rights.
11:38:54 Sometimes they are like banking and situations.
11:38:56 So there are a lot of options in that process.
11:39:02 But to facility tailgate redevelopment as well as
11:39:06 savings.
11:39:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may, please, ma'am. The next
11:39:11 thing is, I look at this here.
11:39:17 >>> And those rights can be sold.
11:39:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: thank you very much.
11:39:23 On that second page there where it says is section
11:39:27 231.3, I think those are the sticking areas.
11:39:32 I have the feeling no matter which way this council
11:39:35 goes, somehow that's going to be interpreted in a court
11:39:39 of law.
11:39:42 Both sides moving there, economic impact, hardship is
11:39:46 going to be determined somewhere down the line, whether

11:39:49 this council votes one way or the other way, the final
11:39:52 definition is going to be by some individual that is
11:39:57 called a judge.
11:39:58 Thank you.
11:39:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
11:40:00 We are going back to item number 10.
11:40:02 Mr. Snelling, comments, we will go up and down.
11:40:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want to say on this subject of TDR
11:40:12 that both sides agree on that.
11:40:16 And the legal department is working on it and we are
11:40:20 looking toward an end of summer date to have some
11:40:23 specific language back to us in terms of TDR.
11:40:27 So it's a Kum ba yah moment between Mr. Grandoff and
11:40:33 Lockett and everyone, the TDRs would give council and
11:40:37 property owners the tool they need to be effectively
11:40:40 counterbalanced preservation concerns.
11:40:42 And so I think we should set an ambitious date for
11:40:45 ourselves to get this in place.
11:40:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Snelling, what do we need to do?
11:40:51 >>THOM SNELLING: Growth management development
11:40:56 services.
11:41:01 What it's come down to is the issue about the variance

11:41:04 and footprint of the building and stuff like that.
11:41:07 And single family versus multifamily.
11:41:15 The issue about whether or not the zoning administrator
11:41:18 versus the A.R.C. administrator or the questions
11:41:21 brought up about the zoning administrator is that the
11:41:23 authority, the zoning code itself, doesn't have the
11:41:30 authority to make decisions to waive setback an approve
11:41:33 variances rests specifically with the zoning
11:41:35 administrator so that's why the zoning administrator
11:41:45 Lot averaging and things like that.
11:41:48 The growth management, deputy director, I can't do
11:41:50 that.
11:41:51 Other folks can't do it.
11:41:53 As the zoning administrator, just called out in the
11:41:56 code.
11:41:57 That's reason of the reasons that is like that.
11:41:59 The other point of discussion, there was a great
11:42:03 concern that multifamily versus single family or
11:42:10 commercial.
11:42:11 The only thing that this proposes to do is that on
11:42:16 replacement properties, and that will be made clear for
11:42:22 replacement structure only, which also goes on the

11:42:27 exact same footprint and same density that was
11:42:29 previously there, is what the zoning administrator is
11:42:32 allowed to approve, where the location is.
11:42:35 That's the difference there.
11:42:36 And I think one of the concerns, can we have the Elmo
11:42:41 please?
11:42:55 This if 24 is a multifamily property, hissing to
11:42:58 property built in the 20s or 30s, and the yellow
11:43:01 represents where the actual footprint of the building
11:43:03 is and let's say there are 350 units there and the.
11:43:08 Hurricane comes, termites come, it's destroyed.
11:43:11 My understanding, the concern is that if it's a
11:43:13 multifamily, they want to build this back.
11:43:16 The person may be able to, without that clarification,
11:43:20 about the footprint and about the density, come back in
11:43:23 and say, okay, great, we'll build to this footprint at
11:43:26 two feet or three feet or whatever it happens to be.
11:43:29 But also we are going to sneak in an additional 50
11:43:31 units here in this area here.
11:43:32 We still build to the F.W. Woolworth print.
11:43:34 We are not increasing the height, not adding anything
11:43:36 else but we are staying within that footprint.

11:43:39 But they are allowed to increase density up to 100
11:43:42 units just for discussion.
11:43:43 What we are saying is that that the language change
11:43:45 that we are wanting or we agreed to bring back to
11:43:49 council between readings is that the only thing that a
11:43:53 staff approval could take place is just what's shown
11:43:56 here in yellow because that is exactly what was there
11:43:58 previously.
11:43:59 No increase in density.
11:44:00 No change of use.
11:44:02 No increase of commercial intensity.
11:44:06 It stays the same.
11:44:07 That's the only thing.
11:44:08 That's the language that we are proposing to add.
11:44:10 And the other thing, the portion of the discussion that
11:44:13 has to do with single family versus multifamily is that
11:44:18 you have to remember the historic districts are not all
11:44:20 single family.
11:44:22 They are multifamily districts within all of our
11:44:24 historic districts, which have multifamily uses that
11:44:27 are historic.
11:44:29 There are commercial uses in all our historic

11:44:31 districts.
11:44:32 Side park, South Howard, that are historic and
11:44:36 identified as structures there, Seminole Heights has
11:44:40 historic structures contributing there up and down
11:44:43 Florida Avenue.
11:44:44 Tampa Heights, I'm not sure if Tampa Heights actually
11:44:47 has them.
11:44:47 But a lot of discussion is taking place in West Tampa.
11:44:51 West Tampa is going to have a huge amount of historic
11:44:53 commercial properties that are under consideration, and
11:44:55 the other area that's kind of out there being discussed
11:44:57 is Palmetto Beach.
11:44:59 Again, lots of commercial property.
11:45:02 So we feel that by controlling the density and not
11:45:07 allowing any increase at all to the density, and not
11:45:10 allowing any change to this specific footprint
11:45:13 historically on that property that we have addressed
11:45:15 the issue about the concern about more density, more
11:45:18 traffic, et cetera.
11:45:20 We are not proposing any changes to anything.
11:45:24 The apartment building built in 1920 you can build it
11:45:28 right back.

11:45:30 And I'll be complete with my discussion.
11:45:33 The zoning administrator will make no discussion,
11:45:37 approvals or anything on what the building looks like.
11:45:40 The architecture, the construction of it, the style,
11:45:42 the materials, the roof pitch, everything else, that
11:45:45 all goes to the board.
11:45:46 That person still has to go back to the board.
11:45:48 The one thing that they don't have to do is get a
11:45:51 variance to rebuild.
11:45:52 Then they are just focusing in on architecture,
11:45:55 materials, and stuff like that.
11:45:58 I hope -- if you have questions I will be glad to
11:46:00 answer them.
11:46:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Height.
11:46:03 Will the height be required to be the same as the
11:46:05 existing building that got demolished or whatever?
11:46:08 >>THOM SNELLING: Oh, yeah.
11:46:09 It says no waivers are being -- there's no waiver to
11:46:12 height.
11:46:13 >> I just want to clarify. Let's say a 50-story
11:46:15 building is being replaced.
11:46:17 Does the new structure have to be 50 feet or less?

11:46:20 Or the request not to ask for any height?
11:46:25 >>> What is proposed for the zoning administrator is
11:46:26 simply the setback. The zoning administrator is not
11:46:28 waiving any sort of height requirement.
11:46:30 So if they want to change the height it would have to
11:46:32 be -- the zoning process, now, height has nothing to do
11:46:38 with what the VRB has.
11:46:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Now need a motion.
11:46:45 Pleasure of council.
11:46:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move the ordinance?
11:46:52 I move.
11:46:56 >>THE CLERK:
11:46:58 >>> Actually what you need to do is make the ordinance
11:47:00 with the changes.
11:47:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Is that the same ordinance, or have we
11:47:08 got a new one?
11:47:09 >>> The same title that you have before you.
11:47:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move an ordinance of the city of
11:47:13 Tampa, Florida amending City of Tampa code ordinance
11:47:15 chapter 27 zoning article 9 historical preservation
11:47:19 making comprehensive revision to the code provision
11:47:21 related to the architectural review commission,

11:47:24 sections 27-77 official schedule of district
11:47:28 regulations adding for severability, providing for
11:47:32 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
11:47:35 effective date.
11:47:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Question on the motion.
11:47:37 Mr. Shelby?
11:47:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For the maker of the motion, was there
11:47:40 a second, by the way?
11:47:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
11:47:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The maker of the motion does that
11:47:45 include --
11:47:46 >> All revision that is were done and the conversation
11:47:48 was this council.
11:47:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
11:47:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Discussion for a second?
11:47:54 I think that this is almost as good as it can be.
11:47:57 I know Elizabeth Johnson and Roger have spent hundreds
11:48:01 of hours on this.
11:48:02 They raised some additional concerns.
11:48:04 They are not reflected in what's before us.
11:48:06 So I won't be supporting this.
11:48:08 Thank you.

11:48:08 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
11:48:10 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena and Mulhern
11:48:17 voting no.
11:48:21 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
11:48:23 I think important to notice, that no one objected to
11:48:27 the motion that you made and was approved so any
11:48:29 concern that perhaps I may have misrepresented
11:48:31 someone's position is ill founded.
11:48:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I noted that.
11:48:39 >>> And obviously I would never do that and anybody who
11:48:41 believes otherwise really needs to talk with me.
11:48:43 The second issue is we need to deal with what we just
11:48:46 have discussed.
11:48:47 And let me suggest, since you approved the ordinance
11:48:50 with 1, 3, 6 and 8 added, what the discussion has
11:48:54 established is that two and four are also acceptable.
11:48:59 2 being the idea that the HPC will make a
11:49:01 determination, not a recommendation.
11:49:04 4 being that the appeal will be to the circuit court.
11:49:07 >>> Correct.
11:49:08 >> So it might be prudent since we are all in agreement
11:49:12 on that to make a motion --

11:49:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
11:49:16 >> Second.
11:49:16 (Motion carried).
11:49:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman.
11:49:19 Mr. Smith, I totally trust you. My inference was there
11:49:23 could have been someone in the audience who hadn't
11:49:24 weighed in on this and I just felt like it was
11:49:27 appropriate to hear from the public before we move on.
11:49:28 >>> I didn't think you made the comment, but that's all
11:49:34 right.
11:49:34 Thank you.
11:49:35 [ Laughter ]
11:49:41 The last issue is really item number 5 and 7.
11:49:44 Number 7 is kind of a non-essential.
11:49:46 Number 7 deals with the definition of object.
11:49:51 According to deny advertise object that we have in our
11:49:54 version is the definition under the standards.
11:49:58 Stephani, I think, she's okay.
11:50:01 She likes her definition.
11:50:03 It's not something that we -- I probably should have
11:50:07 suggested you include 7 in the motion.
11:50:12 Let's see if we can get rid of 5 and 7.

11:50:14 Here's the issue on economic hardship.
11:50:16 I think if you listen carefully, Laurel essentially
11:50:19 conceded that legally what I am suggesting makes sense,
11:50:22 but she's concerned about the empirical effect on
11:50:25 historic preservation and the properties governed by
11:50:27 it.
11:50:28 The concern that some will be lost.
11:50:31 The reason I'm making that recommendation is because my
11:50:34 job as your lawyer is to recommend what you should do
11:50:39 legally.
11:50:40 I try to stay out of your policy decision.
11:50:42 I certainly try to stay out of your politics.
11:50:45 So my recommendation is based on the idea that what I
11:50:48 should be recommending to you protects the city as much
11:50:51 as possible.
11:50:53 I understand those who are advocates for historic
11:50:56 preservation are concerned.
11:50:58 But my concern is that our current standard is
11:51:01 essentially a taking standard.
11:51:03 And what that means is, if someone establishes an
11:51:07 economic hardship under a taking standard, we may be
11:51:11 looking at liability right in the face.

11:51:14 Under a taking, we not only have to buy their property,
11:51:17 we have to pay for their attorneys' fees.
11:51:20 My reason for suggesting we come off of that standard
11:51:23 is to protect the city from that exposure.
11:51:28 I would like to us ultimately develop the TDRs which
11:51:32 will mitigate some of the concerns.
11:51:34 We are going to be moving in that direction.
11:51:35 We have a tremendous commitment from Ms. Lockett, and I
11:51:47 cannot say enough about the compassion about the people
11:51:50 in the preservation community.
11:51:51 Although I differ on this issue, I differ because my
11:51:53 job is different from theirs.
11:51:56 It's not a lock lack of respect for what their goals
11:51:58 are or their legal acumen, both of which are
11:52:02 considerable.
11:52:03 My job is my job and that's why I am before you making
11:52:04 the recommendation I am making.
11:52:06 I would request that you pass the economic hardship
11:52:08 standard in the handout that I provided to you, along
11:52:12 with number 7, so essentially what I am recommending is
11:52:15 for your last motion, if you would move the economic
11:52:18 hardship standard proposed by me, along with the

11:52:22 economist existing definition of object, I think we are
11:52:25 completed.
11:52:26 If you have any questions I will be happy to answer
11:52:28 them.
11:52:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My question, how far are you, your
11:52:35 office, from developing the transfer development
11:52:38 rights?
11:52:38 >>DAVID SMITH: First it is an extremely important
11:52:44 development.
11:52:44 We need to get those as quickly as possible.
11:52:47 They will also deal with the overlay, how do we protect
11:52:50 those areas where, how do we encourage mass transit?
11:52:54 We are going to do a lot of these things with TDRs.
11:52:57 How long it will take I'm not entirely sure.
11:52:59 I also heard Mrs. Saul-Sena's suggestion we will be
11:53:02 ready by the end of the summer.
11:53:04 I hope so.
11:53:05 I don't know.
11:53:05 It's a complicated problem.
11:53:06 I know that David Mechanik has an ordinance that he did
11:53:10 recently down in, I think, Charlotte County.
11:53:12 It took him six months.

11:53:13 The problem in TDRs is not necessarily the ordinance.
11:53:17 The real problem is making them real.
11:53:19 If they are illusory they don't accomplish your
11:53:22 purpose.
11:53:22 What do I mean by that?
11:53:23 You have to have a market.
11:53:24 So we need to look, we, you, because this is really
11:53:27 your area, need to look at the comp plan, and in your
11:53:31 peripheral bonus density issues and all of these
11:53:34 things, what you are doing to hand out, if you will,
11:53:38 because you want to create a market for TDRs.
11:53:41 You want someone to be able to sell them or they are
11:53:44 meaningless.
11:53:44 This ten story building that when want to keep as a
11:53:47 two-story historic structure, he has to be able to sell
11:53:50 those and there has to be someone willing, able to buy
11:53:54 it.
11:53:54 So it is a complicated matter.
11:53:56 We will certainly be back to you with further
11:53:57 discussions as soon as possible.
11:53:58 I would certainly think further discussions sometime in
11:54:00 the summer, end of the summer would be doable.

11:54:02 I don't know if it will be definitive.
11:54:04 But we are getting a lot of encouragement from others
11:54:07 and a lot of help from others.
11:54:10 >> Do you foresee this ordinance in dealing with it
11:54:16 being demolished, or offer a change between now and,
11:54:22 let's say, four months, three our four months?
11:54:26 >>DAVID SMITH: I think you are really asking what
11:54:29 happens if the ordinance is ultimately approved as is,
11:54:32 which is going to in itself probably take another
11:54:34 couple of months.
11:54:35 Because if you approve it at first reading today, we
11:54:38 need to send it up to the state for review.
11:54:41 We are going to set a public hearing.
11:54:43 It's probably more like 45 days to make sure we have
11:54:45 the cushion to get it up there.
11:54:47 I don't know that we might get some comments that may
11:54:49 suggest some additional changes.
11:54:50 But if all of that falls into place, and if you a
11:54:53 profit let's say in the July or August, however that
11:54:56 works out, I think your question is, can buildings be
11:54:59 demolished?
11:55:00 The process that you will approve pursuant to the

11:55:04 A.R.C. will be the process employed, that economic
11:55:08 hardship standard, if you go with our recommendation,
11:55:11 will be the standard applied.
11:55:14 So if people can go through the process, and to meet
11:55:18 that standard, to demolish a building, then the
11:55:21 application to do so could be successful.
11:55:23 Empirically, I don't know.
11:55:27 In terms of reality of it, I don't know.
11:55:29 I think the real problem -- and this has been said by
11:55:31 everybody involved in this -- has been the need to
11:55:35 clear up the process.
11:55:36 And with a better process, with a more user friendly
11:55:39 process, and with some more incentive, particularly
11:55:43 TDRs down the road, we don't have a lot of people
11:55:47 clamoring to not be subjected to this, as I can tell.
11:55:50 There are some cigar factories concerned how it would,
11:55:53 would.
11:55:53 They can maybe answer that question much more so than I
11:55:55 could but hopefully with a better process people with
11:55:58 truly historic buildings will want to be part of it.
11:56:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Can we get a motion?
11:56:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to make a motion to

11:56:07 send to legal the things that were discussed today, but
11:56:11 with keeping the language that exists in the current
11:56:14 ordinance about reasonable beneficial use, number 7.
11:56:20 >> Second.
11:56:22 >> Motion and second?
11:56:22 Question?
11:56:23 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
11:56:24 Opposed, Nay.
11:56:28 >>THE CLERK: The motion failed.
11:56:32 >> 3 to 3.
11:56:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Then it will come back next week?
11:56:37 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: It was three votes?
11:56:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
11:56:42 3-3, failed.
11:56:51 >> It will come back at our next meeting.
11:56:54 >> Unless somebody moves to waive?
11:56:58 >> It will come back next Thursday.
11:57:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Revote next Thursday.
11:57:02 Okay.
11:57:09 >> So number 7 that we need to include?
11:57:12 >> Number 7.
11:57:13 Definition of object.

11:57:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I would include that we -- move that
11:57:17 when include number 7.
11:57:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This isn't my motion, this is a
11:57:25 different motion.
11:57:26 Could you clarify it?
11:57:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What I moved earlier here, we had
11:57:30 included certain portions of the ordinance be included,
11:57:33 right?
11:57:34 And then one left out the word "object."
11:57:37 >>DAVID SMITH: Yes, sir.
11:57:38 That's number 7.
11:57:39 You have approved everything but 5, which is the
11:57:41 economic hardship rule 7.
11:57:47 >> So I want to include the object so when it comes
11:57:50 back you only have one outstanding issue.
11:57:55 >>DAVID SMITH: Economic hardship.
11:57:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I am leaving that out, just moving
11:57:59 "object."
11:58:01 >>DAVID SMITH: Your motion is to approve the term in
11:58:03 the term proposed by us?
11:58:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Exactly right.
11:58:07 >> Second.

11:58:08 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
11:58:11 (Motion carried).
11:58:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Number 5 is the only outstanding
11:58:15 issue and that will come back next week.
11:58:17 >> Could I get a date six weeks out for the A.R.C.
11:58:20 ordinance to come back for second reading?
11:58:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Six weeks out?
11:58:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I believe it's July 19th.
11:58:33 >>> July 19th.
11:58:35 >> So moved to schedule the A.R.C. to come back on July
11:58:38 19th.
11:58:39 >>GWEN MILLER: 9:30.
11:58:41 Motion and second.
11:58:41 (Motion carried).
11:58:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have a question with the city
11:58:46 attorney, Mr. Smith.
11:58:49 You all started on the transfer of development rights.
11:58:52 >>DAVID SMITH: We have received some information.
11:58:57 I wouldn't say we started.
11:59:00 We have been rather busy.
11:59:03 You guys just decided today.
11:59:05 But we are working on it.

11:59:07 Julia Cole will be leading the effort and we have some
11:59:10 help from people in the private sector.
11:59:13 >> Would it help if council made a motion that they
11:59:17 bring back something to us three months?
11:59:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
11:59:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion an second.
11:59:21 (Motion carried).
11:59:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, one of the issues
11:59:27 raised by Mr. Smith is where do we put these things.
11:59:29 And council is going to be making decisions about, as
11:59:32 we look at our comprehensive plan, where do we want
11:59:34 them to be.
11:59:35 I just talked to the Planning Commission.
11:59:36 And they can make available to the legal department the
11:59:39 areas around transit modes that could receive
11:59:43 additional density.
11:59:44 Those are the sort of policy issues that the legal
11:59:47 department can come up with an ordinance.
11:59:49 I believe.
11:59:50 But it's really up to us in terms of policy that they
11:59:52 really want the density.
11:59:54 Where could the property rights be transferred to?

11:59:57 And those something that's going to require us to do a
11:59:59 lot of work.
12:00:05 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to our committee reports.
12:00:11 Public Safety Committee, Reverend Scott.
12:00:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I move item 13 for approval.
12:00:15 >> Second.
12:00:15 (Motion carried).
12:00:18 >> Parks and recreation, Linda Saul-Sena.
12:00:21 >> Thank you.
12:00:21 Move resolutions 14 and 15.
12:00:23 >> Second.
12:00:23 (Motion carried).
12:00:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move items 16 through 21.
12:00:32 >> Second.
12:00:32 (Motion carried).
12:00:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Finance Committee, vice chair Joseph
12:00:39 Caetano.
12:00:41 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Move 22 through 24.
12:00:45 (Motion carried).
12:00:47 >> Building and zoning, Mr. Caetano.
12:00:54 >> Move 25.
12:00:54 (Motion carried).

12:00:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Transportation committee.
12:00:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Move 26 through 33.
12:01:00 >> Second.
12:01:00 (Motion carried).
12:01:01 6 we have an ordinance for second reading.
12:01:08 >> Madam Chairman, it's 12:00 noon.
12:01:10 >>CHAIRMAN: I want to do this so when we come back the
12:01:13 city clerk won't have to wait.
12:01:16 We have one second reading.
12:01:17 And we'll be out of here.
12:01:20 We need to open item number 34.
12:01:23 >> So moved.
12:01:23 >> Second.
12:01:23 (Motion carried).
12:01:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that wants
12:01:27 to speak on item 34?
12:01:32 >> Move to close.
12:01:33 >> Second.
12:01:33 (Motion carried).
12:01:34 >> I move the ordinance, an ordinance approving a
12:01:46 special use permit S-2 approving a place of religious
12:01:49 assembly with a fellowship hall in an RS-60 residential

12:01:52 single family zoning district in the general vicinity
12:01:54 of 401 west Bougainvillea Avenue in the city of Tampa,
12:01:59 Florida and as more particularly described in section 1
12:02:02 hereof allowing more than 50% alternative parking space
12:02:06 on the grass, providing an effective date.
12:02:09 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion an second.
12:02:10 Vote and record.
12:02:13 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously with Dingfelder
12:02:26 being absent.
12:02:26 >>GWEN MILLER: We will now be in recess until 1:30.
12:02:36 (Meeting recessed at 12:02 p.m.)

Tampa City Council
Thursday, May 17, 2007
1:30 p.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.

13:29:50 >>CHAIRMAN PRO TEM SAUL-SENA: Roll call.
13:35:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
13:35:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
13:35:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
13:35:54 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here
13:35:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We are going to complete our agenda
13:36:05 before we get to the 1:30 affordable housing
13:36:08 discussion so we are on number 35 which cannot be
13:36:10 heard and the public hearing has been rescheduled.

13:36:13 Number 36 cannot be heard.
13:36:17 Number 37.
13:36:21 You know what?
13:36:22 Let's have a motion to open all the public hearings.
13:36:25 >> So moved.
13:36:25 >> Second.
13:36:26 (Motion carried).
13:36:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The public hearings are now open.
13:36:31 Is there a staff person to make a presentation on
13:36:33 number 37?
13:36:39 Anybody who is going to speak on any of these public
13:36:41 hearings, please stand, and be sworn in.
13:36:46 (Oath administered by Clerk).
13:36:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would ask that all written
13:37:09 communications relative to today's hearings which have
13:37:11 been available for public inspection at City Council's
13:37:13 office be received and filed into the record at this
13:37:16 time, please.
13:37:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there a motion to receive and
13:37:24 file everything?
13:37:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I thought we did that at the end of
13:37:28 the meeting on all of them.

13:37:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: For some reason we are doing it at
13:37:31 the meeting.
13:37:32 (Motion carried).
13:37:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If any member of council has had any
13:37:36 communication with council, with his or her
13:37:39 representative, any member of the public, please
13:37:41 disclose that prior to the vote.
13:37:42 Finally when you state your name, please reaffirm for
13:37:44 the record that you have been sworn.
13:37:46 I put a little sign to remind you.
13:37:48 Thank you.
13:37:51 >>BARBARA LEPORE: I am with the City of Tampa land
13:37:53 development.
13:37:54 I am here to represent the staff on WZ 07-21 for the
13:38:01 location of 4816 and 4818 east Busch Boulevard,
13:38:08 commercial general add and residential 35 multifamily.
13:38:13 The petitioner is requesting a 2(COP-R) for sale of
13:38:17 alcohol containing beer and wine with association with
13:38:22 a restaurant.
13:38:26 Oh the restaurant will be located on the CG zoning
13:38:30 section for the sale of alcohol.
13:38:37 It will be about 1400 square feet of area.

13:38:40 And it is located ... the sale of alcohol will be
13:38:47 incidental.
13:38:49 An overview of the location.
13:38:52 This is the area.
13:38:54 This is the Busch Boulevard.
13:39:13 This is a request for wet zoning.
13:39:15 2(COP-R).
13:39:18 There are other wet zoned establishments, residential
13:39:22 establishments, as well as institutional
13:39:24 establishments.
13:39:25 The petitioner is asking for the waiver of the
13:39:28 distance separation.
13:39:30 Land development has no objection.
13:39:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
13:39:38 >>> Officer Miller, City of Tampa police department, I
13:39:40 have been sworn.
13:39:41 The police department has no objections to this wet
13:39:43 zoning.
13:39:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
13:39:44 Petitioner?
13:39:53 Come up an give us your name and address and affirm
13:39:57 that you have been sworn.

13:39:58 >>> Actually I have not been sworn.
13:40:03 (Oath administered by Clerk).
13:40:06 >>> I'm representing the authorized leasing agent for
13:40:16 deli plus.
13:40:17 I'm here because currently right now, we do the
13:40:20 location is actually the whole building, or most of
13:40:23 the building, is the same owner.
13:40:26 We do hold a 2(APS) for the grocery store next to us,
13:40:35 and we want to complement the meals and service for
13:40:42 our customers.
13:40:43 And we just wanted to request you approve this, the
13:40:49 waiver to extend more services to our clientele that
13:40:51 we have.
13:40:52 Thank you.
13:40:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Any questions for the petitioner?
13:40:54 Is there anyone who would like to comment on this?
13:40:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move the hearing be closed.
13:41:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion and second to close the
13:41:03 public hearing.
13:41:03 (Motion carried).
13:41:04 Would council members like to make a motion?
13:41:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to approve the

13:41:12 2(COP-R) zoning at 4816 and 4818 east Busch Boulevard.
13:41:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion and second.
13:41:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me read the ordinance. Move an
13:41:25 ordinance making lawful the sale of alcohol by more
13:41:27 than 1% by weight not more than 14% by Watt weight and
13:41:31 wines regardless of alcohol content beer and wine
13:41:34 2(COP-R) for consumption on premises only in
13:41:36 connection with a restaurant business establishment at
13:41:39 or from the certain lot plot or tract of land at 4816
13:41:46 and 4818 east Busch Boulevard more particularly
13:41:48 described in section 2 hereof waiving certain
13:41:50 restrictions based on distance on certain findings
13:41:53 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict
13:41:55 providing an effective date.
13:41:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Miranda.
13:41:59 Reverend Scott?
13:42:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I wanted to raise a question, and I
13:42:04 don't know what staff will address this, waiving the
13:42:06 distance requirement.
13:42:07 And I know that it is two churches within the general
13:42:11 vicinity, if they had an opportunity to be addressed
13:42:15 or has staff or anybody contacted them?

13:42:21 >>BARBARA LEPORE: I'm sorry, I didn't hear.
13:42:25 >>REBECCA KERT: They would have received notice under
13:42:27 the --
13:42:32 >> And there was no response?
13:42:34 >>REBECCA KERT: No.
13:42:34 We haven't had any contact.
13:42:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for the clarification.
13:42:38 Any discussion?
13:42:39 There's been a motion and second.
13:42:44 Is there a second?
13:42:48 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: He made the motion, I seconded
13:42:50 it.
13:42:51 (Motion carried).
13:42:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Item 38.
13:42:55 Public hearing is now open.
13:42:57 Staff.
13:43:05 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
13:43:16 I'm hear for WZ 07-53 for the location at 723 west
13:43:23 Columbus drive.
13:43:26 The petitioner is asking for 2(APS) for sale of beer
13:43:31 and wine on the premises.
13:43:37 For consumption on premises.

13:43:46 7200 square feet.
13:43:47 The request is -- petitioner is right now requesting
13:43:51 2,000 square feet of the wet zoning.
13:44:00 There is a copy of the staff report for your review.
13:44:02 The sale of alcohol will be incidental to the
13:44:05 business, the report is available for your review.
13:44:27 This is the east side of the boundary.
13:44:34 There is no parking
13:44:46 (off microphone)
13:46:29 The petitioners have done extensive renovation.
13:46:42 We are looking for a larger space.
13:46:46 Limited the size of the store down to 2,000 feet as a
13:46:49 convenience store. The location of the store in the
13:46:52 context of the building is such that, west side of the
13:47:02 building, and the entrance to the store in the south
13:47:04 side of the building.
13:47:09 The egress from the property onto a residential street,
13:47:12 Monroe, is the way the property has been designed and
13:47:14 set up and separated for numerous years through year
13:47:16 ownership.
13:47:17 There was wet zoning in here before.

13:47:19 It's my understanding through prior owners, it lapsed
13:47:23 for nonuse. The location has been closed for a couple
13:47:25 of years.
13:47:25 So my clients are coming back today trying to get new
13:47:28 zoning reestablished for this.
13:47:29 The issue you from an ingress-egress standpoint is the
13:47:33 access off of Columbus is fairly narrow street and
13:47:35 coming in and out at the same time would be difficult,
13:47:38 and so from a transportation standpoint, egress into
13:47:42 Monroe is really the only feasible, practical and
13:47:45 lawful way of doing so because of the size of the curb
13:47:47 cut on Columbus.
13:47:49 My clients are willing to make an accommodation in
13:47:51 terms of adding some curbing on the property, egress
13:47:57 onto Monroe street.
13:47:58 So it directs traffic to go south on Monroe to the stop
13:48:02 sign and get onto Columbus and not into the residential
13:48:05 neighborhood.
13:48:06 They would put curbing about six inches high on an
13:48:09 angle and willing to post signs for no right turn,
13:48:13 which would be hopefully a violation if enforced and
13:48:20 that way people would not be permitted to go through

13:48:22 the residential neighborhood.
13:48:25 The overall property, petitioner has been in the
13:48:30 business of operating convenience stores for many
13:48:32 years.
13:48:33 I have known that since '97, represented them since '99
13:48:37 on various matters.
13:48:38 In addition to the parking issue, I know that there's
13:48:40 public feedback. We had an opportunity to review the
13:48:43 e-mails on the public feedback.
13:48:49 The feedback addresses from what I can gather one other
13:48:53 concern, which is while everybody seems to have an
13:48:55 appreciation for the extent of upgrade that my client
13:48:58 has put onto the property, they are wondering about
13:49:00 what might happen down the road.
13:49:02 I don't see that's a permissible reason for denial of
13:49:05 this request.
13:49:06 We have looked at what presently exists and what my
13:49:08 clients have done.
13:49:10 There are provisions within the city code itself
13:49:13 dealing with a lapse of wet zone if not used for 30
13:49:17 days after proper notice, and there are provisions for
13:49:19 termination for cause of the wet zoning within the code

13:49:22 that addresses many of the points raised to the
13:49:29 opposition so if somebody were to buy at some point
13:49:31 down the road, then that person would have to comply,
13:49:33 or there would be consequences including the loss of
13:49:36 the wet zoning that could be suffered.
13:49:39 I also want to state for the record, my colleagues do
13:49:42 not have this property on the market, don't have it on
13:49:47 the market, have an intention to build and establish a
13:49:51 business, rather than adding detriment they have added
13:49:55 lighting, improved the status of the property.
13:49:57 They have added security details and they are going to
13:50:00 be in the process of installing some security cameras.
13:50:03 So that you don't have a 7,000 square foot vacant
13:50:08 willing -- building that's not lit with improper
13:50:12 activities occurring there, and they really want to do
13:50:14 the best they can in respect to the community for that
13:50:17 particular property.
13:50:18 My clients are here.
13:50:19 We can address any questions that you may have relative
13:50:22 to their application.
13:50:23 And we would ask that the council approve the request.
13:50:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.

13:50:28 Questions by council members?
13:50:30 Would anyone in the public care to speak on that?
13:50:53 >>> Valdez, here today to speak on behalf of the
13:50:56 residents of the Riverside Heights Civic Association of
13:50:59 which I am the president.
13:51:01 I just want to reiterate to the neighborhood
13:51:04 association on an ethical basis, because I have agreed
13:51:07 never to appear before council since I worked here but
13:51:13 I want to make sure to the public that I am no longer a
13:51:16 city employee.
13:51:17 Day come before you as the president of the river
13:51:20 Heights Civic Association representing our concerns
13:51:23 from the entire membership.
13:51:25 I was here before you to say that we support this
13:51:36 request the reason being that we voted on this
13:51:38 conditional use at our meeting.
13:51:39 The Mandani has done a tremendous amount of work to
13:51:44 this property.
13:51:44 They have complied with what they needed to do on the
13:51:49 square footage.
13:51:51 We are really concerned about the fact that they do not
13:51:54 own the parking lot in front of where their business

13:51:58 is.
13:52:01 It's a very funny situation that happened when they got
13:52:03 the property, that did not come with it so we are
13:52:08 concerned that will hinder them from succeeding and we
13:52:10 want them to succeed.
13:52:12 They have been a very viable piece to our community at
13:52:18 this point.
13:52:19 We are concerned about the residents, Monroe.
13:52:27 He seems to have a plan for that.
13:52:28 We would really not want any traffic on that
13:52:30 neighborhood street.
13:52:32 We would really like them to close off that all
13:52:37 together so they couldn't go into the neighborhood.
13:52:39 We just don't know about the turn-around on that.
13:52:42 And we know that transportation in a wet zoning is --
13:52:45 in a wet zoning, yes, you can't consider that for
13:52:48 conditional.
13:52:49 So all we are asking for is to give them the chance of
13:52:55 the year conditional, beer and wine, and see where we
13:52:59 go from there and we can come back in a year and see
13:53:05 the effects.
13:53:05 But this is a very important piece of property, because

13:53:11 it is blocks away from the heights project, it's blocks
13:53:14 away from the riverwalk, and it's going to make a
13:53:20 difference to what's there.
13:53:23 Thanks.
13:53:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
13:53:25 Any questions?
13:53:25 Next.
13:53:34 Anyone, for any of these public hearings, who has not
13:53:37 yet been sworn, be sworn now.
13:53:39 (Oath administered by Clerk)
13:53:45 >>> Good evening.
13:53:47 I'm Agnes Watkins, 402 west Columbus drive, apartment
13:53:51 A. My zip is 32602.
13:53:56 I am here today because of my community.
13:54:01 The store they are talking about, I live right up the
13:54:04 street from there.
13:54:05 And as many of you know, Jackson Heights has made a
13:54:10 tremendous change in this year.
13:54:12 We have cut down on vague ran sis vagrancy, we have cut
13:54:23 down on alcohol going in the alleyway from that
13:54:25 Boulevard to Massachusetts.
13:54:28 We have many problems with people, and where people

13:54:39 would purchase their beer or wine or whatever and this
13:54:41 is where they would make their home at.
13:54:43 We have cleaned that up.
13:54:48 We have a church right across the street from this
13:54:50 facility that has just started.
13:54:55 We also have school kids walking to grand elementary
13:55:04 school.
13:55:05 We also have a crossing that the cars and the people
13:55:15 that walk up and down the street, they do not respect
13:55:18 our children and our crossing guard.
13:55:20 And I feel like this would bring more problems
13:55:28 throughout the neighborhood.
13:55:31 I'm not against the store.
13:55:32 Don't get me wrong.
13:55:33 But I am against alcohol being sold in the air.
13:55:36 Because we have cleaned it up.
13:55:38 So why should we open up a way to bring what we have
13:55:43 took out of the neighborhood to bring it back into the
13:55:45 neighborhood?
13:55:46 Let us respect our children that is walking back and
13:55:49 forth.
13:55:50 And we also have men approaching our children that are

13:55:56 walking, alcoholics that was approaching our school
13:55:59 kids.
13:55:59 And where I live there, I can sit on my porch and I can
13:56:02 watch the traffic at the store that they are talking
13:56:05 about.
13:56:06 And I can see how the people that are walking up and
13:56:09 down the street, and they have taken my yard, made my
13:56:13 yard for who so ever will come, because they can still
13:56:18 go and purchase their beer, because my husband has
13:56:20 retired, and he drinks, they feel like they can come
13:56:24 and welcome themselves in my yard to drink to keep the
13:56:26 police from stopping them.
13:56:28 And I'm sick of running them away from my house.
13:56:31 And I don't want them.
13:56:34 I'm trying to leave a Christian life and every Sunday I
13:56:37 have to run people out of my yard, purchasing beer, and
13:56:43 they come in my yard and drink alcohol.
13:56:45 And I don't like to be nasty to people but we have
13:56:49 cleaned this area up.
13:56:50 And I am begging you today to please, please, think
13:56:54 about the neighborhoods that we have cleaned up, think
13:56:57 about children that are walking back and forth, the

13:57:02 B.C. grant school, that we don't have to worry about
13:57:04 this problem anymore.
13:57:05 Think about our crossing guards, that they don't
13:57:08 respect -- they don't throw up, and I'm afraid for our
13:57:16 children.
13:57:16 They'll get hit one day.
13:57:18 And I thank you.
13:57:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, ma'am.
13:57:20 Next.
13:57:48 >> Speaker waiver form.
13:57:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: One name.
13:57:51 Reed Evans.
13:57:52 One additional minute.
13:57:54 Thank you.
13:57:55 >>> Sharon King.
13:57:55 I live in Riverside Heights and I'm board member of the
13:57:59 association.
13:57:59 And I'm here to try to illuminate why we wanted
13:58:06 contingency fee on the zoning.
13:58:08 I have your pictures that we have taken of the parking
13:58:16 lot. This was taken about six months after the city
13:58:21 said it wasn't an appropriate parking lot for

13:58:23 commercial establishment.
13:58:24 A lot of the grass has been cut back.
13:58:27 That's not an issue anymore.
13:58:28 The grass is short.
13:58:30 We are in a drought also and that also helps.
13:58:32 You can see the wall there.
13:58:33 They were supposed to paint and fix the wall.
13:58:37 And you see that they didn't do anything.
13:58:39 They just busted through a wall.
13:58:40 They they're was a fence there.
13:58:42 They busted through the wall, made a driveway and
13:58:45 that's what you have got.
13:58:45 The city told us they were going to curb, they were
13:58:50 going to barricade, the necessary signs to make sure
13:58:53 that people only went to the left, and exited on
13:58:56 Columbus drive.
13:58:57 Well, that sign that you see there, the only thing they
13:58:59 did -- and it's gone, it's no longer there.
13:59:02 If you were to drive by there today there is no sign.
13:59:05 The only thing that's left is the arrow.
13:59:12 This is another view of the wall.
13:59:13 You can see that it has not been painted or fixed or

13:59:16 anything.
13:59:17 Now, how the city writes off on this, I don't know. It
13:59:21 worries me.
13:59:24 And here is another view.
13:59:27 Looking from Monroe towards the lot.
13:59:36 The sign is gone. The arrow is still there.
13:59:40 You have here a better view that is not an acceptable
13:59:48 wall.
13:59:49 Nothing has been done.
13:59:50 This is the view from Columbus drive.
13:59:51 Again the grass is short.
13:59:56 The grass isn't long anymore.
13:59:57 It's short.
14:00:00 You see the dumpster there.
14:00:08 I discussed the plans with the attorney, what is the
14:00:10 projected plan.
14:00:11 The other one was a revised one.
14:00:13 The dumpster was supposed to be fenced in, wood or
14:00:17 something.
14:00:19 But there it sits, basically there.
14:00:20 I saw it.
14:00:23 Here the curb is straight, the grass is short.

14:00:36 And here you get a concept of the wall.
14:00:39 Close-up of the wall.
14:00:43 When they accepted it, you know, this is what we are
14:00:49 faced with.
14:00:50 It's been like 20 years of issues with this property of
14:00:54 code enforcement.
14:00:55 And for some reason, code is not enforced here.
14:01:00 It's like a no-man's land.
14:01:02 Maybe we need to take a vote to incorporate it back
14:01:04 into the City of Tampa.
14:01:05 I don't know what the solution is.
14:01:07 But, you know, we believe that this couple here, you
14:01:10 know, are upstanding people and believe they want to do
14:01:15 a good job and so forth.
14:01:16 But this parking lot is not acceptable.
14:01:18 You wouldn't want it in your neighborhood.
14:01:19 I don't even know how they got the egress out there.
14:01:23 I didn't think you were supposed to do that, go out on
14:01:25 a residential street.
14:01:26 But I know that you wouldn't find it acceptable.
14:01:30 And if they get the wet zoning it should be that we can
14:01:35 work out some of these issues.

14:01:37 And, you know, that's our position.
14:01:39 And I want to say something positive to council,
14:01:45 whenever we had an issue we came to council and we have
14:01:47 never been disappointed.
14:01:48 So I think that you can take care of this.
14:01:50 And thank you.
14:01:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:01:51 Mr. Miranda?
14:01:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Madam Chair, Saul-Sena, I am not
14:01:56 going to speak about the wet zoning directly for a
14:01:58 second.
14:01:58 But I don't know who owns this building now.
14:02:00 This used to be the old prince grocery.
14:02:06 And some years ago there was a litigation, for whatever
14:02:08 reason, and whoever bought the property assumed they
14:02:15 were buying the total property.
14:02:16 Well, guess, what they were not buying the total
14:02:18 property, if my recollection of my history is right.
14:02:21 They were building the -- buying the building. The
14:02:24 property from the building, set line to the east was
14:02:27 not included in the sale.
14:02:30 They thought they were buying it as the sale.

14:02:32 Therefore, this is what caused this dilemma of this
14:02:35 building.
14:02:36 Some years back, maybe ten years ago or something, if I
14:02:39 recall reading it in the paper, that's what happened
14:02:42 there.
14:02:42 So, therefore, the parking lot in the front would have
14:02:47 been there, you won't have these problems.
14:02:49 But when it was sold, it was sold as one piece, the
14:02:55 building.
14:02:55 So they had to go to the rear.
14:02:57 They had to move the opening of that building to the
14:02:59 side and to the rear, and therefore that's what you got
14:03:02 that mishmash of parking problems in the back.
14:03:06 I don't know the petitioner.
14:03:07 I don't know if he did or they did or the prior owner
14:03:10 or somebody did the fencing and the cutting, and that's
14:03:13 wrong.
14:03:14 But I also say that if what I heard, the petitioner's
14:03:19 representative make use of the L-shape, that's like
14:03:23 what they have on Dale Mabry and spruce.
14:03:29 I hate to say all these names because I don't want to
14:03:33 give publicity to these place that is sell bolts and

14:03:37 nuts and hardware.
14:03:38 You cannot make a left-hand turn on spruce.
14:03:41 Even though I will be very objective with you, once in
14:03:43 a while I see a big truck that will jump over that
14:03:47 six-inch barrier, not often, but it does happen.
14:03:51 Certainly a car like mine or yours, Mrs. Saul-Sena,
14:03:54 would not make it.
14:03:56 But what I am saying is those things do happen.
14:03:59 But I don't know what the outcome is, and I am not
14:04:03 speaking about the zoning.
14:04:04 I am just speaking on the history of the property so
14:04:06 that blame is not blamed of individuals that may not
14:04:10 have owned the building.
14:04:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:04:13 Ms. Mulhern.
14:04:15 >>MARY MULHERN: I just thought Mr. Miranda might know
14:04:17 who owns that parking lot?
14:04:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's by the original owner I hope
14:04:23 I'm not speaking out of turn.
14:04:25 If I remember had history of that building that's what
14:04:27 happened.
14:04:28 Now, the owners here, I didn't know if he was here.

14:04:30 But she can address that.
14:04:32 I noticed that I skirted around.
14:04:33 I didn't say how it was purchased, when it was
14:04:36 purchased.
14:04:36 I gave an assumption of a big umbrella.
14:04:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Next.
14:04:44 Come on up.
14:04:50 >>> Nora Macin.
14:05:00 I have a tape of Sharon KATY saying that I sold drugs
14:05:10 and I can produce it but I wasn't involved in the sale
14:05:12 of the store or anything.
14:05:13 But I do know, they have been nasty to me since they
14:05:16 have been there, and I have asked them not to use my
14:05:19 property.
14:05:20 I do not feel that they are the nice people that you
14:05:23 pretend them to be.
14:05:24 And very surprise that the river heights neighborhood
14:05:27 civic center would vouch for them to have it for one
14:05:29 year when they publicly, with the narcotics system,
14:05:34 people up there, selling beer, they were so against it.
14:05:40 Since I have been out in the neighborhood, and I don't
14:05:42 sell alcohol, I don't drink, I'm sort of glad there's

14:05:47 no alcohol.
14:05:48 So my son is supposed to be here to tell the rest but
14:05:52 you took too long and he had to go to work.
14:05:58 The city made us put the wall up which they knocked
14:06:01 down. The city sent me a letter saying we could not
14:06:04 use the city for the District of Columbia, could not
14:06:06 park trucks in the back of the building between my
14:06:08 house and the store because that is residential where
14:06:10 that house was.
14:06:11 That was my homestead.
14:06:13 It was not supposed to go with the sale.
14:06:15 Itself was one big mess.
14:06:17 That's all I can say.
14:06:18 And I certainly don't need more alcohol in that
14:06:20 neighborhood, because they terrorized me for 15 years.
14:06:24 Thank you.
14:06:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:06:26 Next.
14:06:32 >>> My name is Tommy bacon, 414.
14:06:37 I have been a resident for 43 years there.
14:06:39 And you got the unfortunate people, you know, they come
14:06:51 into the neighborhood, and like she was saying they

14:06:55 putting mattresses here and going in your garbage cans
14:06:59 here, and walking up and down there, and you see the
14:07:02 kids going out trying to go out the back gate, they get
14:07:06 scared, you know.
14:07:07 And I noticed the lady said they had eight parking
14:07:10 lots -- I mean in the parking lot, eight parking
14:07:13 spaces.
14:07:13 But when you try to have a car wash in there, you try
14:07:17 to have people come in and gets congested.
14:07:25 North Columbus Boulevard, I have seen more accidents
14:07:29 there since I been there.
14:07:31 And I'm not trying to take anything away from the
14:07:33 people that bought the store.
14:07:34 Because I hear a lot of good things being said.
14:07:38 And nobody saying nothing when you give them personal
14:07:43 alcohol sales and they walk across the street and being
14:07:46 hit by a car.
14:07:47 Ain't nobody saying anything about all that.
14:07:49 All they saying is what good going to come out.
14:07:52 No good going to come out of alcohol.
14:07:54 I'm against it.
14:07:56 I used it.

14:07:57 I abused it.
14:07:58 God took me away from it.
14:08:00 I went back to it.
14:08:01 And I'm still trying to recover from all my relapses.
14:08:06 But I'm here trying to tell you, I'm trying to tell but
14:08:10 my neighborhood.
14:08:16 You know, my mom stayed one block south, 43 years was
14:08:24 our home, and she just moved to Massachusetts, Columbus
14:08:27 drive right across from Primadonna.
14:08:33 80-year-old woman came outside because of the people.
14:08:36 I had to put the fence in front of the yard because the
14:08:39 guy coming from the stores going here, going there,
14:08:45 doing this, doing whatever they want to do, taking over
14:08:47 the neighborhood.
14:08:48 We try and clean it up.
14:08:49 But you got so many people competing against each
14:08:53 other, you know.
14:08:54 And I know for a fact if this thing be approved, we are
14:09:00 going to have a bigger problem than what you have now.
14:09:02 All I'm trying to say is look out for the kids.
14:09:10 The world is in your hand now.
14:09:13 Think about it.

14:09:14 That's all I have to say.
14:09:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:09:15 Next.
14:09:18 >>> Kathy Evans.
14:09:19 I have been sworn in.
14:09:20 I live at 813 west Kentucky Avenue inside Riverside
14:09:23 Heights.
14:09:24 And the vice-president of the Riverside heights
14:09:26 neighborhood community association.
14:09:29 And we as a neighborhood decided to support
14:09:33 conditionally the Mandanis and the wet zone for a year.
14:09:38 You heard the condition.
14:09:38 We have also contacted the Tampa Heights neighborhood
14:09:42 association to kind of let them know what's going on
14:09:45 and how they feel about it.
14:09:47 They said that, no, they weren't in support of having
14:09:50 liquor, but with beer and wine, they support our stance
14:09:53 of the conditional support, meaning we want to revisit
14:09:58 this in a year, see if they have been able to work out
14:10:00 anything with that parking situation, because it is, as
14:10:05 Mr. Miranda was saying, it's going to be kind of hard
14:10:07 even for them as a business to be able to be profitable

14:10:10 without having -- that's the front of the store really,
14:10:13 and that's not their property to have.
14:10:15 So it's kind of a sticky situation.
14:10:17 But we don't want the traffic going through our
14:10:19 neighborhood.
14:10:20 We don't want that to be the way in and out of a store.
14:10:27 And we wanted to just make sure that those conditions,
14:10:33 we are going on record as a neighborhood saying that
14:10:35 that's what we are in support of and that's what we are
14:10:38 thinking about and we would like to revisit it in a
14:10:40 year.
14:10:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Next.
14:10:45 >>> Good afternoon, council.
14:10:47 My name is Artie rosebary, 2805 north Monroe street.
14:10:53 The street that actually is the traffic would turn on.
14:10:58 I live three houses down from the store.
14:11:03 I'm here today to address -- I've heard many things
14:11:07 come across.
14:11:09 I heard one lady mention, first of all, I want to
14:11:11 mention that I am also the pastor of outreach church of
14:11:15 Jesus.
14:11:17 We have actually started a ministry from my home

14:11:19 residence.
14:11:22 We are evangelizing the neighborhood, and though I'm
14:11:26 not for beer consumption, alcohol consumption, I did
14:11:34 once have a problem with this establishment having a
14:11:36 wet zoned license.
14:11:38 I mean, who so ever will let him come, we'll put out
14:11:43 award, and, hey, if they come out with a beer in their
14:11:47 hand hopefully I can give them the word.
14:11:50 Amen.
14:11:51 But several things that I mention, I have six children
14:11:57 who are in the neighborhood.
14:12:02 They have made a tremendous turn around since these
14:12:05 people have owned.
14:12:06 Before, I saw the lady had the pictures with the
14:12:10 overgrowth.
14:12:10 None of that there.
14:12:13 She kept referencing the wall.
14:12:14 The wall.
14:12:15 I don't know if the Mandanis were responsible or were
14:12:22 told to do something about the wall.
14:12:24 That was then by the previous owners.
14:12:27 I have been in the neighborhood for five years, and I

14:12:29 was there when Ms. Melton did own.
14:12:32 And I remember how it was.
14:12:34 I remember the mattresses.
14:12:36 And I remember all the bums that used to hang out.
14:12:39 I'm sorry, I didn't mean to call them bums, I'm sorry.
14:12:42 The homeless, you know.
14:12:43 I remember how they used to hang out -- bad choice of
14:12:47 words.
14:12:49 Forgive Thee.
14:12:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
14:12:52 >>> But, you know, I remember how it used to be overrun
14:12:56 with just so many problems.
14:12:58 And since these people have come, I mean, the store
14:13:01 looks better, it's clean, you know, it's real clean,
14:13:05 you know, wasn't like that before, no disrespect to Ms.
14:13:12 Milton.
14:13:13 But it's made a tremendous turnaround.
14:13:16 Also the kids.
14:13:17 I heard everybody talking about the kid.
14:13:19 Nobody talks about the establishment that is across the
14:13:21 street that sales beer and alcohol already.
14:13:24 You know, nobody talks about the people that goes over

14:13:26 there and buys beer and everything already.
14:13:29 Some Todd Pressman me it's no different for this
14:13:31 establishment if it was a 7-Eleven or a BP gas station
14:13:36 or any other type of establishment that sells beer.
14:13:38 Nobody have a problem.
14:13:40 But because it's the Mandanis or because they are
14:13:44 Indian or whatever problems somebody may have, they
14:13:46 want to discriminate.
14:13:48 And I don't think that's fair.
14:13:49 So I'm speaking on behalf of, you know, what's fair and
14:13:53 what's right.
14:14:03 Also -- well, that's it.
14:14:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:14:06 Next.
14:14:06 I think a neighborhood person is next.
14:14:15 >>> My name is Pamela McKinnon.
14:14:18 And I don't live in the neighborhood but my pastor does
14:14:22 I'm over there all the time doing the car wash like he
14:14:25 said at the store.
14:14:26 And we are evangelizing.
14:14:29 We come out for people that come and there's a lot of
14:14:31 cars and everything that came over there, and it's just

14:14:34 opened but it's a really clean atmosphere. The kids
14:14:38 love going up there at night.
14:14:39 There's kids everywhere.
14:14:41 The kids go up there to get bread or something.
14:14:43 We need a convenience store that's clean like that in
14:14:46 the neighborhood.
14:14:46 People are nice there.
14:14:47 They let you use your food stamp card.
14:14:50 Because at the store across the street they don't take
14:14:53 food stamp cars.
14:14:58 So they let you us your card and it really is nice.
14:15:01 They sell good food in there and it's really clean.
14:15:04 And I just appreciate the store being there.
14:15:06 I don't know all the history behind it but I appreciate
14:15:09 the people being really nice, treating me with respect
14:15:12 when I come in, and it's really nice.
14:15:14 And I thank God that it's there.
14:15:16 And that's all I can say.
14:15:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:15:19 Next.
14:15:21 Wait, ma'am, I think there's one more neighborhood
14:15:23 person.

14:15:25 If anybody else would like to speak, please come up to
14:15:27 the front.
14:15:28 Thank you.
14:15:30 >>> Good afternoon.
14:15:30 My name is Gwendolyn Harvey.
14:15:34 And I don't live in the neighborhood but my pastor
14:15:36 does, too.
14:15:38 And I just want to say that the store is -- has made a
14:15:42 big change.
14:15:44 It's clean.
14:15:45 And I like going in there.
14:15:47 Walk in all the time, groceries in there, represent the
14:15:54 neighborhoods, and like someone already said, it's
14:15:57 convenient.
14:16:01 That's all I have to say.
14:16:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:16:04 One more neighbor?
14:16:06 Oh, you have already spoken, ma'am.
14:16:08 Just one shot.
14:16:10 Staff.
14:16:13 >>BARBARA LEPORE: I would like to bring a letter that
14:16:21 was submitted by Mr. Lane.

14:16:25 Barbara, I understand on the 16th of May which was
14:16:28 two days ago, hi, Barbara, we don't have any issues at
14:16:32 this time at that location.
14:16:33 However, there was an issue with the number of parking
14:16:37 spaces at this location.
14:16:40 That is an issue for the construction service center
14:16:42 folks.
14:16:43 And the Land Development Corporation, an issue with you
14:16:50 the location, I had a question.
14:16:51 I would like to turn in this letter.
14:16:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me.
14:17:04 Why don't you take that Mike?
14:17:09 >>> You can see in here, parking is in the back.
14:17:26 There is a section here.
14:17:27 I don't know if you can see it.
14:17:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could you clarify, is that opening
14:17:31 on Monroe street?
14:17:33 It's not channelized?
14:17:34 It's just wide open?
14:17:37 >>BARBARA LEPORE: I didn't see any signs here.
14:17:39 But I spoke with the transportation department.
14:17:41 And they actually would allow this to be internalized.

14:17:48 To the left.
14:17:52 This is another picture of the lane.
14:18:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to ask a question of
14:18:02 legal before the petitioner has the chance to come up.
14:18:05 Taking a look at the picture that's on the Elmo right
14:18:07 now, is council allowed in considering this particular
14:18:14 issue before us to require certain things such as the
14:18:17 wall be finished and that the access be channelized on
14:18:21 Monroe street?
14:18:25 >>> Actually, no, not in this process.
14:18:28 And I would give a little summary before.
14:18:31 But you can conditional hours of operation, sanitary
14:18:35 conditions.
14:18:36 It's not appropriate to condition the alcohol beverage
14:18:39 permit issues that are tied to the general commercial
14:18:43 use.
14:18:43 That's already been approved, and any issues have to be
14:18:47 resolved through a different process. The other option
14:18:49 that City Council would have would be to do a one-year
14:18:51 conditional.
14:18:52 What that means is what it says, they have one year,
14:18:54 and then they have to come back and reapply.

14:18:57 That being said, any condition including the one-year
14:18:59 conditional needs to be agreed upon by the applicant.
14:19:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:19:03 Mr. Miranda.
14:19:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: thank you chairperson Saul-Sena.
14:19:08 However, I agree with your legal opinion.
14:19:10 However, I disagree with the legal opinion.
14:19:12 Let me tell you why.
14:19:16 If the petitioners themselves put that on the record
14:19:18 that that's what they want, then it becomes part, and
14:19:22 they did address it in the beginning, where they said
14:19:25 that they would do the channelization.
14:19:27 Am I correct, counselor?
14:19:31 And they would do the channelization with the signs
14:19:34 going only south to Columbus drive.
14:19:37 So although you are correct it has no part of what it
14:19:40 had to do with the alcohol zoning, I think that if the
14:19:46 petitioner comes and makes it their part, that it
14:19:48 becomes part of the record.
14:19:52 >>> Maybe I can clarify what my advice is on that
14:19:54 point.
14:19:54 Certainly the applicant is under oath, and they can

14:19:56 make representations to you, and representations will
14:20:00 be made under oath.
14:20:02 That being said it is still not appropriate to make
14:20:04 that a condition tied to the wet zoning.
14:20:07 Even if the applicant agrees to it when he's up here,
14:20:10 if it's not tied to the use of the alcoholic beverage,
14:20:13 he can come back later, and it won't be enforceable.
14:20:16 Sure, you can put in the there but it's not going to be
14:20:18 enforceable.
14:20:19 I just want to make that clear.
14:20:21 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Can I ask the attorney?
14:20:24 Who owns these eight parking spaces that are on the --
14:20:29 along Monroe?
14:20:34 >>> The eight parking space as long Monroe?
14:20:36 That's part of the parcel my clients own.
14:20:38 If I may, I want to put a copy of the actual attachment
14:20:43 to the application here.
14:20:50 That is the parcel my clients own along this end here
14:20:52 is where -- this is Columbus.
14:20:57 This is Monroe street.
14:20:58 The parking spaces are on the western side of the
14:21:00 property facing west, going from north to south, and

14:21:05 there is a space there that's also part that's
14:21:08 permitted.
14:21:09 The entrance from Columbus is here. The entrance with
14:21:13 the sign that was pointed out by staff is here.
14:21:16 And the property goes to North Boulevard.
14:21:21 Down here, is what we were suggesting we do in terms of
14:21:26 that directional work for that, an and perhaps even a
14:21:29 little more graduated than that to give a depiction of
14:21:32 what we were intending.
14:21:34 I hope this answers your question.
14:21:37 I have some more.
14:21:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No one else from the public can
14:21:43 speak who has previously spoken.
14:21:45 If there's no one else from the public to speak then
14:21:48 petitioner can come up for rebuttal.
14:21:50 >>> Thank you.
14:21:52 I don't know if this is going to show up.
14:21:54 I took pictures this morning with my camera phone,
14:21:57 technology is wonderful.
14:21:58 I don't have a color printer in my car but I do have
14:22:01 the pictures taken this morning.
14:22:03 That is standing on Monroe street looking south, along

14:22:06 the side here is the wall, unfortunately it didn't come
14:22:11 through very clearly but it shows some of the work
14:22:14 that's been done and how the area is cleaned up.
14:22:16 It's a much better depiction.
14:22:21 My client purchased the property in '04, in December of
14:22:25 '04, and the wall was knocked through.
14:22:31 I don't think the chronology was 100 clear earlier.
14:22:36 That historically was there from before.
14:22:43 My clients recall the no left turn sign.
14:22:51 And I would have to read what council for the city said
14:22:54 but my clients are committing to the public and to the
14:22:56 board today.
14:22:58 They are going to make those improvements for the curb
14:23:00 and the signage.
14:23:01 But they believe it's important to be a part of the
14:23:03 neighborhood, not to be against the neighborhood.
14:23:05 And that's what they have done.
14:23:06 And looking now at the city of Orlando, and some
14:23:11 locations they have there, they are in a blighted area.
14:23:14 They are going to use the same technology with security
14:23:16 cameras to increase what they have.
14:23:17 And I think that overall, again, the overall -- what's

14:23:24 been checked, they are doing the right things, going
14:23:26 above and beyond, there are currently no code
14:23:29 violations.
14:23:29 If there's an issue brought to their attention they
14:23:31 will address it promptly and I believe a lot of the
14:23:33 comment regarding alcoholic content was simply beyond
14:23:38 my clients' control and not necessarily directed to
14:23:41 people buying liquor from this location, but simply the
14:23:44 effects of liquor as a whole.
14:23:47 And I don't know that they can be held accountable for
14:23:49 that and I don't think that they should be in this
14:23:51 context. If there's any other questions I would be
14:23:52 happy to address them.
14:23:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Council members, could you clarify
14:23:58 whether you are requesting -- can requesting a
14:24:01 conditional use?
14:24:02 >>> We have a wet zone application for selling beer and
14:24:06 wine.
14:24:09 I'm not certain if you are -- saying conditional use.
14:24:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Maybe our legal department can
14:24:16 clarify that for you.
14:24:23 >>REBECCA KERT: They do have a one-year conditional but

14:24:27 you would be getting what you applied for one year but
14:24:30 would you need to come back before that year runs out.
14:24:35 >> We are not asking for a conditional use.
14:24:36 We are asking for this to be approved.
14:24:37 I believe under the sections of the code that are
14:24:40 applicable under the context you have, under 3-100
14:24:45 revocation for cause, and 3-90 revocation for lapse, my
14:24:49 clients are living up to what the code requires.
14:24:54 >> You are also asking for a waiver of the 1,000-foot
14:24:56 distance requirement from the school or other wet
14:25:00 zoning.
14:25:00 Other council members, questions?
14:25:03 Ms. Mulhern.
14:25:07 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question about the process.
14:25:11 We just sat here and listened to the appeal from the
14:25:15 neighbors and the public asking for a conditional use.
14:25:18 And after we have heard all of this, and they hear that
14:25:22 it would have no force, so I feel like we haven't
14:25:27 really heard from the neighbors.
14:25:28 And now the petitioner tells us he does not want a
14:25:32 conditional use, that we heard from them something that
14:25:36 can have no teeth.

14:25:38 I mean, we could pass this conditional use, but it's
14:25:41 not really within -- now we don't know how they feel
14:25:47 about just having -- I guess we vote it up or down
14:25:51 basically.
14:25:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could you clarify, legal?
14:25:55 >>REBECCA KERT: To clarify, there are conditions, and
14:25:57 then there's a conditional use.
14:25:58 I think what I was speaking about earlier that would
14:26:00 not be enforceable would just be having general
14:26:02 conditions, either on the conditional use, or on a
14:26:05 permanent wet zoning.
14:26:06 And those can only be related to location, sanitary
14:26:09 conditions, and hours of operation as they directly
14:26:13 relate to the effects of the sale of alcoholic
14:26:15 beverages.
14:26:16 The second one is a one-year conditional.
14:26:18 And that's the one that has to be requested by the
14:26:22 applicant.
14:26:22 Maybe I can give you all a little guidance about where
14:26:24 you are right now.
14:26:28 >>MARY MULHERN: My point is we should amend that before
14:26:31 we went through the whole process.

14:26:33 Because we really haven't gained anything.
14:26:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Maybe if she explains it will clear
14:26:39 things up a little.
14:26:40 >>> I hope so.
14:26:41 Maybe it will but I'll give it a shot. The way this is
14:26:43 set up is if a waiver is requested, which is what
14:26:47 happens now, it is the applicant's initial burden to
14:26:50 demonstrate by substantial, competent evidence that the
14:26:53 sale of alcoholic beverages is incidental to the
14:26:56 primary use.
14:26:57 They have told you that they are running a convenience
14:26:59 store operation where the sale of alcoholic beverages
14:27:03 will in fact be incidental to the primary use.
14:27:05 At that point they are entitled to the wet zoning,
14:27:07 unless the opposing party or the city is able to
14:27:12 demonstrate by substantial, competent evidence that
14:27:14 they don't meet the requirements in the code, and in
14:27:19 the public interest.
14:27:21 If City Council is inclined to deny this, you are going
14:27:26 to have to identify what section of the code it does
14:27:27 not meet, and that it refers to the public interest.
14:27:33 >>MARY MULHERN: They are asking for a waiver of the

14:27:35 1,000-foot so we don't have to demonstrate that, do we?
14:27:40 >>REBECCA KERT: No.
14:27:40 That's what in fact triggers it.
14:27:42 The way your code is set up right now, if they came in
14:27:46 for a wet zoning and did not meet any -- need any
14:27:50 waivers City Council has no ability to deny it.
14:27:52 You have a 1,000 feet setback from a number of
14:27:55 different items.
14:27:56 That's what triggers this entire process.
14:27:58 Their initial burden is to demonstrate that the sale of
14:28:02 alcoholic beverages is incidental to the primary use.
14:28:04 You might not agree with the system that you have right
14:28:07 now.
14:28:07 We are looking to change it and bring you different
14:28:09 options but that's how it's set up right now.
14:28:11 >>MARY MULHERN: So we can't vote on this based on that
14:28:15 1,000-foot requirement?
14:28:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes, we can.
14:28:20 >>> You can't deny it merely because of the 1,000 feet.
14:28:23 Because -- what your code says is if you are within
14:28:26 1,000 feet and you need a waiver, then you have shifted
14:28:29 the burden to the applicant to show that the sale of

14:28:32 alcoholic beverage is incidental to the primary use.
14:28:36 And this is what your code says.
14:28:39 This isn't me, this is what's in your code right now.
14:28:41 If that's true, then you have to find that there was
14:28:45 substantial competent evidence in the record that they
14:28:47 don't meet the requirements of your code and that it
14:28:50 refers to the public interest.
14:28:50 If you can do that, that is your basis for denial.
14:28:53 You need to state that in your motion and that would be
14:28:56 the basis.
14:28:58 >> To follow up.
14:28:59 Obviously, when Mrs. Kert says competent substantial
14:29:04 evidence, she doesn't mean by weight, more likely than
14:29:07 not.
14:29:08 In other words, if you can go to the testimony that you
14:29:09 heard and use that testimony that forms the basis for
14:29:12 your decision, the competent, substantial evidence, and
14:29:19 state that, that would suffice.
14:29:20 It doesn't have to be a weighing of the evidence.
14:29:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Caetano.
14:29:25 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I intend to support this petition
14:29:27 due to the fact that there was many, many residents who

14:29:30 got up and spoke in favor of this, saying the place is
14:29:34 clean, and I didn't realize there is a store across the
14:29:36 street that's selling beer and wine, and evidently the
14:29:40 people are buying this beer and wine coming out there,
14:29:45 and I believe it's up to the police department.
14:29:47 If we have problems like that in the neighborhood,
14:29:49 these people should not suffer.
14:29:51 It's not their problem.
14:29:53 It's the city's problem to clean that area up.
14:29:56 And that's all we keep doing is hitting the small
14:29:58 businessman, and it hurts, believe me.
14:30:01 And I think they have demonstrated.
14:30:04 And I was unsecured of who owned this parking lot
14:30:08 because I believe that lady said she owned it.
14:30:13 >>> (speaking from floor).
14:30:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You're out of order, ma'am.
14:30:16 Please sit down.
14:30:17 Reverend Scott.
14:30:18 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I'll support this petition.
14:30:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My question is for legal.
14:30:22 So we can understand again.
14:30:25 The reason they are in here is because they need a

14:30:27 variance, they need a waiver.
14:30:29 And really, though, council could deny this based on
14:30:32 the fact that they are coming in.
14:30:39 And how many schools are close by here?
14:30:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madonna.
14:30:43 Grant.
14:30:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: See, this other thing is staff.
14:30:48 You have two churches, and those that were within the
14:30:52 1,000 feet rule.
14:30:54 You don't even have that in the petition.
14:30:55 That's what I was looking for.
14:30:57 At least I didn't see it when I read it.
14:30:58 What schools are closed?
14:31:00 What churches are closed?
14:31:03 I guess the pastor saying they have a church there now.
14:31:05 I don't know what constitutes a church in terms of when
14:31:09 it was established but clearly, they need a waiver.
14:31:14 So we have to understand that, council.
14:31:17 So the burden of proof is on them, not on us.
14:31:21 And if they have not proven to this body, and given us
14:31:27 substantial evidence to grant a waiver, it can be
14:31:32 denied.

14:31:34 >>> I'm not an attorney and not trying to do Ms. Kert's
14:31:37 job, but --
14:31:39 >>BARBARA LEPORE: From what I received from the
14:31:42 petitioner, we require the petitioner to comply within
14:31:48 the 1,000 walking distance, not the radius, but the
14:31:51 walking distance.
14:32:02 They have to go to the light.
14:32:03 They have to make safe crossing.
14:32:06 So at this time is what the code requires.
14:32:10 And from the second page, they use the section which is
14:32:14 institutional use.
14:32:15 And based on that, when they gave me the report, there
14:32:20 is none.
14:32:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So why are they requesting waiver if
14:32:27 they have no institution?
14:32:29 >>> They are not requesting institution.
14:32:31 They are requesting the waiver to the other wet zoned
14:32:34 establishment.
14:32:34 >> The one across the street there.
14:32:36 So prima Madonna is the --
14:32:42 >>> It's not the radius.
14:32:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I understand, I understand.

14:32:48 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm looking at the report on the
14:32:49 petition for a wet zoning.
14:32:50 And it says there are several properties with RS-50,
14:32:55 RS-60, RM-16, 45 to 127 feet.
14:33:00 So those are all residential, no schools or churches?
14:33:04 >>> No.
14:33:04 Those are just residential properties.
14:33:10 Not church.
14:33:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to speak on this.
14:33:14 Well, is there a move to close the public hearing?
14:33:17 >> So moved.
14:33:18 >> Second.
14:33:18 (Motion carried).
14:33:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there a motion from council?
14:33:36 I pass the gavel.
14:33:38 I don't know who the appropriate recipient is.
14:33:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Go ahead.
14:33:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm familiar with this neighborhood.
14:33:45 It's making an Ernest effort to improve.
14:33:48 And I am very pleased that the property owner is trying
14:33:51 to improve this property.
14:33:53 The neighborhood organization has requested a

14:33:57 conditional use.
14:33:58 What that would mean is for a year, this property owner
14:34:02 would have the opportunity to sell alcohol.
14:34:05 Then after a year it would come back before council and
14:34:08 we would again have a fresh public hearing and listen
14:34:10 to the people who live around it.
14:34:13 Has this been a positive contribution to the
14:34:14 neighborhood?
14:34:15 Has it been a negative contribution?
14:34:17 What has the impact been?
14:34:19 I personally think that that would be the most
14:34:22 satisfying way to make a decision on this.
14:34:24 I want to give the property owner the benefit of the
14:34:26 doubt.
14:34:27 I also want to hear from the neighbors what kind of an
14:34:29 impact selling alcohol at this location.
14:34:34 Council cannot do this.
14:34:35 Council only has the opportunity to vote up or down
14:34:38 what's before us, which is not a conditional use.
14:34:41 The property owner said clearly they weren't willing to
14:34:45 request the conditional use.
14:34:48 Based on that I will not support this.

14:34:52 >>> The applicant has indicated to me that they would
14:34:54 request a one-year conditional.
14:34:55 >> Even though the public hearing is closed?
14:34:57 >>> Well, they realize, that's what they told me and
14:35:00 asked me to advise.
14:35:01 >> Is there a motion to reopen the public hearing?
14:35:04 Is there a second?
14:35:05 Motion and second to reopen the public hearing.
14:35:07 Reverend Scott.
14:35:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You passed the gavel.
14:35:10 You can't do that.
14:35:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I thought I was getting it back.
14:35:18 That's the way it works.
14:35:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is that the way it works?
14:35:22 >> You pass it, you get it back.
14:35:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So you do the talking and you get the
14:35:27 gavel back?
14:35:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
14:35:30 [ Laughter ]
14:35:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I look forward to that retreat.
14:35:42 >> There's been a motion and second to reopen the
14:35:43 public hearing.

14:35:44 Any discussion on the motion?
14:35:45 All those in favor say Aye.
14:35:48 The public hearing is reopened.
14:35:49 The petitioner wishes to say something to council?
14:35:53 >>> Yes.
14:35:53 I thank you for passing the gavel back and forth.
14:35:59 In discussion with my colleagues, in all honest if I, I
14:36:03 believe they are going to come back and state they are
14:36:05 a positive impact to the community.
14:36:07 They are willing to make this a conditional use request
14:36:09 so that the community is not left out of the loop in
14:36:14 what might happen over the course of next year, and in
14:36:17 hopes of establishing for everybody what their
14:36:20 intentions are and will remain.
14:36:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:36:26 We have now heard from the petitioner that they are
14:36:28 requesting this as a conditional use.
14:36:30 Is there a motion to close the public hearing?
14:36:33 >> So moved.
14:36:33 >> Second.
14:36:33 (Motion carried).
14:36:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What are the wishes of council?

14:36:38 Mr. Shelby?
14:36:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you do wish to contemplate a
14:36:40 one-year conditional, the appropriate motion would be
14:36:42 direct legal to bring it back next week under
14:36:45 ordinances for first reading.
14:36:46 So that it would be ready to go without any additional
14:36:49 public hearing or testimony.
14:36:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Ms. Mulhern?
14:36:53 >>MARY MULHERN: I'll move that we bring it back next
14:36:55 week for first reading for conditional wet zoning.
14:37:00 >> Second.
14:37:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion and second.
14:37:02 Any discussion on the motion?
14:37:05 Passed unanimously.
14:37:06 Thank you.
14:37:09 Number 38.
14:37:12 Number 39.
14:37:20 >>> We have already opened everything.
14:37:23 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
14:38:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there a map?
14:38:13 >>> I don't have a map because this is an extension
14:38:15 only.

14:38:15 I have pictures of this establishment.
14:38:17 The current number is WZ 07-58.
14:38:20 For the location at 2221 east Hillsborough Avenue.
14:38:23 The petitioner is requesting a one-year extension of
14:38:27 time for wet zoning by ordinance 2002 in '85 which was
14:38:38 a 3 PS for sale of alcohol on the site.
14:38:40 The 120-day extension set to expire in February.
14:38:51 The Ross Dress for Less would find a tenant who would
14:39:00 actually run the business.
14:39:07 I have some pictures.
14:39:27 This will show the establishment.
14:39:29 The parking area.
14:39:35 The wet zoning.
14:39:37 The other view of the parking area.
14:39:43 There is also a sign.
14:39:53 >>> Officer Miller, City of Tampa police department.
14:39:55 Police department has no objection to this wet zoning.
14:39:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:39:59 Petitioner?
14:40:00 Petitioner, would you please tell us the closest cross
14:40:04 street?
14:40:05 >>> For the record my name is ray Allen, attorney with

14:40:07 the law firm of Carlton Fields here representing Ross
14:40:10 Dress for Less.
14:40:16 Let me go back in a little bit of history.
14:40:19 I have to answer this question.
14:40:20 I have been sworn.
14:40:21 I forget as an attorney.
14:40:25 I have been sworn.
14:40:26 A little bit of history.
14:40:27 When Albertson's closed its stores a few months back
14:40:30 this is one of the stores they closed.
14:40:32 Ross came in and took a sublease from this particular
14:40:34 piece of property.
14:40:35 Included in that sublease was Albertson's that had
14:40:38 their drugstore and it was one of those liquor stores
14:40:40 that was off to the side.
14:40:42 It was a small portion.
14:40:43 It was a separate building, or separate use.
14:40:48 Ross has undertaken that entire lease.
14:40:51 They have their dress store back up and running now.
14:40:54 They have not found a suitable tenant to move in to
14:40:57 take over the liquor store.
14:40:59 As Albertson's was shutting these stores down,

14:41:02 Albertson's had actually asked for a six month, 120-day
14:41:07 discontinuance, I believe that's what it's called
14:41:09 within the ordinance, a discontinuance of sale for
14:41:12 alcoholic beverages.
14:41:12 That was granted for 120 days.
14:41:15 Prior to that 120 days lapsing, Ross had taken over the
14:41:19 sublease.
14:41:20 They came in and then asked to have this extended for a
14:41:23 year, to give them enough time to come in and find a
14:41:26 suitable tenant, because obviously they want somebody
14:41:28 that's going to be compatible with the store to have it
14:41:31 up and running and the remainder of the shopping
14:41:33 center.
14:41:34 They just have not to this point in time found someone
14:41:37 they believe within that year they can find someone, or
14:41:40 else they are at a point where they are going to have
14:41:42 to -- they have talked about going in and running that
14:41:45 themselves, or closing the liquor store down, which
14:41:48 would be their two option ifs they can't find anybody
14:41:51 at the end of the year.
14:41:52 So this is really a one-year extension for the
14:41:56 discontinuance is what we are asking for.

14:41:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Any questions by council members?
14:42:00 What is the cross street?
14:42:03 >>> This is at the southwest corner of 22nd and
14:42:05 Hillsborough Avenue.
14:42:07 So you have Irwin technical across one corner, there's
14:42:11 an old guitar store I think across the street.
14:42:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:42:15 Anyone from the audience care to speak?
14:42:19 Is there a motion to close?
14:42:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
14:42:21 >> Motion and second to close.
14:42:22 (Motion carried).
14:42:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move the one-year extension.
14:42:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second for discussion.
14:42:37 >> You do know that middleton is right by the corner
14:42:42 there, within a thousand feet, right?
14:42:44 They are there.
14:42:47 >>> That's correct.
14:42:50 >> They have done a good job there with that.
14:42:52 >>> They really cleaned it up.
14:42:53 >> Looks very nice.
14:42:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Any more discussion on the motion?

14:42:57 All those in favor say Aye.
14:42:58 Opposed, Nay.
14:43:00 Passed Nan unanimously.
14:43:02 >> That was to move the resolution, correct?
14:43:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
14:43:05 Thank you for the clarification.
14:43:06 Number 40 is open.
14:43:09 >>BARBARA LEPORE: The next case is WZ 07-59 for the
14:43:13 location 2500 north Rocky Point drive.
14:43:17 The petitioner is requesting a 4(COP-X), extension at
14:43:23 this location.
14:43:25 There was an extension of time granted, one in 2005,
14:43:29 the next one in 2006.
14:43:32 The extension in 2006 expired on the 22nd of
14:43:38 February.
14:43:41 This extension will be for an extension of time. The
14:43:47 location, I visited the location, and actually at this
14:43:50 time there is nothing there.
14:43:51 The building was demolished.
14:43:53 There was a fire.
14:43:54 And right now the petitioner is trying to obtain the
14:44:01 establishment.

14:44:02 I have some pictures.
14:44:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I ask a question?
14:44:29 Doesn't there have to be a building to have a liquor
14:44:32 zoning?
14:44:40 >>REBECCA KERT: No.
14:44:40 Only for a one-year conditional.
14:44:42 >> Is the entire property being requested for this
14:44:45 extension?
14:44:47 Of a 4(COP-X)?
14:45:00 Mr. Miranda?
14:45:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I believe that not only is that
14:45:05 building no longer there, burnt down, wasn't this the
14:45:08 area that in 2003 we did some changing or rezoning
14:45:12 because of the expansion of the links project and the
14:45:17 exchange there?
14:45:19 >>BARBARA LEPORE: I'm sorry, I don't know.
14:45:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm satisfied with that.
14:45:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I assume there's no police report,
14:45:31 but perhaps there is.
14:45:34 >>> I always do a thorough job.
14:45:36 Officer Miller, City of Tampa police department.
14:45:38 We have no objections to this location even though

14:45:41 there is no building there.
14:45:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Who would you inquire with?
14:45:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Before we hear from petitioner, how
14:45:48 many requests for extensions are people allowed?
14:45:53 >>> It's incidental to the primary use, they are
14:45:55 allowed as many as City Council is willing to grant.
14:46:02 If it is the primary use on the property they are
14:46:04 allowed one.
14:46:05 >> Well, this is 4(COP-X).
14:46:07 >>> Yes.
14:46:07 And I did check.
14:46:09 In the original ordinance it's required that the sale
14:46:11 of alcoholic beverages be incidental to the primary
14:46:14 use.
14:46:14 So that will continue on, once they dealt with their
14:46:18 discontinuances.
14:46:19 We are trying to clean up some of these languages.
14:46:21 I realize your ordinance is not particularly
14:46:24 straightforward.
14:46:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If it's an X, then it's the primary
14:46:29 use.
14:46:31 >>> No.

14:46:31 X means that you are allowed to -- the sale of
14:46:36 alcoholic beverages is for on-site consumption only.
14:46:39 That's what X means.
14:46:40 However, in the ordinance granting them that original
14:46:42 X, they are required to have the sale of alcoholic
14:46:44 beverages be incidental to the primary use.
14:46:49 So if that clarifies that.
14:46:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thanks.
14:46:52 Petitioner?
14:46:55 >>> Joseph Diaz, 2522 West Kennedy Boulevard.
14:46:59 The location that we are talking about is the old
14:47:02 Crawdaddy's whiskey, at the very end of Rocky Point
14:47:10 road.
14:47:10 When this ordinance was first adopted in 1997, there
14:47:14 was a finding in that ordinance, even though it was an
14:47:17 X, that the sale of alcoholic beverages is entirely
14:47:20 incidental to the primary function.
14:47:23 Under the city 390 you can only get one extension
14:47:27 unless the ordinance finds that the sale of alcoholic
14:47:30 beverages is incidental, and then there's unlimited
14:47:33 extensions.
14:47:35 I was not involved in the original zoning application,

14:47:39 but I did represent these people in the 2005 and in the
14:47:43 2006 one-year extension.
14:47:46 The building has been demolished and they are in the
14:47:50 process of pulling the permits to start construction.
14:47:53 This property sat vacant for quite some time and they
14:47:56 wanted to preserve the wet zoning because they knew as
14:47:59 long as they stayed within this footprint they were
14:48:01 going to be fine, instead of going out building and
14:48:03 then having to come and obtain a wet zoning.
14:48:06 That's why we are here before you, seeking this third
14:48:08 extension.
14:48:09 As Barbara has indicated, I think if you go out there
14:48:12 now you aren't going to see anything.
14:48:14 That building came down fairly recently.
14:48:16 That building hasn't been down maybe six, seven months.
14:48:19 That building was still up when I came before you last
14:48:22 year.
14:48:22 So what we are asking for is a one-year extension with
14:48:25 the hopes that we are going to be up and running, and
14:48:28 we don't have to come and visit you again next year.
14:48:32 This extension, I think on March 22nd, we filed on
14:48:36 March 14th, before the present extension expired.

14:48:40 So we are before you again seeking another one-year
14:48:43 extension with that location.
14:48:45 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:48:46 Is there anyone in the public who wants to speak on
14:48:47 this?
14:48:49 Is there a motion to close the public hearing?
14:48:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
14:48:52 >> Second.
14:48:52 (Motion carried).
14:48:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What is the pleasure of council?
14:48:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: For one year on this petition, WZ
14:49:01 07-59.
14:49:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion and second.
14:49:06 Any discussion?
14:49:08 Passed unanimously.
14:49:10 Number 41.
14:49:26 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
14:49:48 I am here for WZ 07-68 for the location 2720 west
14:49:54 Martin Luther King Boulevard.
14:49:58 This property is CG commercial.
14:50:02 Requesting 2(APS) for sale of beer and wine on
14:50:05 consumption on premises only.

14:50:06 Currently at this time this property has a 1(APS),
14:50:09 which was granted in 1975 for the sale of beer.
14:50:18 If this wet zoning will be allowed, 2,000 square feet
14:50:24 area, the sale of alcohol will be incidental.
14:50:26 There are other properties which are wet zoned that are
14:50:32 residential and institutional properties in the 1,000
14:50:34 walking distance.
14:50:36 The petitioner is requesting a waiver of this
14:50:42 separation.
14:50:43 Land development has no objection.
14:50:44 I can maybe show some pictures of that.
14:50:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This is catter-corner across the
14:50:49 street from St. Joseph's hospital, correct?
14:50:53 >>> This is the foot mark.
14:51:04 This is commercial.
14:51:15 This is another view.
14:51:35 >>> Officer Miller, City of Tampa police department.
14:51:37 I have been sworn.
14:51:37 We have no objection with this wet zoning.
14:51:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:51:41 Petitioner?
14:51:47 >>> George Pappas, address 1822 north Belcher road,

14:51:56 suite 200, Clearwater, Florida.
14:52:01 Again in summary, my client operates and owns a real
14:52:04 property, currently has 1(APS) sales of beer there.
14:52:09 Obviously would like to extend that to add wine as
14:52:12 well.
14:52:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:52:16 Is there anyone in the public who would like to speak
14:52:19 on this?
14:52:19 Is there a motion to close?
14:52:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
14:52:22 >> Second.
14:52:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion and second to close.
14:52:24 (Motion carried).
14:52:25 Is there a motion from council?
14:52:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Go ahead and move an ordinance
14:52:37 repealing -- ordinance number 62728 making lawful the
14:52:44 sale of beverages containing alcohol of more than 1% by
14:52:47 weight and not more than 2% by weight and wines
14:52:53 regardless of alcoholic content beer and wine in sealed
14:52:57 containers for consumption off premises only at or from
14:53:01 that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 2720
14:53:06 west Martin Luther King Boulevard, Tampa, Florida as

14:53:09 more particularly described in section 3 hereof waiving
14:53:12 certain restrictions as to the distance based upon
14:53:14 certain findings, providing for repeal, of or
14:53:19 ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
14:53:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.
14:53:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion and second.
14:53:25 Any discussion?
14:53:26 Passed unanimously.
14:53:27 Thank you.
14:53:28 Number 42 is now open.
14:53:31 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
14:54:00 Case WZ 07-72, at the location of 9399 North Florida
14:54:05 Avenue.
14:54:07 This parcel is zoned CI commercial, petitioner
14:54:12 requesting 4(COP-R), sale of beer and wine and alcohol,
14:54:15 regardless of the contents of the alcohol, with in
14:54:22 connection with a restaurant.
14:54:23 This is an existing restaurant which has 1680 feet, the
14:54:30 wet zoning will be -- the sale of alcohol will be
14:54:39 incidental.
14:54:40 There are other wet zoned establishments.
14:54:46 Petitioner is requesting a waiver of the distance

14:54:49 separation.
14:55:03 This is the restaurant.
14:55:04 This is the wet zoned area which the petitioner is
14:55:07 requesting above 9,000 square feet.
14:55:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:55:13 Officer Miller?
14:55:15 >>> Officer Miller, City of Tampa police department.
14:55:17 I have been sworn.
14:55:18 Police department has in a objection to this wet
14:55:20 zoning.
14:55:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:55:24 Petitioner.
14:55:26 >>> He had wad Cole, attorney, representing the
14:55:29 petitioner in this case, address 1370 pine Hurst road,
14:55:38 and I have been sworn.
14:55:39 This is for a wet zone petition 4(COP-R), restaurant
14:55:43 located eight or nine miles north of downtown, been in
14:55:46 continuous operation since 1993, a bona fide
14:55:52 restaurant, the area is intensely commercial, auto
14:55:55 dealerships, and compatible with the surrounding area.
14:55:59 My client wishes wet zoning to enhance his options to
14:56:03 his customers to enjoy a beverage with dinner, it's

14:56:06 also a very competitive industry.
14:56:09 Otherwise, I would like to get on the record and simply
14:56:11 state that my client does operate another restaurant in
14:56:13 the unincorporated area of Hillsborough County, and has
14:56:17 wet zoning there, he has been operating under that
14:56:19 license for approximately a year without incident.
14:56:22 Consequently he does have experience with the service
14:56:24 of alcoholic beverage, the requirements set forth in
14:56:27 the city's code as well.
14:56:30 He meets all the Cee criteria, has been satisfied with
14:56:33 respect to the city's ordinance.
14:56:34 We put our notices out and received no objections from
14:56:40 everyone, staff and police department have no
14:56:42 objections as well.
14:56:46 Myself and my client are available for answer to
14:56:49 questions.
14:56:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there anyone in the public who
14:56:52 would care to speak on this?
14:56:54 >> Move to close.
14:56:54 >> Second.
14:56:55 (Motion carried).
14:57:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I will move the ordinance WZ 07-72,

14:57:11 ordinance making lawful the sale of beverage containing
14:57:14 alcoholic, regardless of alcoholic content, beer, wine,
14:57:18 liquor for consumption on the premises only in
14:57:19 connection with a restaurant business establishment on
14:57:22 that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 9399
14:57:26 North Florida Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more
14:57:28 particularly described in section 2 hereof waiving
14:57:31 certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain
14:57:34 findings, providing for an ordinance in conflict,
14:57:40 providing an effective date.
14:57:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion and second.
14:57:42 Any discussion?
14:57:42 (Motion carried).
14:57:44 Passes unanimously.
14:57:46 Thank you.
14:57:46 Number 43 is now open.
14:57:54 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
14:58:14 I am heretofore case WZ 07-73, the location 1811-A east
14:58:23 Fowler Avenue.
14:58:25 It is commercial intensive.
14:58:27 Petitioner is requesting 2(APS) which is for the sale
14:58:29 of beer and wine for the consumption on the premises.

14:58:34 The petitioner is requesting to sell the beer and wine
14:58:37 beverages in connection with a cigar store.
14:58:43 It will be about 900 square feet.
14:58:46 The sale of alcohol will be incidental to the business.
14:58:51 There are some wet zoned establishments.
14:58:54 Petitioner is requesting the waiver separation.
14:59:01 Under distance separation.
14:59:27 Land development has no objection.
14:59:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:59:30 Officer Miller.
14:59:33 >>> Officer Miller, City of Tampa police.
14:59:35 We have in a objection to this wet zoning.
14:59:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you very much.
14:59:38 Petitioner?
14:59:44 >>> Good afternoon.
14:59:45 For the record my name is John Imatus, penguin drive in
14:59:51 Tampa.
14:59:54 The property is owned by Mr. Couch, and they have no
15:00:00 objection, have been ten other than for a number of
15:00:07 years. The only neighborhood association is University
15:00:09 Square Civic Association.
15:00:10 Mr. Sterlick came by and met with me and he has sent me

15:00:14 a letter thanking us for our notice concerning the
15:00:17 petition.
15:00:22 The civic association -- the Fowler Avenue is
15:00:28 completely commercial and they expect to feature
15:00:30 alcoholic beverages, thus we have in a objection to
15:00:32 your wet zoning, you will be our neighbor, wish you
15:00:36 well, look forward to meeting you as a partner.
15:00:39 Hope you meet with success.
15:00:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
15:00:41 Would anyone in the neighborhood care to speak on this
15:00:44 petition?
15:00:45 >> Move to close.
15:00:46 >> Second.
15:00:46 (Motion carried).
15:00:50 >> Move an ordinance making lawful sale change alcohol
15:00:58 of not worn 1% by weight not more than 14% by weight,
15:01:03 beer and wine, 2(APS) off premises only at or from the
15:01:11 certain lot, plot or track of land located at 1811
15:01:15 east-A east Fowler Avenue Tampa, Florida as more
15:01:19 particularly described in section 2 thereof waiving
15:01:22 certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain
15:01:25 findings providing for repeal of all ordinances in

15:01:27 conflict, providing an effective date.
15:01:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's a motion.
15:01:31 Is there a second?
15:01:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Second.
15:01:34 >> Any discussion?
15:01:35 (Motion carried)
15:01:35 Passed unanimously.
15:01:36 Thank you.
15:01:37 And now onward to our affordable housing workshop.
15:01:40 And we are sorry that we are running a little late.
15:01:53 >>> Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of council.
15:01:56 Cindy Miller, director of growth management development
15:01:58 services.
15:01:59 And I do thank you for this opportunity to have a
15:02:01 workshop where we can spend a little bit of time
15:02:03 talking about affordable housing.
15:02:06 Let me give a few statistics that I think are helpful
15:02:11 for both the folks viewing as well as other interested
15:02:13 parties.
15:02:14 And I think in the last couple of years, we have heard
15:02:16 more about affordable housing, obtainable housing,
15:02:19 workforce housing, than we ever heard before.

15:02:30 It takes two to three incomes.
15:02:35 During the year 2005 to 2005, during that five-year
15:02:38 time period, housing costs in our area throughout the
15:02:40 state increased almost 80%.
15:02:43 During that same five-year time period, salary levels
15:02:47 went up less than 10%.
15:02:49 So what we really have is not just housing prices going
15:02:52 up, but the wage scale overall not increasing anywhere
15:02:56 close to that rate of inflation.
15:02:58 And we are not unique here in Florida. It is happening
15:03:02 all over the country.
15:03:03 It also used to be -- and I can remember this from a
15:03:07 long time ago -- is that you would say that you could
15:03:09 afford a house if you took two times your salary and
15:03:13 could purchase a house.
15:03:14 Now the kind of equivalency here in Florida is you have
15:03:18 to take four times the salary in order to look at a
15:03:22 house.
15:03:24 That is the kind of problem.
15:03:25 That's comparable to New York state.
15:03:27 Maybe not New York City but it's comparable to New York
15:03:30 state.

15:03:31 One thing that I think we have to look at, that we
15:03:33 trade to look at here in Tampa over the last couple of
15:03:35 years, is we have to look at what I call sort of a --
15:03:41 almost like a market curve.
15:03:42 You have to be able to have good rental, affordable
15:03:45 rental, so that young folks starting out are able to
15:03:48 have a place of their own.
15:03:51 Then you have to be able to have an affordable
15:03:53 first-time home ownership.
15:03:55 So whether it is looking at a condo, a single-family
15:03:58 home, a townhouse, we need to be able to look at all
15:04:02 types of market opportunities.
15:04:05 So rental as well as for purchase.
15:04:08 Because if you are looking at a young person, someone
15:04:10 with a family, then someone who is retiring, we have to
15:04:14 make sure that all types of housing are available.
15:04:16 We also sort of trip over the words affordable,
15:04:19 workforce housing, obtainable.
15:04:21 It's probably easier for me to tell you what's not
15:04:23 affordable.
15:04:24 What's not affordable is when you have to spend more
15:04:26 than 30% of your income for housing.

15:04:30 And there are some rats staggering statistics that I
15:04:34 can share with you if you like at a later time.
15:04:37 But when you look at especially folks that make less
15:04:39 than $50,000 salary, they are spending far more than
15:04:44 30% of their salaries on their housing costs.
15:04:48 What I also talk about at various times is talk about
15:04:52 ship, the state housing initiative partnership.
15:04:55 Ship is state funding.
15:04:56 Home is investment partnership program, a federal
15:05:00 granted program.
15:05:01 They deal with different categories and different
15:05:04 salary levels.
15:05:05 But basically we use ship for down payment assistance,
15:05:08 owner occupied rehabilitation, emergency repairs, new
15:05:12 in-fill housing, and also new construction of
15:05:15 multifamily rental communities.
15:05:17 Home has also some similar situations where single
15:05:21 family or multifamily housing rehab and down payment
15:05:24 assistance.
15:05:25 So there is different salary levels and other
15:05:27 requirements for each program.
15:05:28 If we can now go to the PowerPoint, please.

15:05:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you have copies of this for the
15:05:35 council members?
15:05:36 >>> I don't have hard copies but I would be very happy
15:05:39 to provide them to you.
15:05:41 The slides themselves, we tried to keep them one
15:05:44 sentence so you won't get too many things glared on
15:05:46 them.
15:05:46 I want to basically cover highlights of the 2006-2007
15:05:49 time period, basically last fiscal year and our current
15:05:53 fiscal year to date, roughly about search months of
15:05:57 this year.
15:05:57 One thing that we started in 2006 was we issued a
15:06:00 request for qualifications to qualify not for profit
15:06:04 organizations, private developers and contractors to
15:06:06 build single-family homes on city owned vacant lots in
15:06:10 East Tampa.
15:06:10 That was really the first time we had done actually an
15:06:13 RFQ, was early in 2006.
15:06:17 We established design criteria for single family houses
15:06:21 to be built on city owned lots.
15:06:22 One thing we heard from various folks within the
15:06:24 community, some of our standards when it came to single

15:06:28 family houses, for example, that a front porch wasn't
15:06:33 required, or that there was only one door exiting off
15:06:36 the front and no exit out the back.
15:06:39 And if you are looking at either a person with small
15:06:41 kids or an elderly person, you like them to be able to
15:06:44 have two reasonable exits out of their house.
15:06:48 We also had commissions through an architect for
15:06:51 affordable single family house designed for in-fill lot
15:06:55 so you didn't have designs in-house that were able to
15:06:58 utilize for affordable housing and making them
15:07:01 available.
15:07:01 In 2006, also, we incorporated in chapter 27 a bonus
15:07:06 density provision for affordable housing in chapter 27.
15:07:10 It hasn't been utilized yet.
15:07:12 It is where, if a developer has a multifamily unit,
15:07:17 they can provide affordable housing, and that can be
15:07:21 considered in your bonus density.
15:07:23 I do think we have to work on that further as we come
15:07:25 back to you for our July amendments, because one thing
15:07:28 in looking at it is it requires that it be affordable
15:07:31 for 30 years.
15:07:32 That's probably putting the first step a little bit too

15:07:35 high for the developer, but we need to work on that.
15:07:39 Another thing that we did which was the first time we
15:07:41 had partnered with Hillsborough County, HSA and
15:07:45 Hillsborough County as the government, but we provided
15:07:48 as a City of Tampa $750,000 in ship funds to help
15:07:52 augment bond, so this is again another opportunity to
15:07:57 provide down payment assistance that would equal 20% of
15:08:00 the purchase price on a house up to $50,000 down
15:08:03 payment.
15:08:06 Now as we get into rehabilitation of houses, owner
15:08:08 occupied houses can qualify for up to $50,000 in
15:08:13 repairs that will bring a house up to code.
15:08:17 In 2006 we had 40 owner occupied homes rehabilitated,
15:08:21 and then also a means by which to leverage money from
15:08:25 the CRA especially East Tampa with TIF funds, we had 14
15:08:30 rehabilitations funded for that.
15:08:31 So we were able to sort of be able to match or dovetail
15:08:36 these efforts.
15:08:37 In 2007 we are getting a little bit of a better pace
15:08:40 going.
15:08:40 Again this is basically our first seven months.
15:08:42 We either have owner occupied homes already under

15:08:46 rehabilitation or in process of the application, 93 of
15:08:50 those in total, of which 34 will be rehabilitated with
15:08:54 TIF funds.
15:08:56 When it comes to down payment assistance, again there's
15:09:00 different categories of down payment assistance, but
15:09:03 basically for 20% of the housing costs, $50,000 in most
15:09:08 cases, but under certain salary, income eligibility, it
15:09:11 can go to $60,000.
15:09:13 In 2006, we had 48 persons or families received down
15:09:17 payment sis.
15:09:18 In 2007, we are now up to a pace of 65.
15:09:22 We expect there will be many more.
15:09:25 As you probably have heard, extensively in the news,
15:09:28 with the issues of the subprime market, where you have
15:09:32 folks that have been seeing staggering increases in
15:09:35 their monthly payments, or we have seen foreclosures,
15:09:40 luckily this is not something that affected our
15:09:41 program.
15:09:42 Our programs have always been six to eight so no one is
15:09:47 getting a surprise at their anniversary date.
15:09:50 When it comes to down payment assistance, because of
15:09:53 the changing marketplace, we are seeing many more

15:09:58 applications for down payment assistance than we did
15:10:00 before.
15:10:02 In 2006, there were three in-fill single homes
15:10:04 completed by the West Tampa CDC.
15:10:08 In 2007, we have already transferred or allocated 29
15:10:13 in-fill lots that were city property that now are under
15:10:17 development by the community housing development
15:10:19 organization for Tampa.
15:10:23 Coach foundation and East Tampa business and civic
15:10:25 association.
15:10:26 Those are either under design or under way.
15:10:29 And in a couple of case it is houses are actually
15:10:31 completed.
15:10:32 We also partner with other not for profit
15:10:34 organizations.
15:10:36 The center for women in 2006 did 105 repairs, mostly
15:10:41 funded through the senior housing improvement program.
15:10:44 Now you will see that the number for 2007 is down to
15:10:47 38.
15:10:47 But what we also did was triple the amount of
15:10:50 assistance that the center for women could utilize.
15:10:53 In 2006 we were only really authorized a max of $5,000.

15:10:58 You can't do much with $5,000.
15:11:05 So earlier this year we authorized $15,000.
15:11:09 For a roof replacement or other assistance.
15:11:12 Keep in mind a homeowner can still participate in our
15:11:15 rehabilitation program.
15:11:16 So we are able to again match or dovetail these kinds
15:11:19 of products.
15:11:25 I was before you a few weeks ago to talk about some of
15:11:27 these more important things from the past.
15:11:29 But one thing that we are very pleased with, with the
15:11:33 accountability that the housing community development
15:11:35 division has been able to accomplish, is that the City
15:11:39 of Tampa -- City of Tampa's audit department -- I
15:11:44 should be able to say that word, I used to be over
15:11:46 there -- that they noticed significant operational
15:11:48 improvements in our housing program.
15:11:50 That particular report was submitted to this council, I
15:11:52 believe, in December.
15:11:54 In the case of HUD, they have closed all the findings.
15:11:58 In the case of ship, again the state program, they
15:12:02 successfully completed a satisfactory monitoring
15:12:04 review.

15:12:05 I know satisfactory doesn't sound like a lot but this
15:12:07 is like getting a gold star for us.
15:12:11 In 2006, let's talk a little bit about affordable
15:12:15 rental.
15:12:15 The city participated through home and SHIP funds in
15:12:20 3520 affordable rental units, at Meridian point and
15:12:25 Centro Astriana.
15:12:29 We also, in 2007, anticipate that we will have new
15:12:34 units currently under construction, or about to go
15:12:36 under construction, 296 as part of park terrace in East
15:12:41 Tampa and San Lorenzo terrace.
15:12:45 I would like to mention too that it covers 2006 and
15:12:48 2007, when we came before council about a year ago with
15:12:51 a real estate transaction with Intown properties in
15:12:54 West Tampa.
15:12:55 What we have included in the real estate transaction
15:13:06 {} We required as part of the real estate transaction
15:13:11 at least 20% of them be affordable project wide, not
15:13:14 just those properties, and we are monitoring them, I
15:13:19 believe Intown properties is just about to finish out
15:13:21 not having all of those affordable houses accounted
15:13:25 for.

15:13:26 We also included in the heights project and affordable
15:13:28 housing component.
15:13:31 For 2007, we have an award of lots pending for various
15:13:35 East Tampa lots that would be transferred to three not
15:13:40 for profits, three not for profits I mentioned earlier
15:13:43 and also three builders.
15:13:45 We are a little bit slower on this than we intended to
15:13:47 be.
15:13:48 I will point this out to you from this standpoint.
15:13:52 One thing when it comes to city property, what a lot of
15:13:57 people think, we have an inventory of hundreds and
15:14:00 hundreds of city lots.
15:14:01 We really don't.
15:14:03 When it comes to in-fill lots, we have an inventory of
15:14:06 about 50 to 55, of that 37 have been looked at by the
15:14:13 not for profits and the builders.
15:14:14 These lots were deeded to the city meaning the previous
15:14:21 owners no longer own the property so therefore they
15:14:23 came to the city sometime in the last few years.
15:14:25 What makes it challenging, and I think we are all
15:14:27 learning, that there's a good reason why these
15:14:29 properties never were built on or never developed or

15:14:34 lost taxes because they have challenged when it comes
15:14:36 to construction, and we are hoping to work through some
15:14:38 of those challenges.
15:14:40 We also have a real estate development workshop series
15:14:43 for faith based organization.
15:14:46 I mentioned earlier that we need to look at not just
15:14:49 single-family homes but itself also other multifamily
15:14:52 opportunities.
15:14:53 One of those that came before council in March, or
15:14:58 really two that I am going to address, is that we did,
15:15:02 starting last year, had a request for proposal process
15:15:04 for multifamily funding, so that we are then able to
15:15:08 receive proposals, be able to have it reviewed for
15:15:12 underwriting purposes to make sure that it's a
15:15:15 qualified opportunity, and then to be able to give our
15:15:18 support through a commitment letter to the housing --
15:15:22 Florida housing finance agency.
15:15:25 There have been applications submitted for Central Park
15:15:27 Village for 203 affordable units, and for one building,
15:15:33 and for a second bid building of 160 affordable units
15:15:36 which would be for seniors.
15:15:38 Also, applying to the state was a development called

15:15:43 Madison heights which is on Florida, which is 108
15:15:45 affordable units for seniors.
15:15:49 One thing that -- and that will conclude the
15:15:52 PowerPoint.
15:15:53 Thank you.
15:15:56 When we look at how much in funding we received from
15:15:59 the state and federal government, the dollar amounts
15:16:02 that I have shown you a couple of weeks ago total about
15:16:05 $6 million.
15:16:09 If all we were looking at is rehabilitation of
15:16:11 single-family homes, or single-family down payment
15:16:16 assistance, basically would you be looking at, say,
15:16:18 $50,000 per family.
15:16:20 And you take $6 million and divide it by $50,000, it's
15:16:24 only 120 families.
15:16:26 But $6 million sounds like a lot of money but it really
15:16:29 isn't.
15:16:29 So unless we have the partnership where we are seeing
15:16:33 rezoning applications that have an affordable housing
15:16:38 component, unless we partner for affordable rental,
15:16:40 affordable multifamily housing, working with tax
15:16:44 credit, working with our colleagues at the county and

15:16:47 at the state, I think that that is something that we
15:16:49 are really going to miss some opportunities, because it
15:16:52 really would help if we can leverage our dollars.
15:16:54 And and I am going to place on the Elmo -- Elmo,
15:17:01 please -- for anyone in the public who is interested in
15:17:07 obtaining information on public assistance or
15:17:11 rehabilitation, the community development division,
15:17:14 phone number 274-7954.
15:17:17 274-7954.
15:17:20 And the staff there would be very happy to provide
15:17:22 information.
15:17:24 Also here with me is Sharon West, the manager of the
15:17:31 division.
15:17:31 When it comes to the accountability and especially for
15:17:35 the 2007 fiscal year, Sharon takes -- takes the credit
15:17:39 for that.
15:17:41 I think I am going trip over this title.
15:17:43 Councilman Scott has known Sharon from the affording
15:17:47 housing task force.
15:17:48 And I think one very significant attribute that began
15:17:51 working with our various partners, one thing that we
15:17:53 have trade to do the last few months is what the county

15:17:56 programs are and what the city's programs are.
15:18:00 As an example, when it comes to our home buyer
15:18:02 education program, it used to be that people had to go
15:18:04 to classes in person.
15:18:07 The county was accepting online education.
15:18:10 So therefore we started looking at their program so
15:18:12 that we can have some kind of consistency between our
15:18:15 government.
15:18:15 And there's other opportunities.
15:18:17 I think that's one example of where it helps.
15:18:20 So those are my remarks, unless there's anything else I
15:18:26 can address.
15:18:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Ms. Miller.
15:18:29 Very good.
15:18:31 I guess most of the data from me was the task force,
15:18:36 Ms. West served on that.
15:18:38 And I would encourage council, you can get it online,
15:18:42 by the way.
15:18:46 If you don't know how to use a computer then I can
15:18:48 certainly make them available to you, Charlie
15:18:58 Also, there are a number of recommendations that came
15:19:00 out of the county.

15:19:01 First of all, let me just say, I want to commend you
15:19:04 and Ms. West for opportunities for the city and the
15:19:09 county to work together on some projects, including the
15:19:13 senior office at Meridian street, the building.
15:19:17 The county was involved in that in terms of revenue in
15:19:21 case people don't know.
15:19:22 So an opportunity for that in other areas.
15:19:24 So that's commendable.
15:19:27 On page 14, one of the things that we found in our
15:19:33 discovery, the task force, one is land becomes a huge
15:19:37 issue, because, you know, no new land so land becomes
15:19:46 an issue.
15:19:48 We have to discover that government becomes a burden to
15:19:52 developers and to nonprofits because it puts a whole
15:19:55 lot of regulations in place, that makes it almost
15:19:57 totally impossible to be able to have affordable
15:20:01 housing.
15:20:02 That's in the report as well.
15:20:03 So in the report it talks about how we should use all
15:20:06 of our -- to help the private sector, nonprofits, to be
15:20:15 able to get through the hurdles or to relieve them of
15:20:18 the burden so that they can build affordable house.

15:20:23 Now, I will tell you that just coming on this side over
15:20:27 here with the city, and I have heard a lot of that
15:20:30 issue, a lot of nonprofits have a difficult time
15:20:34 jumping through a lot of hurdles, a lot of
15:20:36 requirements.
15:20:37 So at some point, since this is a workshop, we need to
15:20:40 talk about how do we streamline the process, here
15:20:43 again, how do we help those doing affordable housing
15:20:46 move to the forefront?
15:20:49 When one thing the county did and that they hire an
15:20:53 affordable housing who can move between department
15:20:56 lines and help affordable housing to move.
15:20:59 It is a critical issue for this region.
15:21:03 And particularly for the City of Tampa.
15:21:07 We talk about this which you already are doing
15:21:10 everything based on your report today, and then also we
15:21:14 talk about the recommendation to allow land swaps, like
15:21:17 transfer, development rights.
15:21:18 These are some incentives that can be incorporated, I
15:21:22 think, that would help the affordable housing, talk
15:21:26 about creating -- this is very important -- creating a
15:21:28 Fordable housing trust fund.

15:21:32 I think the county is enroute on their way to doing
15:21:34 that and on their budget cycle, putting the money in to
15:21:38 address that.
15:21:39 I know Pinellas has already done, and I think they put
15:21:42 in like $10 million annually of that trust fund to help
15:21:46 affordable housing.
15:21:47 I don't know what it's going to be after the state
15:21:51 changes tax base and all that. but that becomes a huge
15:21:56 I shall knew terms of the trust fund, affordable
15:21:59 housing trust fund.
15:22:02 And it also talks about helping the CRA and helping
15:22:05 them to streamline the process so that they can move
15:22:08 forward and create affordable housing as well.
15:22:11 So there are a number -- numerous recommends on page 13
15:22:17 and 14 of the document, 15, that will help, I think,
15:22:23 the city to at least take a good look at, that will
15:22:26 help affordable housing in the City of Tampa, and in
15:22:31 the meantime, with the nonprofit, and talk about some
15:22:39 of the struggles, some of the barriers, some of the
15:22:43 hurdles that they are having difficulty to get through.
15:22:47 It is my understanding that St. Pete has a process that
15:22:50 takes them about six weeks to get through and here it's

15:22:54 taken about six months.
15:22:55 I don't know how true that is.
15:22:56 But that is a long time to get a permit to move forward
15:23:03 on building.
15:23:03 I will tell you that affordable housing, time is money.
15:23:08 Time is money.
15:23:12 And developers will tell you that, builders will tell
15:23:15 you that and nonprofits will tell you that.
15:23:18 So it's crucial that we look at the regulations and see
15:23:21 what barriers or burdens that we have placed out there
15:23:23 and how we can remove them that can help these
15:23:26 organizations to be able to move forward and create
15:23:28 affordable housing, and I am going to wrap it up,
15:23:31 affordable housing -- I love to talk about it --
15:23:36 affordable housing is key.
15:23:38 It's very important.
15:23:39 You are talking about affordable housing and you need
15:23:44 to throw a definition on that, too.
15:23:46 By the way, it's in the report.
15:23:48 Affordable housing, talking about people such as
15:23:52 policemen, sheriffs deputies, teachers, janitors,
15:23:58 waiters, secretaries, and that is -- council members,

15:24:08 and that is true.
15:24:09 Given today's climate, everyone cannot afford to go a
15:24:15 house or go out and re-do it.
15:24:18 The average home in Hillsborough County I think was
15:24:20 $254,000 last year.
15:24:22 So thank you, Madam Chair.
15:24:26 >> Madam Chair, can I just mention one thing, Reverend
15:24:27 Scott?
15:24:28 When it comes to some of the challenges say in
15:24:30 permitting or things of that nature, I think we
15:24:32 already have come to some of those obstacles.
15:24:36 The not-for-profits that identified some of our
15:24:39 co-sections that again these lots that we have
15:24:42 allocated are very challenging lots.
15:24:44 And one thing that we have done is Sharon West working
15:24:48 with my deputy Thom Snelling is working with the
15:24:55 different departments getting together.
15:24:56 Because we have run into everything from sidewalk
15:24:58 issues, trees, transportation, stormwater, and you all
15:25:03 are navigating a difficult bureaucracy at best.
15:25:06 So I think some of the information that comes out of
15:25:08 those efforts as we bring everybody to the table to

15:25:11 work lot by lot, to what the issues are, I think that
15:25:15 will be some of the kind of information we can bring
15:25:17 back at a future date to be able to talk about it.
15:25:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
15:25:21 Ms. Mulhern
15:25:31 >>> Is there a program for short-term rental
15:25:33 assistance?
15:25:37 This is something that comes up with people dealing
15:25:38 with the homeless.
15:25:40 If they can get a lot of times people can get the
15:25:44 assistance on paying their rent in that first few
15:25:47 weeks -- the county does that, okay.
15:25:53 So we don't have any program like that.
15:25:56 >>> The county or other not for profit social service
15:25:59 agencies may offer it as well.
15:26:01 >>MARY MULHERN: The other thing I want to mention for
15:26:04 us as council people, now that the market has dropped
15:26:10 and there's a lot of housing stock out there, I think
15:26:14 about it every time someone comes in front of us with
15:26:17 a rezoning, that what we are looking for are smaller,
15:26:23 affordable housing, especially as opposed to the big,
15:26:29 you know, expensive condos that we see every time we

15:26:32 are here, we see one after another, condo projects.
15:26:35 So I think we need to look at incentives.
15:26:38 The TDRs is one.
15:26:40 But another one -- and this may have happened before I
15:26:43 started, but city bonuses for people who are building
15:26:47 affordable housing, in the works --
15:26:52 >>> It is something we already have a portion of the
15:26:54 of the chapter 27 density bonus provision do authorize
15:26:57 that.
15:26:57 I think we still need to work on that to develop that
15:27:01 more fully.
15:27:03 >>MARY MULHERN: I feel there's a disconnect when I
15:27:06 drive around and then come in and at a council meeting
15:27:10 that there are luxury condos not selling.
15:27:13 And meanwhile, we keep hearing requests for zoning
15:27:15 changes.
15:27:16 People asking if they can have variances and favors to
15:27:22 build the housing stock that we have a glut of.
15:27:25 So I think if we don't say yes, then that might
15:27:30 encourage build towers get more into a market where we
15:27:32 need the housing.
15:27:33 And it would make the affordable housing, just through

15:27:37 the market, working more available.
15:27:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
15:27:43 Any other questions?
15:27:45 Reverend Scott.
15:27:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Not necessarily a question, but also I
15:27:49 failed to mention, also, I don't know if you do this
15:27:53 or not, impact fee waiver incentive.
15:27:55 That may be something we will discuss later on, too.
15:27:59 But again, I am told that at least from the city
15:28:01 perspective, from some of the people now, that the
15:28:06 impact fee, adds about $20,000 on a home.
15:28:11 That's huge.
15:28:12 And so that is another incentive.
15:28:14 I know we have that with the county's program.
15:28:16 And we have moneys set aside for that.
15:28:20 So that again you create the affordable housing, and
15:28:24 you impact fee waivers.
15:28:29 And the opportunity where people are, such as like
15:28:33 with the Westshore alliance, or the old jail site, you
15:28:35 know that property there, doing affordable housing,
15:28:39 and I understand that they are going through some
15:28:42 problems or they run into some barriers that maybe

15:28:44 perhaps staff can look at and see how you can help
15:28:48 overcome those barriers or hurdles because it's
15:28:52 critical and very important that we create affordable
15:28:56 housing.
15:28:57 >>> And it is true when it comes to impact fee waivers
15:28:59 and others, I would say utility costs for a house,
15:29:02 because say transportation fees, other utilities fees,
15:29:07 hookups, something of that nature.
15:29:08 We do not at this point have a waiver but it is
15:29:11 something that is certainly an allowable cost that we
15:29:13 can help subsidize from the standpoint affordable
15:29:16 housing.
15:29:17 Some of the limitation that is our utilities
15:29:18 departments have is because we have bond issues but it
15:29:21 is still something we will need to continue to look at
15:29:23 in the future.
15:29:24 >> One last question.
15:29:25 The Sadowski act.
15:29:28 Did they remove the cap off of that in Tallahassee
15:29:30 this year?
15:29:31 >>> No.
15:29:31 >> And did they release any additional funds?

15:29:35 And the Sadowski act, by the way, is additional money
15:29:37 set up for affordable housing, and asked this question
15:29:42 earlier on --
15:29:45 >>> It would have basically tripled the allocation.
15:29:49 >> So that again, you know, we need to really work on
15:29:53 lobbying the governor and legislator to remove the cap
15:29:56 off the Sadowski funds.
15:30:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Council members, we have
15:30:02 representatives of a variety of nonprofits in the
15:30:05 audience.
15:30:06 This is a workshop.
15:30:07 We are not required to open to the public.
15:30:09 But we could.
15:30:10 What is your pleasure?
15:30:16 There's a motion and second that we open the workshop
15:30:18 to allow comment from people in the audience limited
15:30:20 to three minutes.
15:30:21 So come on up.
15:30:25 There's been a motion and second.
15:30:26 All those in favor say Aye.
15:30:28 Opposed Nay?
15:30:29 Passed unanimously.

15:30:30 Thank you.
15:30:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Three minutes.
15:30:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Three minutes each.
15:30:42 >>> Good afternoon, council persons.
15:30:44 My name is Michael Randolph with the West Tampa
15:30:47 Community Development Corporation.
15:30:52 And I hope I am working this thing correctly this
15:30:54 time.
15:30:55 Now what happened last time.
15:30:57 The West Tampa CDC covers the grounds between Columbus
15:31:10 and Kennedy over to Himes to the Hillsborough River.
15:31:26 It includes 43 through 45, census track 48 through 49.
15:31:33 What I have done on this map that you have in front of
15:31:36 you, in different colors, if you see blue, that
15:31:41 represents the incomes, census track 2004.
15:31:50 You can see why it's so important that it be
15:31:53 highlighted.
15:31:54 In the West Tampa, there's three yellow areas, 43, 44
15:32:01 and 50.
15:32:05 The census track 45, and two blues, census tracks 48
15:32:11 to 49.
15:32:20 Let's talk about the local community in the West Tampa

15:32:25 area.
15:32:26 I think this is key.
15:32:30 You have so many people talk about affordability but
15:32:33 what is affordability as it relates to the local
15:32:35 community?
15:32:36 In West Tampa, there are three areas that are
15:32:38 highlighted in yellow.
15:32:45 Their income is between 31% to 50%.
15:32:49 The annual income is between 16 to 27,000.
15:32:55 Then at least one area, census track in West Tampa,
15:32:59 was 30% or less of median income.
15:33:02 Then the blue area, the blue dot that's on the map
15:33:05 represents median income between 51 to 80% of area
15:33:12 median income.
15:33:13 Affordable housing in West Tampa, attainable housing
15:33:16 in West Tampa, is merely a pipe dream.
15:33:19 The majority of people in the West Tampa community
15:33:23 cannot afford a house that's above between 92,000 to
15:33:28 120,000, particularly on the presentation that I made
15:33:32 before you.
15:33:35 We keep on using affordability and affordability.
15:33:38 But affordability for who?

15:33:39 And in West Tampa there is a crisis.
15:33:42 The majority of people that live in West Tampa cannot
15:33:44 afford a house that's 150,000 or above that number.
15:33:49 We really need to start addressing issues about how do
15:33:52 we deal with folks that are 70% down below median
15:33:58 income.
15:33:58 My concern is as people come to you and they talk
15:34:01 about affordability, the questions need to be asked,
15:34:03 affordability for what income bracket?
15:34:06 Because when you begin, you begin to look at the local
15:34:11 community and begin to look at the needs in a given
15:34:14 neighborhood.
15:34:17 Councilman Scott, councilman, there is a cries nice
15:34:24 West Tampa.
15:34:26 When people say affordability, please look at the
15:34:28 numbers and see affordability for whom?
15:34:31 Thanks very much.
15:34:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you very much.
15:34:42 >>> Betty Wiggins, East Tampa business and civic
15:34:45 association, located at 2814 north 22nd street,
15:34:50 and I have with me Diane Hart, who is also going to
15:34:53 make some remarks, and we have Isabel Williams, our

15:34:56 project manager.
15:34:58 I want to thank you for granting our request for this
15:35:02 workshop which we made, I guess, a couple of months
15:35:07 ago.
15:35:07 And we are not going to be at global as Ms. Miller.
15:35:14 I learned a great deal from her remarks.
15:35:17 But I want to focus in on some of the nuts and bolts
15:35:20 of some of these issues.
15:35:22 We feel that the affordable housing program is
15:35:26 meritorious, and we feel that it is helping people,
15:35:31 the manager as far as the city is concerned, the
15:35:35 manager of the housing department, Ms. West, and her
15:35:38 key staff are accessible, professional, and they try
15:35:41 very hard to be helpful.
15:35:44 Yet there are persistent issues that are disincentives
15:35:49 to affordable housing and these are your worthy of
15:35:54 your concern and your attention and your action.
15:35:57 These are I feel the concerns that we have.
15:36:00 Number one, there's a need for more quality
15:36:02 communication among departments, particularly which
15:36:08 gets involved with the trees a lot and traffic, which
15:36:10 deals with sidewalks.

15:36:12 We have those issues all the time.
15:36:13 Sidewalks in front of one home, with no other
15:36:18 sidewalks in the block or on the street.
15:36:20 These sidewalks lead to nowhere and serve no
15:36:23 utilitarian purpose but they do add to the cost of
15:36:26 constructing the home.
15:36:28 There is a fee in lieu of sidewalk, which adds roughly
15:36:34 $4,000 to the cost of the home.
15:36:35 And that has to be passed on to the home buyer.
15:36:38 These fees are often assessed in instances where
15:36:42 there's never hope of a sidewalk being installed.
15:36:45 The next item, why can't the city have a true
15:36:49 expedited permitting process?
15:36:50 This is our greatest frustration.
15:36:52 Sometimes it takes a short period of time but
15:36:56 oftentimes, too often it takes up to six months,
15:36:59 because they are always delays with trees and
15:37:01 sidewalks and anything else that you cannot think of.
15:37:05 The nonprofits have been told that we are developers
15:37:09 in East Tampa and sometimes the partnership appears to
15:37:13 be a scale not balanced, appears to be one sided.
15:37:17 Too often the issue of trees come up after the

15:37:20 nonprofit organization.
15:37:22 If the city has really inspected the lot, why can't
15:37:25 they see and declare the drawbacks to the lot being
15:37:29 built?
15:37:31 Is anybody really doing field inspections, or are they
15:37:34 just looking at aerial and so forth?
15:37:39 Developers are allowed to use their own house plans
15:37:43 which we do not subscribe to, which do not subscribe
15:37:48 to the city's plan.
15:37:49 Are nonprofits being held to a different standard?
15:37:52 The city's contract gives a legal description.
15:37:55 This really is a serious one.
15:37:58 On the lot, but it makes no mention of the size of the
15:38:01 lot.
15:38:01 And we have had a real serious problem there.
15:38:04 Yes, the city has -- they seem to have a "let the
15:38:13 buyer beware attitude."
15:38:15 (Bell sounds).
15:38:15 I have two just two more comments, may I?
15:38:18 The contracts should have the lot dimension in it.
15:38:22 Commendably, some of the housing authority residents
15:38:25 are first-time home buyers but there needs to be

15:38:27 better articulation between Tampa housing authority
15:38:30 and the city.
15:38:31 And this is especially true when we have deal-breaking
15:38:36 issues that come up before the closing is set.
15:38:40 So in summary, while some of the above observations
15:38:44 are based on individual situations, most are
15:38:46 recurring, and result in costly delays including
15:38:50 construction delays, scheduling delays, interest
15:38:53 payments on lots, and a snail's pace in build homes
15:38:57 for Tampa's most needy citizens.
15:39:00 And our organization has been in this since 1999, and
15:39:04 it gets to be very frustrating as well as challenging.
15:39:09 Again, thank you.
15:39:10 Diane has a few remarks that she would like to add.
15:39:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
15:39:16 >>> Diane Hart.
15:39:17 I reside at 5006 east Cumberland drive in Tampa,
15:39:20 Florida.
15:39:21 Ms. Wiggins outlined it quite nicely.
15:39:24 We have been in several meetings with Cindy and with
15:39:27 Sharon, and they have bent over backwards to help us.
15:39:30 There is no connectivity between a lot of the other

15:39:34 departments. And we can only expect our housing
15:39:36 department to be as good as its local run department.
15:39:41 People have the ability to issue waivers, but they
15:39:43 won't.
15:39:43 And we don't know why.
15:39:46 This same sidewalk, fee in lieu of sidewalks for the
15:39:50 house loke at the corner of Chelsea and 26th,
15:39:53 there's a grand oak tree sitting at the corner.
15:39:55 There can never be a sidewalk at this location.
15:39:58 But we are being required to pay $4,000 for a sidewalk
15:40:02 fee for a place that we can never have a sidewalk.
15:40:06 So my thinking is if I can't put a sidewalk, why am I
15:40:08 paying for it?
15:40:09 Why am I not allowed to get that waiver?
15:40:12 But the person that may have the authority to issue
15:40:15 the waiver will not do it.
15:40:18 And I know a lot of it goes all the way back to '99
15:40:22 and 2007 when Steve LaBrake issue, but that is gone.
15:40:26 It's time for us to move forward.
15:40:28 We can no longer be afraid to move this housing
15:40:32 project forward.
15:40:33 We have got to step up and take some chances on our

15:40:37 not-for-profits if we are truly partnered with the
15:40:41 city.
15:40:41 We have been here.
15:40:42 We have helped rebuild the city's affordable housing
15:40:45 program.
15:40:45 And the City of Tampa was no longer building houses,
15:40:48 East Tampa civic association was one of the original
15:40:53 organizations that continued to build, without any
15:40:56 city money, and as of today, we have not received a
15:40:59 dime in any type of housing assistance other than for
15:41:03 our first-time home buyer.
15:41:04 We have gone out, acquired our own money, but it's
15:41:08 costing us money, where we are cut up in delay after
15:41:12 delay and it has nothing at all to do with Sharon West
15:41:15 and her department.
15:41:16 She cannot get us through the permitting process.
15:41:19 She can do everything she can, but she cannot jump
15:41:23 some of the hurdles that we are facing.
15:41:26 We need to sit down with these departments and they
15:41:29 need to come up with a way to streamline this.
15:41:31 I applaud Ms. Wiggins, because if they went out and
15:41:34 they knew that there was a grand tree sitting right on

15:41:38 the edge of the property, at that point they should
15:41:40 have said, on the little paper that they send us, to
15:41:44 choose a lot, you may have a grand tree issue.
15:41:48 That would have stopped them from spending $15,000 on
15:41:52 a lot last December that we have yet to build on that
15:41:55 we are paying interest on today.
15:42:01 Go ahead.
15:42:01 I mean, those are the types of issues that we face.
15:42:04 I mean, that's just one of the many challenges.
15:42:08 But the fee in lieu of sidewalks, we say if there's no
15:42:11 sidewalk going to be put here, don't make me pay a
15:42:13 fee.
15:42:15 Leave that $4,000 off so I can pass this house onto an
15:42:19 affordable home buyer.
15:42:20 That would mean $4,000 that I don't have to put on top
15:42:24 of this price.
15:42:25 But I am going to pay a fee in lieu of a sidewalk for
15:42:28 a sidewalk to be put where?
15:42:30 In what neighborhood are you going to put it if it's
15:42:32 not going in front of my house which doesn't make any
15:42:35 sense to us.
15:42:36 So we are just asking that we have the ability to make

15:42:41 the call.
15:42:42 Make the call.
15:42:43 And don't be afraid to do it.
15:42:45 Somebody has to step up at some point and do this.
15:42:48 (Bell sounds).
15:42:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
15:42:57 >>> Good evening.
15:42:57 My name is reverend Dixon, the Executive Director of
15:43:00 an organization called coast foundation.
15:43:03 I have been in partnership with the City of Tampa
15:43:05 since 1983, before the county started.
15:43:13 The housing program.
15:43:14 And I will say the county has superseded us.
15:43:19 I was told that this was a workshop.
15:43:21 And interpreting a workshop I thought it was some type
15:43:24 of dialogue.
15:43:26 We need to have some situation that we need to
15:43:28 address, one on one, and not be limited to three
15:43:31 minutes.
15:43:32 I won't insult you by trying to bring up some of the
15:43:36 things I would like to bring up but one or two, and
15:43:40 for your information that got the impact fee, the

15:43:42 housing, building is 11700.
15:43:46 My address is 3201 north Bay.
15:43:51 And when we went out, no one said it was a grand tree.
15:44:00 A grand tree next door and it's affected us and that
15:44:03 extra money.
15:44:04 Another thing we just did a house through Warrick
15:44:07 Dunn.
15:44:08 Spending an extra $5,000 for a sidewalk.
15:44:13 I came up to the city.
15:44:14 They have the same type of sidewalk.
15:44:16 So why do they do some things in some areas and other
15:44:19 areas aren't the same?
15:44:21 Now, one thing I have with the building department.
15:44:25 Is they piecemeal too much.
15:44:28 If they have a set of plans let them do everything
15:44:31 with the plan one time.
15:44:32 Don't have come back three or four times and say you
15:44:36 have to do this, you have to do that.
15:44:39 They are supposed to be competent.
15:44:41 They are spending architect dollars.
15:44:43 So we need to get around the table, look at each
15:44:47 other, speak up now.

15:44:57 I would like to bring up some of the issues that are
15:45:00 stumbling blocks, not only to me, but to other
15:45:04 members.
15:45:05 This is a ministry.
15:45:06 I'm compassionate about this.
15:45:09 I am trying to help people who can't help themselves.
15:45:11 Would you please set up a real workshop where you can
15:45:13 sit around the table and not limit it to three
15:45:16 minutes?
15:45:16 Can we do that?
15:45:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Sir, I want to tell you that the
15:45:20 person who is in charge of the department that can
15:45:23 address the issues you're raising is sitting right
15:45:26 behind you taking notes and listening to every word.
15:45:28 Ms. Cindy Miller is the department head for all
15:45:31 permitting, and she is working on it.
15:45:33 A lot of this, you know, council does some things and
15:45:36 the administration does other things.
15:45:37 Many of the issues you are raising are not policy
15:45:39 issues by council, they are functional issues from the
15:45:42 administration.
15:45:43 But the people who need to hear this are sitting and

15:45:45 listening and taking notes.
15:45:46 And she would have the ability to set up the workshop
15:45:49 that you're discussing.
15:45:50 I can guarantee that she's listening intently.
15:45:54 Council function today is to provide an opportunity
15:45:58 for to you hear from the administration, from the
15:46:00 administration to hear from you, and if there are any
15:46:03 policy issues in which we as council can provide
15:46:06 direction, we are more than willing to do that.
15:46:08 This really is worthwhile.
15:46:09 And I really appreciate you all being here.
15:46:20 >>> Now, Mrs. West did call a meeting over to the
15:46:23 building department.
15:46:23 We went over some issues.
15:46:24 And we thought we had clarified things.
15:46:26 But the next week, we get all the same problems.
15:46:33 There's a lack of communication.
15:46:36 And, yeah, you deal with administration, but you also
15:46:41 represent our area.
15:46:42 So we have to come to you.
15:46:44 Who else is going to do it?
15:46:48 Well, they don't work for you but they work for the

15:46:50 citizens.
15:46:50 So we need to get together and try to help the people
15:46:53 who cannot help themselves.
15:46:56 I'm a nonprofit.
15:46:59 An another thing, since I'm talking.
15:47:03 I think we are really in partnership.
15:47:06 We should have a real partnership.
15:47:08 What is the difference between being a nonprofit and
15:47:10 going to a private developer?
15:47:12 They get no place -- more sometimes than we do.
15:47:16 So we need to sit around the table and have a real
15:47:19 workshop.
15:47:20 I thank you.
15:47:23 Any questions?
15:47:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
15:47:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Madam Chair.
15:47:38 Councilwoman Saul-Sena ask S absolutely right because
15:47:42 of the structure of the charter, City Council has a
15:47:46 function and the administration has a function.
15:47:48 And our responsibility is policies.
15:47:52 Now, I will tell you that there are some things that
15:47:54 we can do in terms of first offenses.

15:47:59 We can say impact fee waivers for affordable house.
15:48:03 We can do that.
15:48:04 And that's an interest I have.
15:48:10 Can we take action on workshops?
15:48:13 Because that is something I think we need to take a
15:48:15 look at.
15:48:16 And because it is an ordinance that you are already
15:48:20 doing as Ms. Miller pointed out earlier, the housing
15:48:23 trust fund is another issue that we could take a look
15:48:26 at.
15:48:26 So there are a number of things that we can do.
15:48:28 And I'm looking forward to -- and I guess to the
15:48:33 attorney, how do we need to do that in order to move
15:48:37 this forward?
15:48:37 Because I'm interested in Ms. Miller's operation
15:48:41 coming back to us, provide us information on impact
15:48:45 fees bonuses or impact fee waivers, on affordable
15:48:50 housing trust fund, those kind of issues, based on
15:48:53 some of the things that I have already recommended to
15:48:55 the county from that particular program that will be
15:48:59 very helpful, I think.
15:49:00 Now, reverend Dixon, workshop does not mean from the

15:49:05 government standpoint, does not mean that you come in
15:49:08 and sit around the table.
15:49:09 That's where you do that with administration.
15:49:11 Workshop for us is us to be educated about what is
15:49:14 happening, to provide us information, and generally
15:49:18 what happens at workshops is very seldom the public
15:49:20 participants in workshops; from the county commission,
15:49:30 in a opportunity to address the council.
15:49:31 So today we provide that venue or that avenue for to
15:49:34 you do that.
15:49:35 I just want to make sure you understand that.
15:49:37 And I welcome that.
15:49:38 And I see what you are saying.
15:49:40 I think it is important, though, that administration
15:49:43 take a look at the concerns that have been raised.
15:49:46 I don't know.
15:49:48 I guess based on these concerns, I guess, attorney, do
15:49:55 we ask for a report based on what I heard today?
15:49:59 Do we just leave the administration take a look at
15:50:02 some of these concerns and bring back a report or how
15:50:04 they have addressed some of these concerns and some of
15:50:05 these issues?

15:50:06 Because I don't think we have the power to direct
15:50:08 staff to change these.
15:50:12 I'm just trying to operate within the charter.
15:50:14 See, you have to remember I'm new.
15:50:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you have a specific recommendation
15:50:20 that you wish to ask the administration to address
15:50:25 through code revision, that would be appropriate.
15:50:28 If you wish to ask from the administrative standpoint
15:50:31 how they are addressing the issues that have been
15:50:33 raised, you can ask for a report to come back with
15:50:36 within a certain period of time and have that as a
15:50:38 written report on the agenda, or as a personal
15:50:43 appearance on the agenda.
15:50:45 And if you wish to have any further discussion about
15:50:49 this, you can also schedule that in either a special
15:50:53 discussion meeting, or as an additional workshop down
15:50:58 the road to address some of these issues more
15:51:00 specifically.
15:51:00 So --
15:51:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I guess I am more concerned about
15:51:07 since a number of issues have been raised that perhaps
15:51:09 we could ask the administration to come back with a

15:51:12 report.
15:51:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You raised two specific issues in
15:51:18 your discussion, and when was -- one is the trust fund
15:51:23 and the other is the impact fee waivers.
15:51:25 If those are specific requests that you wish to make
15:51:26 of the administration, you can do that in the form of
15:51:28 a motion.
15:51:29 And ask them to come back with information on how they
15:51:34 propose to address that.
15:51:38 I'm sorry, did you want to speak?
15:51:40 I jumped ahead.
15:51:44 >>> Nelson Preety, I have been sworn in, 614 middleton
15:51:49 road in Lutz and here to give you maybe a perspective
15:51:51 from a contractor's point of view.
15:51:53 I'm doing a house for reverend Dixon coach foundation.
15:51:57 Mrs. Wiggins said most of bay want to briefly mention.
15:52:00 Can't beat this to death but basically the tree issue,
15:52:03 it's really Draconian in the sense that, for example,
15:52:07 I did a house at 3903 north 1324th street, right
15:52:11 next to Martin Luther King.
15:52:13 Grand tree next door.
15:52:14 You wouldn't believe what we had to go through just to

15:52:16 trim a branch coming over to this house.
15:52:20 Besides that, we have to be 20 feet from the grand
15:52:22 free tree.
15:52:23 We were 17 feet.
15:52:27 City came out, county came out, said, no, you have to
15:52:30 be 20.
15:52:30 So we had to go back, revise the plan, do an elevated
15:52:34 foot we are a metal deck.
15:52:37 And it added like $6 that you to the house.
15:52:40 We are digging the trench, put some piers.
15:52:43 It went over -- I guess what I am getting at there's
15:52:47 no common sense.
15:52:48 I love trees.
15:52:49 I doubt there's anyone in this room that loves trees
15:52:51 more than I do. I'm a tree person.
15:52:53 But it's the sense it's just ridiculous.
15:52:55 It doesn't make sense.
15:52:56 At 3201 north Bay, along the east end, there's several
15:53:01 oak trees, large trees, in the back there's several.
15:53:04 But they are just right outside the property line.
15:53:06 And what they want you to do for landscaping, guess
15:53:10 what.

15:53:10 They want you to put in 25 trees.
15:53:13 And these are little plants.
15:53:16 These are trees you have to put in.
15:53:19 125 times 25.
15:53:20 I haven't done the math.
15:53:21 That's what you are getting.
15:53:24 Putting in trees, sticks.
15:53:26 If you go in and look at the lot, you wouldn't want
15:53:30 more trees there. You might want some shrubbery but
15:53:33 not more trees for goodness sakes.
15:53:35 There's a grand tree on the corner of this lot, going
15:53:37 back to the sidewalk issue that's been bounced around.
15:53:41 They will not allow us to put the sidewalk because of
15:53:43 the grand tree.
15:53:44 I wish they would because I can put sidewalks in all
15:53:47 day at $3 a foot.
15:53:48 They are charging coach foundation $2100 to put in 160
15:53:54 square feet of sidewalk.
15:53:56 This is absurd!
15:53:58 And first of all, the lot is 50 feet.
15:54:02 You have a 10-foot driveway so you have 10 feet.
15:54:04 30 feet.

15:54:05 40 feet sidewalk.
15:54:06 10 feet of driveway.
15:54:08 2100.
15:54:09 Do the math. This sidewalk is 4 feet wide.
15:54:11 I can do that all day long for $3 a foot.
15:54:15 These are the little things that I think they are
15:54:18 frustrated about.
15:54:19 And as far as communication with the city to meet the
15:54:21 City of Tampa run a top notch building department, I
15:54:24 have nothing but good things to say about them.
15:54:27 They are great.
15:54:27 But there's just this lack of communication, and these
15:54:30 rules, that somebody has to use some common sense.
15:54:33 That's all we are asking.
15:54:34 Thank you.
15:54:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there a motion for common sense?
15:54:40 [ Laughter ]
15:54:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: in terms of some of the issues, that's
15:54:44 why one of the things when we have the workshop over
15:54:46 at the county, that way they track the project, they
15:54:51 go -- they have time to move between department lines,
15:54:54 you can see what the issues are, and help work the

15:54:57 issues out, and keep the project moving.
15:55:00 And I don't know whether your department had that kind
15:55:05 of capability to be able to do that.
15:55:07 But that is maybe something you want to take a look
15:55:09 at.
15:55:09 Because that's what we heard a lot on our task force,
15:55:13 about the projects moving through the system they run
15:55:18 into a lot of areas.
15:55:21 >>> And Reverend Scott, I think from the housing
15:55:23 standpoint you already know we have the best housing
15:55:25 manager in Sharon West.
15:55:26 When it comes to the communication cost department, it
15:55:29 has been very frustrating to the folks here, because
15:55:32 of the various codes that we do have within our city.
15:55:35 But from that standpoint, with those of us that are
15:55:38 directed -- I talk constantly with Steve Daignault,
15:55:43 with other members of the administration.
15:55:44 From that standpoint I think we have the communication
15:55:46 there.
15:55:46 But I think what the best approach to do when Sharon
15:55:49 came back after the meeting that reverend Dicks
15:55:52 mentioned that is when we did realize some of the

15:55:54 things that we have codes that basically conflict with
15:55:56 each other and that's the kind of information we need
15:55:58 to be able to gather and be able to present in a good
15:56:01 report.
15:56:01 And perhaps come back in a few months to be able to
15:56:04 identify that.
15:56:05 When it comes to impact fees and things of that
15:56:07 nature, I'm looking at the affordable housing report,
15:56:10 the task force report, those are some things that we
15:56:14 can continue to address.
15:56:19 >>MARY MULHERN: This is a great document here, this
15:56:24 list of all these things.
15:56:25 And I would like to add a couple of things to the two
15:56:29 things you have suggested, that I think we could ask
15:56:33 for a report that might become something that we could
15:56:37 actually enact, but would solve some of these
15:56:41 problems.
15:56:41 I would like to see something concrete come out of
15:56:43 this meeting.
15:56:44 I think the sidewalk, the fee in lieu of sidewalks.
15:56:48 I would like to hear about that.
15:56:49 And maybe we can just for houses that are within the

15:56:53 category of affordable housing and within the zone we
15:56:59 can get rid of that.
15:57:00 So I would like to hear about that, how that got
15:57:03 started and why that is still in place, asking for a
15:57:06 fee if a sidewalk does not fit.
15:57:09 And after hearing our builder here, I thought we might
15:57:12 want to hear, too, about what is a reasonable amount
15:57:15 to charge, if we were going to continue to charge that
15:57:18 fee.
15:57:23 To me it seems like we should just get rid of it and
15:57:26 figure out other ways.
15:57:27 If we want to promote sidewalks on specific blocks we
15:57:30 need to figure out how to do that because it is
15:57:32 something that has to go along an entire block.
15:57:37 I also think that maybe we could come up with a
15:57:39 resolution or an ordinance that would put an expedited
15:57:43 permit process which to hear about that because that
15:57:50 might be something that we could do as a council.
15:57:53 And then the other thing I had a question for you, Ms.
15:57:56 Miller, to report back.
15:58:00 You might be able to just tell me right now.
15:58:03 Number 7 was that developers are allowed to use their

15:58:08 old huh plans that the No not-for-profits are.
15:58:13 Can you elucidate, are not-for-profits required to use
15:58:17 those new plans when it comes to homes that we are --
15:58:21 >>> When it comes to homes that we are subsidizing in
15:58:24 some way shape or form that we are providing the
15:58:26 property for, I believe what Mrs. Wiggins was
15:58:29 referring to was the developers, contractors that are
15:58:31 building houses on lots that they own, that are not
15:58:34 receiving any kind of subsidy from the city or any
15:58:37 down payment assistance, we have no control over what
15:58:41 they are building.
15:58:42 It has to follow the code.
15:58:43 And city of East Tampa overlay if it's in East Tampa,
15:58:47 the West Tampa overlay if it's in West Tampa, for
15:58:50 example.
15:58:50 So we have in a way that we can have any control from
15:58:57 that standpoint.
15:58:58 When it Cayman Islands came to the standards for
15:59:00 single family homes that would be receiving either
15:59:03 lots or some form of subsidy from the city, that is
15:59:07 when we did put minimal housing standards in,
15:59:09 including, as I mentioned, like the back door, having

15:59:13 at least a side door, that is something that was in
15:59:15 the front entrance.
15:59:16 Those are the kinds of things.
15:59:18 I can't control developers that I don't have any
15:59:21 financial control over.
15:59:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Miranda?
15:59:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's much more than just affordable
15:59:32 housing.
15:59:36 I had a lady come to see me this week and she did a PD
15:59:41 an old house, 50 by 100 and she told me what she paid
15:59:46 for the house, she told me what the developments were
15:59:48 to fix the house, and then she said, by the time I
15:59:51 finish, I am going to have in excess of 250,000 on
15:59:56 this 900 square foot house, because they want 9 to
16:00:01 12,000, she's going to have three parking spots behind
16:00:03 the house, 12,000 between that and $12,000 for the
16:00:12 architect -- not architect, excuse me, the civil
16:00:14 engineer do the design, the operation, and the folks
16:00:20 in housing, waterproof it.
16:00:21 And then she's going to need a landscape architect to
16:00:24 also sign off on the plans.
16:00:26 So she said, I just can't afford this thing.

16:00:28 And, I mean, this is what's going on, unless somebody
16:00:35 gave this young lady and other that is I spoke to some
16:00:38 misdirection or misinformation, I don't know.
16:00:40 But it seems unreasonable for a three-space parking
16:00:46 behind the house to have a fee of that type amount to
16:00:53 do that type of work so that somebody can move into
16:00:56 something that should have been done months ago.
16:00:58 So this is a lot more, compassion, understanding of
16:01:01 what we are saying.
16:01:02 But believe me, we are looking at the tip of the
16:01:05 iceberg here.
16:01:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, Charlie, I'm glad you have
16:01:11 compassion.
16:01:12 But I think that's the difference.
16:01:13 We have a lot of problems.
16:01:14 And I know I hear it from people all the time.
16:01:16 But the people who are trying to build these kind of
16:01:19 homes can't possibly do it.
16:01:21 You know, that little bit of extra that makes or
16:01:25 breaks whether they own a home.
16:01:27 So, you know, I think we need to look at this now,
16:01:31 because we probably have to do this piece by piece to

16:01:34 get anything done.
16:01:35 So that was our topic for today.
16:01:37 And I would love to come out of here with something
16:01:39 constructive.
16:01:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Reverend Scott.
16:01:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to move that we ask
16:01:44 administration to come back with a report -- how much
16:01:47 time do you need, about 30 days on these issues here
16:01:49 on how they have addressed them, and how they propose
16:01:53 to resolve them.
16:01:55 So on these particular issues and the ones that have
16:01:57 been outlined by council today.
16:01:58 So let's say 30 days.
16:02:02 Is that sufficient?
16:02:03 That will be my first motion.
16:02:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there a second?
16:02:07 >> Second.
16:02:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion and second.
16:02:09 Any discussion?
16:02:10 All those in favor say Aye.
16:02:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The second motion is I will ask that
16:02:15 the administration take a look those recommendations

16:02:20 in terms of 13, 14, 15, and I guess legally to take a
16:02:27 look at it, talk about waiving impact fees and all
16:02:30 that as well.
16:02:31 And then come back to council.
16:02:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: second rot
16:02:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: How much time do you need on that?
16:02:40 60 days on that.
16:02:41 So council, take a look at incentives, affordable
16:02:44 housing trust, transfer development rights, all those
16:02:46 issues that are in here, that we can take a look at
16:02:52 and see if we want to create them on an ordinance.
16:02:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's a motion and second.
16:02:59 I would like to add something to that and I can't
16:03:01 remember if it's addressed in that.
16:03:02 And that is, I heard some developers, that the
16:03:05 difference between affordable and unaffordable
16:03:07 sometimes is whether you put in two parking spaces,
16:03:11 and the cost of creating parking on lots.
16:03:17 It's hugely expensive.
16:03:19 It can be the tipping point between affordable and
16:03:21 not.
16:03:21 And there's been some discussion of if development

16:03:24 occurs along transit routes, could some of the parking
16:03:27 requirements be waived, which then will enable people
16:03:30 to create affordable housing?
16:03:32 So as we are looking at different incentives, that
16:03:34 might be something that we address.
16:03:36 Any other discussion?
16:03:37 All those in favor say Aye.
16:03:39 Opposed, Nay.
16:03:40 Thank you.
16:03:41 Thank you very much.
16:03:41 This is an excellent discussion.
16:03:43 I thank all of you who came down here.
16:03:45 We are sorry we were late getting going but I think it
16:03:47 was really valuable.
16:03:48 Thanks so much.
16:03:49 Okay, council members, we are going to have comments.
16:03:52 Mr. Caetano.
16:03:56 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I wasn't going to bring what I
16:03:58 have here today up, but after hearing everybody in the
16:04:01 audience about the discontentment that they have with
16:04:04 the city, I want to introduce something I don't expect
16:04:09 that weave we are going to vote on it today.

16:04:11 I planned to have a workshop on it.
16:04:13 And it's called an ordinance creating chapter 28
16:04:16 titled government fairness and accountability.
16:04:20 It's five pages.
16:04:22 We will study it.
16:04:23 Legal can study it.
16:04:24 And find out, because we hear a lot of discontentment
16:04:28 here today.
16:04:29 Reverend Scott said something, also.
16:04:32 And I think the builders, whether it's an affordable
16:04:37 home builder, or regular builder.
16:04:39 I know I built a knew house in New Tampa, and after
16:04:42 having it on the market for 15 months, I finally sold
16:04:45 it, never lived in it.
16:04:47 And when my buyer came through, he had an inspection.
16:04:51 And there were code violations.
16:04:53 So I called up the electrician, and he says, well, how
16:04:55 long have you had it?
16:04:57 I says, 15 months.
16:04:58 Well, your warranty has run out.
16:05:00 Code violation warrants never run out.
16:05:02 There were code violations in the electrical.

16:05:05 And I had to repair it.
16:05:07 And the city inspected it and gave me a CO for it.
16:05:12 And spent a half million dollars building this house.
16:05:14 And it was a disappointment.
16:05:16 I got nowhere with the city.
16:05:18 This has gone back to '99 when I built this house.
16:05:21 So I give everybody a copy of this.
16:05:23 I wanted to give it to everybody -- well, the whole
16:05:27 council is not here -- give a copy to --
16:05:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would you like a copy for Ms. Miller
16:05:36 too?
16:05:37 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes, please.
16:05:38 I think I got about ten copies made.
16:05:53 And basically what this is for is to hold the city
16:05:56 accountable to the public that they don't have to come
16:06:01 in and spend weeks and weeks and weeks waiting for a
16:06:03 permit.
16:06:05 From what I understand, when they have to go to
16:06:08 transportation, transportation is in a complete
16:06:11 different location than the building department.
16:06:14 And, therefore, their delays in get -- there are
16:06:18 delays in getting it to transportation.

16:06:20 I think when somebody comes in for a permit there's no
16:06:22 need to wait six months for a permit.
16:06:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, it depends on whether they
16:06:30 submitted adequate information.
16:06:31 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I understand that.
16:06:32 But a lot of times they get the runaround, and I have
16:06:36 gotten many, many calls, and this is what prompted
16:06:38 this article 28.
16:06:41 And I will call a workshop on it in that same
16:06:48 category.
16:06:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there a motion?
16:06:53 Do you want to set a workshop?
16:06:55 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I won't set it today.
16:06:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay.
16:06:58 Thank you.
16:06:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I think pass it to legal and let's
16:07:03 get feedback.
16:07:04 I think that's what he wants at this time.
16:07:06 And then in the future he's looking to do something
16:07:10 further.
16:07:12 I think that's what he had in mind by the last
16:07:14 statement.

16:07:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
16:07:16 Anything else?
16:07:19 This is new business, old business.
16:07:21 We are going around.
16:07:23 Ms. Mulhern.
16:07:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I would like to ask the
16:07:29 administration, Mr. David McCary, solid waste, to
16:07:36 make a report to council on this new site proposal
16:07:40 over on 26th and Sligh.
16:07:42 I had a number of calls about that.
16:07:44 The people who live in that area are very upset about
16:07:46 it.
16:07:47 So I would ask that administration through David
16:07:51 McCary make a report to council at next meeting and
16:07:55 brief us on this so we can have some discussion.
16:07:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, just a request by the
16:08:01 administration, and particularly the clerk's office.
16:08:03 Unless it's something of a pressing health, safety and
16:08:06 welfare issue in terms of a doc agenda system and
16:08:09 getting the motion to Mr. McCary, they request a
16:08:12 minimum of two weeks.
16:08:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, two weeks.

16:08:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion and second.
16:08:17 Any discussion?
16:08:18 All those in favor say Aye.
16:08:19 (Motion carried).
16:08:21 Passed unanimously.
16:08:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The other thing from Mr. Smith in
16:08:27 terms of the small business policy ordinance that's
16:08:34 coming back for us on the 31st.
16:08:36 I want to make sure -- we want to get a copy prior to
16:08:39 several days.
16:08:41 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
16:08:43 Yes, sir, you will.
16:08:45 We are working on making sure it is at least
16:08:47 presentable, and then we will provide it to the task
16:08:50 force, and at the same time we'll provide it to
16:08:52 council.
16:08:54 >> I would like to have it before the meeting.
16:09:00 >>DAVID SMITH: We will try to get it to you a week or
16:09:02 more, maybe as much as ten days or two weeks.
16:09:06 You need time to read it.
16:09:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Miranda?
16:09:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you for leaving the best for

16:09:13 last.
16:09:13 I want to have two commendations made.
16:09:16 One is for the public works utility utilities, public
16:09:20 workweek which is May 20 through 26 and the other is
16:09:23 to the links project that is instrumental with the
16:09:27 Florida Department of Transportation, others involved,
16:09:30 and we can have it ready for next Thursday for
16:09:32 presentation.
16:09:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion and second.
16:09:35 All in favor say Aye.
16:09:36 (Motion carried).
16:09:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Secondly and most importantly our
16:09:40 river continues to drop. The reservoir continues to
16:09:43 drop. The water usage continues to increase.
16:09:46 So again, asking all of you for a conservation of
16:09:50 these issues.
16:09:51 They are not going to get any better until it starts
16:09:53 to rain.
16:09:54 What do I see into the future?
16:09:56 I am not Johnny Carson but I can tell you one thing.
16:09:58 I would imagine water rates will go up for a little
16:10:01 bit of time or we are going to pass through because

16:10:04 it's costing 220 a unit and we are selling it for 1.47
16:10:09 which is about 82 cents or so difference.
16:10:11 And we can't make it up in volume.
16:10:14 So it's not going to be much but it will be something
16:10:16 based on the tier program.
16:10:18 And what else do I see in the future?
16:10:20 Water I am crease because there's enormous unanimous
16:10:26 and not enough supply and that will happen more than
16:10:28 likely in this budget cycle for the next four or five
16:10:31 years.
16:10:34 That's just my looking into the future program
16:10:36 thinking.
16:10:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You're a Pross prognosticate or.
16:10:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council member Dingfelder last week
16:10:45 as chair of the Finance Committee raised the issue
16:10:48 that Jim Stefan wishes to come before council with a
16:10:52 six-month revenue and expense update and there were
16:10:55 some dates that were tossed around.
16:10:57 Jim Stefan indicates that they need to do it next
16:10:59 week.
16:11:00 There are two dates that are considered.
16:11:04 Tuesday, May 29th, perhaps in the morning from

16:11:06 8:00 until 1:00.
16:11:08 Maned you, council, you also have, I believe, a
16:11:11 workshop scheduled for 5 p.m. on Tuesday for the
16:11:15 zoning hearing master practice.
16:11:17 So our suggestion would be you may want to make this
16:11:19 earlier in the afternoon, perhaps 3:00.
16:11:22 Unfortunately, they do need it next week and I did
16:11:26 bring to their attention council did schedule an extra
16:11:28 day for the Tuesday workshop.
16:11:31 If you wish to piggyback this, then, that will be
16:11:34 fine.
16:11:34 Otherwise, the other date would be Wednesday morning
16:11:38 between 8:00 and 1:00, needs a two-hour block.
16:11:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Council members, what is your
16:11:44 relative pleasure?
16:11:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Not on a Thursday when we have those
16:11:52 other --
16:11:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's a Tuesday at three and --
16:11:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can say, what council has
16:12:00 scheduled for next week is on the 31st, which is
16:12:04 your regular council day is a 1:30 Planning
16:12:06 Commission, special discussion meeting in the Mascotte

16:12:09 room.
16:12:09 So that's set forth arch.
16:12:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's two weeks.
16:12:15 You're not saying this correctly.
16:12:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Let me get my calendar.
16:12:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You know what I might suggest, Mr.
16:12:20 Shelby?
16:12:22 If this is going to be in two weeks, can you circulate
16:12:24 the dates to council members, and we can set it next
16:12:28 Thursday?
16:12:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If that's the best way to do it.
16:12:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: do could you say it again real
16:12:37 clearly?
16:12:38 >>> I have two notes.
16:12:39 One note shows they are requesting May 29th or May
16:12:42 30th. The other note says next week and I have
16:12:45 two separate notes in front of me that I was handed.
16:12:47 My suggestion, council, is it looks like the dates
16:12:53 confirmed would either be the 29th or the 30th
16:12:55 of May.
16:12:56 That's the date they are requesting.
16:13:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do council members have a

16:13:03 preference?
16:13:04 The 30th, I have a recommendation for the
16:13:06 administration.
16:13:08 If they want to us pick a day, it needs to be written
16:13:11 prior to Thursday so we can come in to council knowing
16:13:16 what's being proposed and we can all know of our
16:13:19 availability.
16:13:19 This is very difficult because we don't have our
16:13:22 calendars in front of us.
16:13:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I apologize to council.
16:13:25 Chairman Miller asked me to do this.
16:13:27 And it was relayed to me to be able to ask council.
16:13:30 I apologize for the method in which I did it.
16:13:33 If it is council's pleasure, we'll have it done via
16:13:36 e-mail in advance of next week's meeting.
16:13:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If they want the 29th, I mean, we
16:13:45 are going to be here 5:00.
16:13:49 So how much time do they need?
16:13:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Two hour block.
16:13:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 3:00?
16:13:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's a motion for and second for
16:14:01 3:00 on the 29th.

16:14:02 All in favor say Aye.
16:14:03 (Motion carried).
16:14:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again my apologies.
16:14:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do we need to receive and file?
16:14:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion to receive and file.
16:14:13 (Motion carried).
16:14:16 >>DAVID SMITH: I don't need this to be on TV.
16:14:17 I just need to ask you a couple of quick questions.
16:14:23 Treat it just like the public portion.
16:15:05 (Council meeting adjourned at 4:15 p.m.)