Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
Thursday, November 8, 2007
5:30 p.m. Session

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

(Important: ADD TWO HOURS TO TIME CODES)
(6:34 p.m.)
15:34:57 [Sounding gavel]
15:40:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
15:40:10 Roll call.
15:40:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
15:40:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
15:40:18 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
15:40:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
15:40:21 We are going to start with item number one, the
15:40:23 resolution, our committee reports. Is there anyone in
15:40:27 the public to speak on item number 1?

15:40:33 Mr. Caetano, would you move yours?
15:40:35 >> Make a motion to move the resolution?
15:40:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
15:40:44 Mr. Caetano.
15:40:47 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Move number 1.
15:40:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Do I get a second?
15:40:50 >> Second.
15:40:51 (Motion carried).
15:40:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
15:40:53 wants to speak on item 2 or 3?
15:41:02 Mary Mulhern, can you move those, please, the
15:41:04 resolution?
15:41:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I move 2 and 3.
15:41:08 >> Second.
15:41:09 (Motion carried).
15:41:09 >>CHAIRMAN: We are going to go to item number 9.
15:41:15 We have a request, has a very important engagement.
15:41:24 We are going to go to the second public hearing.
15:41:28 Can we move to open the public hearing, please?
15:41:30 >> So moved.
15:41:31 >> Second.
15:41:31 (Motion carried).

15:41:32 >> Good evening, chair Miller, members of the City
15:41:41 Council.
15:41:41 I'm Nancy McCann.
15:41:43 I'm currently in a temporary position with the
15:41:48 department of solid waste and environmental
15:41:51 management, the interim chief of administration.
15:41:53 And usually I'm the urban environmental coordinator.
15:41:56 And I'm here to report that the appropriate
15:42:02 environmental staff and the appropriate legal staff
15:42:06 has reviewed the brownfield application you have in
15:42:08 front of you, and I'm here to recommend that the City
15:42:11 Council approve adoption of the resolution to
15:42:14 designate this property as a brownfield area.
15:42:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move this
15:42:19 resolution.
15:42:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
15:42:23 wants to speak on item number 9?
15:42:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved to close.
15:42:28 >> Second.
15:42:29 (Motion carried).
15:42:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to move this resolution.
15:42:33 >> Second.

15:42:34 (Motion carried).
15:42:34 >>CHAIRMAN: We go back to item number 4.
15:42:43 We have a resolution we need to pass.
15:42:45 Is anyone in the public to speak on that?
15:42:47 >>
15:42:47 >> I'm leave Lee Huffstutler, your chief accountant, I
15:42:52 prepare the financial statements for the streetcar and
15:42:54 I have with me tonight also Jan Smith, a member of the
15:42:57 streetcar board and the Finance Committee chair and we
15:43:03 are willing to answer any questions you might have opt
15:43:05 on the streetcar.
15:43:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I didn't have a question on the
15:43:08 streetcar budget but I would like you to tell me how
15:43:11 successful the streetcar has been in the last year.
15:43:16 >>> I'm Jan Smith.
15:43:18 I live in Lutz.
15:43:19 Thank you very much for the opportunity to tell you
15:43:21 that our endowment earned well over 11% last year,
15:43:26 which was great for the streetcar.
15:43:29 Also, that our ridership was up more than 50,000
15:43:32 riders, which is really terrific.
15:43:34 And as more people move into your Channelside area, we

15:43:39 look forward to that number going up and providing a
15:43:42 wonderful public transit system for the city.
15:43:45 >> I want to thank you for the years of effort you put
15:43:49 into the streetcar and you should feel very stratified
15:43:51 by the community's embrace of it.
15:43:53 >>> Thank you.
15:43:54 We are very excited about it.
15:43:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: As you know, Jan, yourself, all the
15:43:59 Board of Directors and all those involved with the
15:44:01 streetcar project, we had a great convention center.
15:44:05 We didn't have a convention center hotel.
15:44:07 When people came they didn't see too much.
15:44:09 Now they have a chance to see City of Tampa through
15:44:11 different venues, and to have a marvelous mode of
15:44:15 transportation that should be the coming thing for the
15:44:17 future for the city.
15:44:18 So I want to thank you.
15:44:20 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Ms. Smith, may I ask you a
15:44:23 question, please?
15:44:24 I haven't seen you in years.
15:44:25 You have changed.
15:44:26 >>> Nice to see you.

15:44:28 >> In a good way.
15:44:29 You're lucky.
15:44:30 As you get older, now, some people -- [ Laughter ]
15:44:34 Anyway, what I want to ask, on the endowment, how much
15:44:41 money did we have in that endowment in the beginning?
15:44:43 >>> In the beginning, we had 4 million.
15:44:47 Right about 4 million.
15:44:48 >> Okay.
15:44:49 Are you drawing from the principal now?
15:44:51 >>> Mostly we are drawing from earning.
15:44:53 >> From the earning?
15:44:55 >>> The endowment is down about 3.4 million now.
15:44:58 So we have taken approximately 600,000 from the
15:45:02 endowment.
15:45:03 But the rest of it has been earning.
15:45:08 >> And the ridership you said went up, did it go up
15:45:11 11%?
15:45:12 >>> No, that was how much the endowment went up.
15:45:16 On a smaller body of fund to start with last year, the
15:45:19 ridership went up 50,000.
15:45:22 In the last year.
15:45:23 And so far this year, say from the month of October

15:45:27 the ridership was up.
15:45:29 We had our biggest day ever when we had the big
15:45:34 birthday Barb bash, 13500-some riders.
15:45:38 >> The total box fares, I think it was 645,000?
15:45:45 >>> I have it over here if you want me to look through
15:45:49 it.
15:45:50 Or Lee, if you can check it for me, please.
15:45:53 >> How much has that increased say in the last three
15:45:56 years?
15:45:59 >>> Well, because we did have a fare increase it did
15:46:01 go up from the fare box.
15:46:05 >>> Fare box revenue is $618,000.
15:46:11 For 2006 it was 540,000.
15:46:14 So that's a net increase of about $80,000.
15:46:18 In the prior year was 450,000, a 90,000 increase
15:46:23 between that year.
15:46:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott.
15:46:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Good to see you, Ms. Smith.
15:46:34 It looks like we are on the right track.
15:46:35 The concern I had was the endowment, 5.3 million, down
15:46:41 now to about --
15:46:43 >>I didn't hear you.

15:46:44 >> It start out about 5.3.
15:46:46 >>> What the streetcar, the PHS board received was in
15:46:51 the neighborhood of 4 million.
15:46:54 The original figures of I think the 5 million figure
15:46:58 you're looking at had to do with the arrangement with
15:47:01 beneficial corporation, and how they bought their
15:47:05 contract out with the city to operate their little
15:47:09 shuttle between Harbor Island and downtown Tampa.
15:47:11 And they used about a million to take that system
15:47:17 down.
15:47:18 So we received the balance, which was right in the
15:47:21 neighborhood of 4 million.
15:47:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So the question I have, do you
15:47:25 foresee, does the board foresee using any more of the
15:47:30 actual endowment money?
15:47:34 The reason I raise that is, you get to a point where
15:47:45 there's nothing left.
15:47:46 >>> Originally it was anticipated that the endowment
15:47:50 would last about ten years.
15:47:52 And so we are halfway through.
15:47:54 And from a $4 million start we still have 3.5 million.
15:47:58 We would hope that our efforts to sell naming rights

15:48:05 to station stops, to Main Street cars and all, will
15:48:08 turn into a good revenue source for us, as a
15:48:13 contribution to the endowment fund.
15:48:16 We would like to see the corpus, the body of the
15:48:21 endowment increase.
15:48:22 We are using the interest and some revenue to pay for
15:48:27 our operating expenses.
15:48:31 There's so many things.
15:48:32 It will depend on the economy.
15:48:33 It will depend on how many people move in to downtown,
15:48:37 how many people use the streetcar, and what are the
15:48:42 sources of revenue we have as to how much we will have
15:48:44 to draw down the endowment.
15:48:47 So it could last us till 2011.
15:48:51 It's sort of -- the worst case scenario right now and
15:48:55 cot last till --
15:48:58 >> So the point, what plan, let's say the 2011, at
15:49:03 that point you all still need additional revenue.
15:49:06 What will be the -- what is the plan?
15:49:09 >>> I think the original documents of the plan say
15:49:13 that if the endowment were to be depleted that the
15:49:16 City of Tampa is responsible for continuing to pay for

15:49:21 the operation.
15:49:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So then once the endowment is gone,
15:49:26 City of Tampa would fund the streetcar?
15:49:30 >>> Well, it probably wouldn't be a full funding, if
15:49:34 that did come about.
15:49:35 We are hoping, of course, that that won't come about
15:49:37 and then our fund-raising efforts will be successful,
15:49:40 in the event that did happen there would still be fare
15:49:44 box revenues and sale of -- we sell the old-fashioned
15:49:49 advertising cards inside the streetcar, we have naming
15:49:52 rights.
15:49:52 So there would be other sources of revenue so the city
15:49:55 would not be on the hook for the whole amount of
15:49:58 operating expenses.
15:49:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I understand.
15:50:01 >>> Yeah.
15:50:03 And believe me, we are extremely conscientious, and
15:50:07 conscious, of the fact that our endowment, while we
15:50:10 are delighted that in the last year and a half the
15:50:15 corpus of the body of funds has actually raised more
15:50:19 money than it had raised in the previous three years.
15:50:22 >> I just want council to be aware given the climate

15:50:25 that we are in now in terms of tax reduction, and God
15:50:28 knows what's going to happen come January 29th, if
15:50:32 that should pass, continue to look at reduction in
15:50:37 terms of the income, the millage, and I think at some
15:50:43 point the whole issue would have to be looked at if it
15:50:47 gets to that point.
15:50:47 >>> We do have opportunities to provide you with
15:50:52 information during the year, and if there's more
15:50:56 information, I would be happy to provide it to you.
15:50:59 But I think as most of you know, if you go on the
15:51:04 Internet and you put in the word "Tampa," you know
15:51:08 what you see now?
15:51:08 You see the streetcar.
15:51:10 And I live in Lutz.
15:51:12 And I know when I come down here, traffic is a lot
15:51:15 different here than it is in Lutz.
15:51:17 And the city is going to be very happy that they have
15:51:25 a dependable, well-run streetcar to help move people,
15:51:30 particularly in the Channelside, you know.
15:51:33 I think it's a true asset for this community.
15:51:36 And I think the city should be very proud of
15:51:38 themselves for investing your time and effort to help

15:51:43 us make it a successful project.
15:51:47 I hope you will support it.
15:51:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Actually, more of a comment.
15:51:54 I remember seeing last year, I think it might have
15:51:56 been this same time of year when we go through the
15:52:00 streetcar budget there, was a time line that shows a
15:52:04 graph of different scenarios, and probably provide
15:52:14 that to all council and to councilman Scott, about the
15:52:17 endowment.
15:52:18 And everybody is concerned about the endowment.
15:52:19 We would love for the corpus to last forever and just
15:52:22 live off of the interest.
15:52:23 But as it is right now, that was never the original
15:52:27 plan.
15:52:28 The original plan was that the endowment would get
15:52:31 chewed up little by little, and I hope at the end of
15:52:35 ten years there will be no deficit, and then it will
15:52:40 be a nonissue and it will be operating, at least on a
15:52:43 break-even basis.
15:52:45 And it is true from a legal perspective, but if the
15:52:49 endowment is gone, and there is a deficit, the city is
15:52:54 contract actually obligated to run that deficit, which

15:52:57 this year, I guess, would have amounted to about a
15:53:02 million dollars.
15:53:04 I would guess as ridership continues to improve, which
15:53:08 it will, we'll have more residents in Channelside,
15:53:11 we'll have more folks actually riding it from Ybor and
15:53:14 Channelside to come downtown to work.
15:53:16 I believe we should extend it up frankly street and
15:53:22 closer to the downtown core, and then instead of just
15:53:25 being a tourist vehicle it will be a commuter vehicle
15:53:28 as well.
15:53:28 And then we'll increase the hours, too.
15:53:32 I'm optimistic, as your Hartline representative, I
15:53:35 stay on top of this pretty regularly, because Hartline
15:53:39 is an integral part of this team.
15:53:42 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to say, it really is up
15:53:44 to us to promote it and to extend it because it's
15:53:49 never going to be successful unless we make it into a
15:53:56 real transit system that goes places where people need
15:53:59 to use it.
15:54:01 If we don't extend the streetcar line, we can't expect
15:54:06 it to improve, you know.
15:54:08 And it's a varying process that with the area that it

15:54:12 goes to, that you are increasing ridership, and I
15:54:16 think that is very optimistic, but we also have to
15:54:18 remember that when it was designed it was supposed to
15:54:21 go further, and if we don't make that happen, we can't
15:54:24 accept it to miraculously be working.
15:54:29 >>CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone in the public that wants
15:54:32 ton speak on item number 4?
15:54:33 We need to pass the resolution.
15:54:35 >> Move the resolution.
15:54:36 >> Second.
15:54:36 (Motion carried).
15:54:38 Item number 5, need to move the resolution.
15:54:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
15:54:43 >> Second.
15:54:44 (Motion carried).
15:54:47 >>CHAIRMAN: 6, we need to pass the resolution.
15:54:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
15:54:50 >> Second.
15:54:51 (Motion carried).
15:54:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 7.
15:54:59 The item for second reading.
15:55:03 Is there anyone in the public that wants ton speak on

15:55:06 item number 7?
15:55:07 You may come up and speak.
15:55:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: May we have a motion to open the
15:55:13 public hearing?
15:55:14 >> So moved to open the public hearing.
15:55:16 >> Second.
15:55:16 (Motion carried).
15:55:18 >> My New Business item is Eric Shuler, address 1805
15:55:23 East 7th Avenue in Ybor City, and regarding the
15:55:25 reworking of the sign ordinance, I just wanted to make
15:55:29 a comment, to make sure a couple of small issues were
15:55:33 addressed, so they wouldn't fall in the cracks in a
15:55:38 signed ordinance.
15:55:39 There are a number of people on 7th Avenue, I'm
15:55:43 not sure, half a dozen, ten maybe, people who have
15:55:47 sidewalk cafe permits from the city.
15:55:49 And this has been deemed a desirable thing for the
15:55:51 tourists and the people.
15:55:52 We have in our sidewalk cafe 12 chairs, four tables,
15:55:58 two planters.
15:56:00 That's what's been approved.
15:56:03 The city is named on our insurance policy as an

15:56:06 additionally named insured.
15:56:08 We are wet zoned.
15:56:10 And all this is done at great cost.
15:56:12 Unfortunately, I'm not able to put a menu board or
15:56:15 sidewalk sign on the sidewalk cafe that I lease from
15:56:19 the city without code enforcement carrying it off and
15:56:22 citing me.
15:56:23 So what I would like to do, the reason many of us in
15:56:28 Ybor City and probably elsewhere have these menu
15:56:30 boards and sidewalk signs is because they work.
15:56:33 And they hope the business, they hope the customers,
15:56:42 they are effective.
15:56:42 But I run the risk of now being -- getting a double
15:56:47 fine if I do this again, and I put my menu on the
15:56:50 sidewalk, on the property that I lease from the city
15:56:52 and insure at my own intense.
15:56:54 So I would just like to put that out, that in that
15:57:01 very little niche I know this is a much larger issue
15:57:04 than that.
15:57:05 But in my little parochial interest I sure could use a
15:57:08 little bit of help with sidewalk cafe, and display a
15:57:13 menu without it being carried off by code enforcement.

15:57:17 Thank you.
15:57:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for bringing this to our
15:57:20 attention.
15:57:21 I would like to ask Julia Cole, our attorney.
15:57:24 That isn't address in the ordinance before us, is it?
15:57:29 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
15:57:30 That issue, what we have addressed within the sign
15:57:34 code ordinance is say fines on umbrella and those kind
15:57:40 of issues.
15:57:40 Where this change would need to occur wouldn't be so
15:57:42 much within the sign code but within the sidewalk cafe
15:57:45 ordinance.
15:57:45 And Rebecca Kert also indicated to me you probably
15:57:48 need to have an amendment within the BLC ordinance,
15:57:51 the Barrio Latino commission.
15:57:55 An ordinance to allow for this.
15:57:57 So I think that's an issue that we can address in
15:58:00 those two formats and probably that it would be place
15:58:02 to address that issue.
15:58:04 >> After we deal with this I am going to ask legal to
15:58:07 address it.
15:58:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone else that would like to

15:58:10 speak?
15:58:10 Need to close.
15:58:11 >> Second.
15:58:12 (Motion carried).
15:58:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move for adoption upon second
15:58:20 reading, an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida
15:58:22 making comprehensive revisions to chapter 20.5 City of
15:58:25 Tampa code of ordinances amending section 20.5-4 words
15:58:30 defined amending section 20.5-7 allowable signs,
15:58:34 permits, when not required, amending section 20.5-13
15:58:38 on-site signs, permits required by repealing and
15:58:42 replacing section 20.5-13-C-1 amending section 20.5-13
15:58:47 on-site signs, permits required by repealing and
15:58:50 replacing section 20.5-13-C-2 repealing and replacing
15:58:55 section 20.5-16 repealing all ordinances or parts in
15:58:59 conflict therewith, providing for severability,
15:59:03 providing an effective date.
15:59:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: As you well know I have
15:59:07 consistently voting against the ordinance, not that
15:59:11 I'm agreeing with the ordinance in total but to me a
15:59:14 banner is a sign, and to me a sign that the city may
15:59:16 have where it says "warning, no left turn due to

15:59:20 whatever occurrence may be" is certainly one that's
15:59:24 necessary.
15:59:24 But I don't think the city should have an exclusion
15:59:28 compared to any other business.
15:59:29 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: May I ask the gentleman that came
15:59:34 up?
15:59:34 >>GWEN MILLER: No, you can't ask.
15:59:35 We have closed.
15:59:36 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Okay.
15:59:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 8.
15:59:42 >> We got to vote.
15:59:43 >> Everybody vote?
15:59:45 Vote and record.
15:59:46 >> I didn't see anything up on the screen.
15:59:50 >> It's not on our screen.
16:00:01 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I voted no.
16:00:03 Sorry.
16:00:07 >>GWEN MILLER: We are going to erase it and vote
16:00:08 again.
16:00:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You can hardly see it.
16:00:14 Number 2 is no.
16:00:15 3 is abstain.

16:00:17 4 is yes.
16:00:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Vote and record.
16:00:19 Vote and record.
16:00:41 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Caetano and Miranda
16:00:45 voting no.
16:00:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to request the legal
16:00:50 department look at making legal A-frame signs that are
16:00:58 used by cafes --
16:01:02 >> On a temporary basis.
16:01:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yeah, removed after a day, and the
16:01:09 business establishment is closed -- would positive
16:01:11 days be enough to bring this back to us?
16:01:16 >>JULIA COLE: Maybe I can get a motion.
16:01:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I want to speak to the motion.
16:01:20 I'll second for point of discussion.
16:01:22 I understand, and I agree with Mrs. Saul-Sena to a
16:01:25 point.
16:01:25 How far, I think before you draw something up you must
16:01:29 realize the size of the table, how much footage is
16:01:32 left to walk and if they put an apron sign or whatever
16:01:35 they call it what type of interference to walkers it
16:01:38 may have.

16:01:41 >>JULIA COLE: That is one of the questions we were
16:01:43 going to ask.
16:01:44 While 30 days may be enough to bring back language,
16:01:46 what I am suggesting is that you would also need a
16:01:48 change within chapter 27.
16:01:50 So that's something that would take a little bit, you
16:01:52 know, in terms of the profit.
16:01:55 Well, we are talking 30 days.
16:01:57 We might be able to process that as part of the
16:02:01 January cycle but I would have to talk with staff.
16:02:04 Other issue would also be with what Mr. Miranda
16:02:08 raised, we will have to work with transportation to
16:02:10 make sure we comply with all departments.
16:02:13 And if I could just take a moment after we get this
16:02:16 vote I just wanted to thank some people at the front.
16:02:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead.
16:02:19 >>JULIA COLE: I want to take an opportunity to thank
16:02:22 everybody who worked very hard on the sign code.
16:02:25 We have been working on it for almost three years.
16:02:27 And I feel very proud and honored that we finally got
16:02:30 some really good changes made.
16:02:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We appreciate your hard work on

16:02:35 that.
16:02:35 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and a second.
16:02:39 (Motion carried)
16:02:42 Is there anyone in the public that's going to speak on
16:02:44 number 8?
16:02:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved to open number 8.
16:02:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
16:02:49 (Motion carried).
16:02:52 Got a motion and second.
16:02:55 I only have one person.
16:02:58 Are you sure you want to speak?
16:03:01 We'll wait.
16:03:07 Get Mr. Scott.
16:03:08 Bring him in.
16:03:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Nail biter.
16:03:13 Bottom of the ninth.
16:03:15 Two outs.
16:03:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anybody in the public that
16:03:18 wants to speak on item number 8?
16:03:20 We need to close.
16:03:20 >> Move to close.
16:03:22 >> Second.

16:03:22 (Motion carried)
16:03:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Number 8?
16:03:29 I would like to move the ordinance for second reading,
16:03:32 an ordinance making lawful the sale of beverages
16:03:34 containing alcohol regardless of alcoholic content,
16:03:37 beer, wine and liquor, 4(COP-R), for consumption on
16:03:41 the premises only in connection with a restaurant
16:03:43 business establishment at or from that certain lot,
16:03:47 plot or tract of land locate at 2221 West Platt
16:03:50 street, Tampa, Florida, as more particularly described
16:03:52 in section 2 hereof, waiving certain restrictions as
16:03:57 to distance based upon certain findings, providing for
16:03:59 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
16:04:02 effective date.
16:04:02 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and second.
16:04:05 Vote and record.
16:04:19 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder, Miranda
16:04:21 and Saul-Sena voting no.
16:04:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
16:04:28 We are going to our public hearings at 6:00.
16:04:46 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
16:04:49 I would like to provide you with a mop-up agenda for

16:04:56 this evening's hearings.
16:05:14 For tonight everything is ready to move forward except
16:05:17 for item number 11, V-07-35 in which I received a
16:05:23 letter from John Grandoff requesting a continuance of
16:05:26 that case.
16:05:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Until when?
16:05:28 Continued until when?
16:05:30 Mr. Grandoff?
16:05:32 Number 11.
16:05:33 Continued to when, Mr. Grandoff?
16:05:38 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza.
16:05:43 Whatever is your pleasure, Madam Chair.
16:05:46 And I am going to renotice and repost the sign on the
16:05:50 property, we noticed the surrounding homeowners, I
16:05:53 also notified them of the request for continuance.
16:05:55 So whatever is open for you.
16:05:57 >>GWEN MILLER: What do you have open?
16:05:59 >>ABBYE FEELEY: We have an opening on January 10 at
16:06:01 6 p.m. if that's acceptable.
16:06:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
16:06:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
16:06:07 >>CHAIRMAN: Did anyone in the public come to speak on

16:06:10 item number 11?
16:06:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I see no one.
16:06:13 >>CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
16:06:18 Opposed, Nay.
16:06:23 >>ABBYE FEELEY: I'm sorry, I believe item 12 and item
16:06:27 13, there is written correspondence from Vincent
16:06:30 Marchetti to continue both the vacating and the
16:06:33 rezoning for that case to January 10th.
16:06:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 12 and 13.
16:06:39 Anyone that came to speak on item 12 and 13, if you
16:06:43 want to speak against the continuance.
16:06:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is petitioner here?
16:06:52 >>> Al Steenson, 4100 west Leila Avenue, Tampa,
16:06:58 Florida, president of Gandy association.
16:07:00 I want to speak to the continuance.
16:07:02 We have all read the headlines.
16:07:04 We know what's happened down there.
16:07:05 These people, this particular development, has
16:07:11 suffered some severe setbacks.
16:07:12 Now why are we here tonight?
16:07:15 This will be, if I'm not mistaken, the fist or sixth
16:07:18 continuance on this.

16:07:21 Now we will support this continuance provided the
16:07:26 petitioner or his agent can come back to us in January
16:07:28 with a PD.
16:07:31 We need something that we can sink our teeth into,
16:07:34 something that showing elevations, something that
16:07:36 shows building footprints.
16:07:37 I have a site plan right here.
16:07:39 We have been messing around with this for two years.
16:07:42 And there's not a single footprint on this site plan.
16:07:46 And what go Do we got now?
16:07:50 Very quickly, ma'am, this is what we got.
16:07:54 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Sir, just speak to the continuance,
16:07:56 if you can, as to whether you support or propose it
16:07:59 rather than get to the facts of the issue.
16:08:01 >>> Right.
16:08:03 But we got a waste land.
16:08:05 We lost a marina.
16:08:06 We lost a restaurant.
16:08:07 If the petitioner can give us some assurance that they
16:08:09 can come back in January with a PD, we'll support it.
16:08:12 If they can't, then we are recommending -- we are
16:08:14 requesting that they withdraw these two petitions.

16:08:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Is the petitioner here?
16:08:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I just want top bring to your
16:08:23 attention just so now under section 23-95 appearance
16:08:27 by applicant, the applicator his authorized agent
16:08:29 shall appear in support of his application at the
16:08:31 public hearing.
16:08:32 Failure to do so absent good cause shown may be
16:08:36 grounds for considering the application withdrawn
16:08:38 pursuant to 27-395 subsection C, which follows below.
16:08:43 I just want to bring that to your attention, council.
16:08:45 And it's council's pleasure.
16:08:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
16:08:49 I understand Mr. Steenson's remarks and I appreciate
16:08:51 the frustration that he has.
16:08:55 But I don't think that I can honestly say that this
16:08:59 individual sent a letter, or maybe he's not here, and
16:09:04 I understand what the attorney told me, but I agree
16:09:06 with you, I think this should be the last of the
16:09:09 Mohicans, the last charge of the hill, and come
16:09:13 January 10th, I think it is, if he doesn't, there
16:09:20 she goes, home run over the fence.
16:09:24 That's why I move for a continuance.

16:09:29 Second.
16:09:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like staff to communicate
16:09:32 to the applicant that not only does he need to have a
16:09:35 site plan but he needs to show the site plan to the
16:09:37 neighborhood and meet with them well in advance of the
16:09:39 meeting so they have a time to respond and then he can
16:09:42 change his plans depending on their feedback.
16:09:44 I think the neighborhood has been more than patient.
16:09:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: A date and time for the record,
16:09:50 please.
16:09:50 >> January 10th at 6 p.m.
16:09:52 >>> Madam Chairman, I did speak with him yesterday and
16:09:59 did he give me some indication that they felt they
16:10:01 would have things fairly well on track, or have
16:10:05 something after the first of the year.
16:10:10 That's all we are asking for.
16:10:11 I think we are all tired of looking at concepts and
16:10:14 things like that.
16:10:15 If they are going to do this, the zoning is passed,
16:10:17 then let's do it or let's withdraw the petition.
16:10:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
16:10:24 Thank you.

16:10:25 We have a motion to continue to January 10th at 6
16:10:28 p.m.
16:10:28 All in favor of that motion say Aye.
16:10:30 Opposed, Nay.
16:10:39 Number 18.
16:10:52 >>> We are not sure on that.
16:10:58 We didn't bring the file with us this evening.
16:11:00 >>GWEN MILLER: So we have to reschedule?
16:11:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It's already been previously
16:11:04 rescheduled and it's presently set.
16:11:07 I believe it has to be removed from the agenda.
16:11:13 >>> That's correct, Mr. Shelby, thank you.
16:11:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand this has been
16:11:16 rescheduled for the 29th?
16:11:21 >>CHAIRMAN: Of November, yes.
16:11:24 We need a motion to remove it.
16:11:25 >> So moved.
16:11:26 >> Second.
16:11:27 (Motion carried).
16:11:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
16:11:28 Is there anyone in the public going to speak on item
16:11:31 10 through 22?

16:11:33 Would you please stand and raise your right hand?
16:11:36 23, I'm sorry.
16:11:37 Please stand and raise your right hand.
16:11:43 >>THE CLERK: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole
16:11:47 truth and nothing but the truth?
16:11:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I ask that all communications which
16:11:51 have been available for public inspection in council's
16:11:53 chambers office be received and filed into the record
16:11:56 prior to action by motion and vote tonight, please.
16:12:02 Motion to receive and file, please.
16:12:04 >> So moved.
16:12:05 >> Second.
16:12:06 (Motion carried).
16:12:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a quick reminder regarding the
16:12:12 necessity to disclose ex parte communications prior to
16:12:15 vote.
16:12:15 Thank you.
16:12:22 >>> Item number 10 on your agenda this evening,
16:12:24 VO-7-61 is a rezoning at 2602, 2610 and 2612 east
16:12:35 Busch Boulevard, from PD, planned development,
16:12:37 professional office and retail sales, to PD, planned
16:12:39 development, retail sales and convenience goods.

16:12:43 There are four waivers associated with the plan this
16:12:45 evening.
16:12:46 Section 27-242, a waiver that meets the required
16:12:51 offstreet parking from 17 spaces to 14 spaces.
16:12:54 Section 27-130, a waiver to provide a 6-foot PVC pier
16:13:00 and lintel fence instead of a masonry wall, a waiver
16:13:06 to reduce the 15-foot buffer to 9 feet along the
16:13:10 northern property line and 27-246 H-1 a waiver to
16:13:14 allow maneuvering the public right-of-way as required
16:13:17 for the collection of solid waste.
16:13:21 The petitioner proposes to rezone the property at
16:13:24 2602, 2610 and 2612 east Busch Boulevard to planned
16:13:29 development to construct a retail strip center.
16:13:33 The property contains .46 acres and the plan proposes
16:13:36 a 4,180 square foot building.
16:13:39 Setbacks for the projects are as follows: 58.5 feet
16:13:43 front yard along Busch Boulevard, 19.46 rear, 4 feet
16:13:51 rear yard along the north property line, 2.19 feet
16:13:55 along the west, and you will see there is an existing
16:13:57 strip center to the west.
16:13:59 So this is minimum separation between those with two
16:14:03 with the required fire walls.

16:14:06 And a 58.69-foot east side yard along 27th Street.
16:14:15 17 parking spaces are required.
16:14:17 14 parking spaces will be provided.
16:14:19 And a waiver is being requested for the deficit.
16:14:28 Just to familiarize you with the site.
16:14:31 It is located on the north portion of Busch Boulevard
16:14:31 between 27th Street and 26th street.
16:14:35 You can see there is commercial general zoning located
16:14:40 along the Busch Boulevard corridor with RS 50 and RM
16:14:46 16 located immediately behind the corridor.
16:14:50 Here are some photos of the site.
16:15:02 Looking north.
16:15:05 Here is a view looking west towards the other strip
16:15:08 center.
16:15:11 A view across Busch Boulevard.
16:15:19 Staff has reviewed the application and City of Tampa
16:15:22 code of ordinances an finds it consistent.
16:15:23 We are available for any questions.
16:15:36 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
16:15:37 I have been sworn in.
16:15:38 You have to bear with me tonight.
16:15:40 I'm fighting a head cold so I'll do the best I can.

16:15:45 This was originally proposed in the DRC process.
16:16:05 My map is incorrect.
16:16:07 This parcel in the rear is not being proposed for the
16:16:10 project.
16:16:14 CMU 35 land use category, consistent with the request
16:16:17 being made by the applicant.
16:16:18 The primary land use along Busch Boulevard is CMU 35.
16:16:28 Planning Commission staff had no objection and finds
16:16:33 it consistent.
16:16:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
16:16:35 Petitioner?
16:16:42 >>> Silcox.
16:17:03 Silcox associates.
16:17:06 The problems we are having on this is the dumpster
16:17:09 location was dangerous for the dumpster to pick up and
16:17:14 back out.
16:17:15 And that's one of the requests that we are asking, an
16:17:20 off-site pickup of the dumpster.
16:17:22 And that also affected...
16:17:33 The waiver we are requesting on the fence is
16:17:35 protecting the existing trees.
16:17:37 It would be less he vase -- invasive to the existing

16:17:42 trees.
16:17:43 Excuse me.
16:17:44 And if there's any questions --
16:17:49 >>CHAIRMAN: Have you been sworn?
16:17:50 >>> Ma'am?
16:17:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Have you been sworn in?
16:17:52 >>> Yes, ma'am.
16:17:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
16:17:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A question to staff.
16:18:01 Thank you, sir.
16:18:05 We all know how rather barren and unsightly, and it
16:18:12 appears to me -- and I know that when Mr. Harrison was
16:18:17 here, he used to speak to try to make improvements to
16:18:21 the Busch corridor and working with D.O.T. and that
16:18:24 sort of thing.
16:18:25 Way was wondering about, it appears we have got on the
16:18:29 frontage there, we have - not magnolias but
16:18:35 ligustrums.
16:18:41 I wonder why we are not trying to put real trees out
16:18:43 there.
16:18:43 >>> Mary Daniels, Land Development Coordination, I
16:18:47 have been sworn.

16:18:47 There are some overhead power lines and we did request
16:18:50 power line tree species to be within that area.
16:18:55 >> Is there anything in between, bigger
16:18:56 than ligustrums but smaller than an oak tree?
16:18:59 >>> Crepe myrtle.
16:19:00 A little gem magnolia.
16:19:08 Holly.
16:19:08 >> Do we give them an option?
16:19:10 >>> We can, sure.
16:19:11 Yes.
16:19:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
16:19:16 I was pleased to see the sidewalk on this.
16:19:20 We spent a lot of money on our whole redevelopment
16:19:23 plan for Busch Boulevard, including sidewalks and
16:19:26 landscaping.
16:19:27 And I'm glad you brought that up, Mr. Dingfelder.
16:19:29 I wonder if the petitioner would be willing to put
16:19:32 something with a little more oomph.
16:19:36 >>> We would be willing to do that if the petitioner
16:19:40 would agree to that.
16:19:41 >> Can we hear from petitioner?
16:19:47 >>> Yes, ma'am, we would.

16:19:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Great.
16:19:50 >>CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone in the public that wants
16:19:52 to speak on item number 10?
16:19:55 Need to close.
16:19:56 >> If we close we can't --
16:20:02 >> A note is required.
16:20:04 >>> It would ab minor change so I ask when you make
16:20:07 your motion if your motion is for approval that you
16:20:09 then add that condition that you would like to see
16:20:11 those trees along Busch Boulevard to be an alternative
16:20:16 species as indicated by staff.
16:20:19 >>CHAIRMAN: Move to close the public hearing.
16:20:21 >> Second.
16:20:22 (Motion carried)
16:20:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to ask staff, anytime we
16:20:34 have rezonings on any of the streets, a pedestrian
16:20:39 plan and landscaping plan, that you encourage the
16:20:41 petitioners to follow it.
16:20:42 Thank you.
16:20:45 Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
16:20:47 vicinity of 2602, 2610 and 2612 east Busch Boulevard
16:20:52 in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly

16:20:53 described in section 1 to zoning district
16:20:56 classification PD planned development professional
16:20:58 office and retail sales, to PD, planned development,
16:21:01 retail sales, convenience goods, providing an
16:21:03 effective date.
16:21:04 And that when you come back for second reading you
16:21:07 have included landscaping that's more in concert with
16:21:12 the Busch Boulevard landscaping plan.
16:21:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we have a second?
16:21:16 >> Second.
16:21:17 (Motion carried).
16:21:20 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Scott
16:21:23 being absent at vote.
16:21:25 Second reading and adoption will be on December
16:21:27 6th, 2007, at 9:30 a.m.
16:21:31 >>CHAIRMAN: Item number 14.
16:21:39 >> Do we have to move to open?
16:21:41 >>GWEN MILLER: We opened them all already.
16:21:43 >> James Cook, Land Development Corporation.
16:21:51 14 and 15 together.
16:21:57 >>CHAIRMAN: Let's open all the public hearings from 14
16:22:00 to 23.

16:22:01 >> So moved.
16:22:02 >>:
16:22:02 >> Second.
16:22:02 (Motion carried).
16:22:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Jim wants 14 and 5 together.
16:22:08 >>> Petitioner is requesting an alley between running
16:22:12 from Mitchell Avenue and Taliaferro Avenue: You can
16:22:16 see on the Elmo, this is highlighted in red.
16:22:21 West of Mitchell.
16:22:36 Block east of Mitchell.
16:22:41 Block west towards Taliaferro.
16:22:43 This shot from Taliaferro to Mitchell.
16:22:50 This is a shot of the property looking north from
16:22:54 Columbus.
16:22:56 This is west of petitioner's property.
16:23:06 Has access off Columbus.
16:23:08 That's a driveway to the side of the house.
16:23:11 That's a drive in the rear, access to the alley if it
16:23:17 were improved.
16:23:19 This is the property... they are using the alley to
16:23:27 the west of Taliaferro.
16:23:29 Public works does object.

16:23:31 However, they are in favor of a partial vacating.
16:23:38 We do have a letter from the owner on the north side,
16:23:48 partial vacating.
16:23:50 And I also got a call from the owner of this property
16:23:52 immediately to the west, in favor of the partial
16:23:58 vacating.
16:24:08 There are 30 alleys in this area, 18 of which have
16:24:11 already been vacated.
16:24:16 Requesting approximately -- this one.
16:24:21 This one.
16:24:22 And there's another one.
16:24:28 Staff would not be opposed to a partial vacating in
16:24:32 this situation.
16:24:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Cook.
16:24:39 Just speaking generically, didn't we have a policy
16:24:43 against dead-ends vacating to create that end?
16:24:50 >>> You're prohibited from petitioning to vacate the
16:24:53 dead-end but once you come in front of City Council,
16:24:56 City Council can waive that part and grant the
16:24:58 dead-end.
16:24:59 We have done them in the past.
16:25:00 >> So effectively, if we dead-end at this alley, it

16:25:05 looks like the six lots, three of them on one side,
16:25:08 three on the north, three on the south, would still be
16:25:11 able to --
16:25:13 >>> which is the one using it now.
16:25:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: There wouldn't be any turn around
16:25:21 requirement or anything like that?
16:25:22 >>> No.
16:25:23 >>CHAIRMAN: Petitioner?
16:25:35 >>> I reside at 421 South Orleans Avenue.
16:25:39 I have been sworn.
16:25:46 >>CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone in the public that wants
16:25:48 to speak on 14 and 15?
16:25:55 >> I don't believe there was a presentation on the
16:25:57 zoning.
16:25:58 Do you want to do two of them together?
16:25:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, will you come back?
16:26:06 >>> There is a related zoning with this vacating, Z
16:26:10 07-70.
16:26:11 I provided you with site plans.
16:26:14 And elevations.
16:26:20 The location is 708 east Columbus drive and 2702 north
16:26:24 Mitchell Avenue.

16:26:26 The petitioner is requesting to rezone from RS-50
16:26:30 residential single-family to PD planned development
16:26:33 for mixed use, business professional office and
16:26:35 storefront residential.
16:26:37 There are several you waivers associated with this
16:26:39 petition this evening.
16:26:41 Waiver 27 -- number one, section 27-242 to allow the
16:26:46 reduction of required parking spaces from 14 to 11.
16:26:50 Section 27-246-A to allow for the reduction of the
16:26:54 required drive aisle from 26 feet to 24 feet.
16:26:57 Section 27-246-A to allow for the reduction of the
16:27:01 required drive aisle from 24 feet to 21 feet for
16:27:04 compact parking spaces that are included on-site.
16:27:07 Section 27-246-J to allow access for a nonresidential
16:27:11 parking lot to a local street.
16:27:13 And section 27-246, to allow for reduction of required
16:27:18 backout from 7 feet to five feet for an ADA space.
16:27:23 The petitioner is requesting to rezone the property to
16:27:25 planned development to develop a mixed use project
16:27:28 with business professional office on the ground floor,
16:27:30 and two single-family dwelling units on the second
16:27:32 floor.

16:27:35 The PD setbacks are zero front, 6.5 feet west, 7 feet
16:27:40 east side along Mitchell Avenue, and 20 feet in the
16:27:43 rear.
16:27:43 The project is required to have 16 parking spaces and
16:27:47 11 spaces are being provided.
16:27:50 I'm sorry, it's required 14 and 11 are being provided.
16:27:53 A waiver is being requested for the deficit.
16:27:55 The project designed in a Spanish revival architecture
16:27:59 with an entrance that is oriented toward the corner
16:28:01 that provides direct access from the public sidewalk.
16:28:05 I think Mr. Cook acquainted you with this site.
16:28:12 Per the vacating discussion.
16:28:14 But I will just show you quick "on the zoning, this is
16:28:18 the site.
16:28:19 Zoom in a little bit for you.
16:28:22 Columbus Avenue, Mitchell to the east, I-275 to the
16:28:27 west, the old Washington school across the street, no
16:28:31 longer there.
16:28:33 I think on my aerial it's still there.
16:28:35 Show you some additional pictures of the site.
16:28:46 Here's a view looking west.
16:28:48 This is a view looking west down Columbus.

16:28:58 Toward the interstate.
16:29:03 This is a view looking down Mitchell.
16:29:12 Also a view across diagonal from the site.
16:29:18 Staff has been working with the petitioner on this
16:29:24 case.
16:29:25 We do find it consistent.
16:29:26 There are a series of changes that do need to be made
16:29:29 to the site plan in between first and second reading
16:29:32 to address some issues.
16:29:33 I have highlighted those on your agenda this evening.
16:29:36 This is located in the East Tampa --
16:29:49 The overlay district.
16:29:55 And as you can see through the staff report, we have
16:30:00 done analysis that does meet all the PD purpose
16:30:05 criteria, designed site in order to place the best
16:30:10 trees on the site which is the need for some of the
16:30:11 waivers that are being requested tonight, and some of
16:30:13 the redesigns that we are requesting, also.
16:30:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Abbye.
16:30:20 What I'm curious about, I'm having trouble
16:30:23 deceiphering it from the site plan, is the egress, the
16:30:28 transportation aspect of this.

16:30:31 Especially as related to put the request for vacating.
16:30:37 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Okay.
16:30:38 Try to put this on the Elmo for you.
16:30:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Pull back a little.
16:30:48 There you go.
16:30:50 >>> The access is going to be off of Mitchell.
16:30:52 What you see here is part of the alley that is now
16:30:56 included in order to make the site function and meet
16:30:59 the requirements.
16:31:00 That's why the alley was being vacated in order to get
16:31:03 that additional land in the rear of the property, be
16:31:07 able to accommodate the parking lot.
16:31:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But I don't understand that.
16:31:18 It's a PD.
16:31:19 So why couldn't we just have some waivers that would
16:31:22 make this project work and still leave the alley open?
16:31:24 >>> There's a 24-inch oak located, and in order to
16:31:28 maintain the protective radius around those trees and
16:31:31 still allow for driving and the maneuvering of cars on
16:31:35 the site, and to also get to meet some sort of
16:31:40 technical standards for transportation, because
16:31:42 transportation does require 26 feet back out, the land

16:31:48 area was necessary in order to meet both the technical
16:31:51 standards for the drive and the protective radius for
16:31:55 the trees.
16:31:55 >> Leave that there for a second.
16:31:59 The cars will go off of Mitchell and then what?
16:32:02 >>> You come in off of Mitchell and there are
16:32:04 90-degree parking spaces located along the rear of the
16:32:07 building, and three compact spaces located along the
16:32:10 west over here.
16:32:11 What we are currently asking petitioner to do is move
16:32:14 these spaces five feet in order to allow for the
16:32:18 appropriate back-up from the ADA space.
16:32:22 Because it does not currently meet the technical
16:32:25 standard.
16:32:26 Technical standard is seven feet, but it still needed
16:32:35 an adjustment.
16:32:36 >> Ask transportation here?
16:32:37 Or are they out there?
16:32:40 >>> Yes.
16:32:46 >> I don't know if you heard my question.
16:32:47 >>> Yes.
16:32:48 >> You did?

16:32:50 >>> The ingress and egress?
16:32:54 >> Well, what I'm confused about is, I think it's a
16:33:00 great location.
16:33:01 It's sort of urban pioneering along that area and
16:33:04 that's wonderful.
16:33:05 I didn't understand why the petitioner would even need
16:33:09 to vacate that alley.
16:33:14 And staff just said it's for transportation reasons,
16:33:16 which makes even lessens to me now.
16:33:22 If you want to put it on the overhead while you talk.
16:33:25 Can't we accommodate your transportation needs and
16:33:33 concerns as well as Mary's trees needs and concerns
16:33:39 and still create some additional waivers and still
16:33:44 leave the alley public?
16:33:46 >>> One of the reasons -- one of the reasons is to
16:33:53 alleviate the need for waivers.
16:33:55 There are four currently.
16:33:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We don't care.
16:34:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's what we are in the business
16:34:03 for.
16:34:03 >>> We can obviously do that.
16:34:06 But I think it's staff's opinion that if something

16:34:08 comes with too many waivers you tend to start to
16:34:11 think, maybe it's just not --
16:34:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I understand.
16:34:14 But it's all a trade-off.
16:34:16 So if the waivers don't hurt anybody, what kind of
16:34:18 waivers are we talking about?
16:34:20 >>> Green space waivers.
16:34:22 Buffering waivers.
16:34:23 Parking waivers.
16:34:29 >> They won't be able to meet green space on the site.
16:34:32 They are going to be able to meet a green space
16:34:35 waiver.
16:34:35 Once we remove that additional land, they'll also need
16:34:38 additional parking waiver, because I'm not sure how
16:34:40 the maneuvering for two-way traffic, and that drive is
16:34:44 going to be -- speak for that further.
16:34:48 But it's going to be a series of waivers, additional.
16:34:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess we'll need to hear from the
16:34:56 petitioner as well.
16:34:57 But that would be -- it looks like a nice project, but
16:35:00 it's, generally speaking, you know.
16:35:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Two points.

16:35:05 We have talked about the fact that our current
16:35:08 requirements are very suburban in nature.
16:35:11 And what's being proposed here is an urban in-fill
16:35:15 project which we are trying to encourage.
16:35:16 And I know that we are going to go to form-based
16:35:20 zoning, we should only live that long.
16:35:22 I mean, we are trying to encourage projects like this.
16:35:24 But my question is, this is a historic neighborhood
16:35:30 and it's a grid.
16:35:30 Aren't we trying to preserve alleys in historic
16:35:33 neighborhoods where the alleys are part of the fabric
16:35:37 and part of the pattern?
16:35:39 Aren't we?
16:35:40 >>> That is included in the West Tampa overlay. That
16:35:42 is not included in the East Tampa overlay.
16:35:44 >> How come?
16:35:47 >>> I'm not exactly sure.
16:35:48 >> Well, they are equally historic.
16:35:53 They were developed around the same time.
16:35:54 Alleys are part of the pattern and alleys give you
16:35:58 additional transportation access.
16:36:00 I guess I won't delay this rezoning but I would like

16:36:03 to ask us to think seriously about the protection of
16:36:06 the alley grid where we find it in our historic areas.
16:36:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission?
16:36:15 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
16:36:20 I have been sworn.
16:36:26 I think I have to go along with what Mr. Dingfelder
16:36:26 and Ms. Saul-Sena said, we look at this project and I
16:36:29 think it's great you use the term urban pioneer. This
16:36:32 particular area over here from Nebraska and Columbus
16:36:34 drive is a blighted area.
16:36:36 But we do have along the border of Nebraska, in which
16:36:43 does encourage mixed use.
16:36:47 You can see this close proximity to the interstate,
16:36:50 and the intersection of Nebraska and -- Mr. Miranda,
16:36:56 what school used to thereby?
16:36:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll give you more now that you
16:37:02 mentioned my name, my alma mater, and I know you spent
16:37:05 four years there in the 8th grade.
16:37:08 I have a record of that.
16:37:09 [ Laughter ]
16:37:10 But down the street, it's a great project.
16:37:12 Don't get M me wrong.

16:37:14 But there was an old Tony shoe shop and Tony had his
16:37:18 house there, and then he had a garage.
16:37:19 On top of the garage there was an apartment building.
16:37:21 And you go another two blocks down on 12th and
16:37:24 Columbus.
16:37:26 That was where Tony LaRussa lived.
16:37:30 And there was a mechanic's shop under.
16:37:32 And overhead there was a house.
16:37:34 And built over that is where he lived.
16:37:35 >> What was the school?
16:37:38 >> George Washington.
16:37:39 The fighting tigers.
16:37:48 >>> But going back to what you talked, about it is a
16:37:50 blighted area.
16:37:51 This is a relatively (away from microphone) -- to come
16:37:55 in and propose a vertically integrated mixed use
16:37:58 project along Columbus drive is something that
16:38:01 everyone has really looked forward to, but people
16:38:04 coming and doing this is also part of the old Tampa
16:38:06 enterprise area, it's within the neighborhood
16:38:10 association boundaries of Tampa.
16:38:12 Planning Commission staff found the appropriate

16:38:16 requested --
16:38:21 >>JULIA COLE: Legal question.
16:38:26 Whether or not the alleyway is open, within East Tampa
16:38:29 overlay, and as Ms. Feeley said, not withstanding,
16:38:34 they also want to make it clear to council that you
16:38:37 have the right in reviewing a vacation to determine
16:38:39 whether or not it's in the public interest to vacate
16:38:41 the right-of-way, not withstanding whether or not you
16:38:43 have something within the East Tampa, West Tampa
16:38:45 overlay.
16:38:45 >> We have an obligation.
16:38:47 >>> You have an obligation.
16:38:48 And I think that's part of your review in determining
16:38:51 whether or not -- you know, it's a question of, is it
16:38:53 being used today?
16:38:54 But also whether or not it is within the general
16:38:56 public interest to keep it open for the future.
16:38:58 And I wanted to make you aware of that, because simply
16:39:01 because it's not within the right-of-way you have to
16:39:04 keep this grid open.
16:39:05 That doesn't relieve you of the opportunity and
16:39:07 obligation to go through that process and make that

16:39:10 determination, and it is within your discretion to
16:39:12 determine is this something that's still necessary for
16:39:15 the public interest, that it is within the public's
16:39:18 interest to keep this alleyway open.
16:39:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, do you want to come back up
16:39:24 again in rebuttal?
16:39:28 Speak to Mr. Dingfelder.
16:39:34 >>> I'm here to answer any questions that you would
16:39:36 have.
16:39:37 I would also like to submit a letter of support from
16:39:41 the neighbor.
16:39:42 There is only one neighbor that is connected to my
16:39:45 property that would be affected by the alley being
16:39:48 closed.
16:39:50 I have owned my property for four years.
16:39:52 I have never accessed it from the alley.
16:39:54 They are using it as a parking lot.
16:39:58 And for much of the time it was blocked in the center
16:40:01 of the alley.
16:40:02 I could not access it at all.
16:40:06 People are sleeping in it.
16:40:10 I have never been able to utilize it.

16:40:13 But I do have a letter of support from the neighbor
16:40:17 that would be affected, and she is in favor of the
16:40:21 project, and also has no problem or issues, I do have
16:40:30 a letter from the neighborhood association, very nice
16:40:35 letter, and they are very much in support of this
16:40:37 project and really are very excited about it and have
16:40:41 really been very helpful in pioneering this area, you
16:40:46 know, for Marshall.
16:40:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone that would like to
16:40:54 speak on item 14 or 15?
16:41:00 >>> I have not been sworn.
16:41:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Where have you been?
16:41:12 Anyone else that came in late and needs to be sworn
16:41:14 in, please stand and raise your right hand.
16:41:21 (Oath administered by Clerk).
16:41:25 >>> I'm here on behalf of the neighborhood
16:41:32 association.
16:41:32 I'm also -- however I am not representing them
16:41:41 tonight, I am representing VME board.
16:41:43 A few years ago, I fought for the remember the George
16:41:52 Washington school.
16:41:52 As ones of the one that is really stood with me --

16:41:59 finally the school went down and she says, Carol, I
16:42:04 would like to devote my project with something to
16:42:07 remind everybody of that school.
16:42:10 Tonight I'm here to say, we are in full support.
16:42:14 The alleyways have not been used in years.
16:42:17 I don't know how you all will work that out but this
16:42:20 project is a real viable project.
16:42:24 We are in East Tampa.
16:42:25 And also in Tampa Heights.
16:42:28 And I'm here to support the property.
16:42:31 Thanks.
16:42:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
16:42:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that we need to compliment
16:42:37 the petitioner for developing a project that really
16:42:39 does architecturally invoke the spirit of the school.
16:42:43 It just beautiful.
16:42:44 And I would like to ask the petitioner a question,
16:42:46 which is, if we approve your project but we don't
16:42:52 approve the alley vacation, that doesn't preclude you
16:42:54 from going ahead and doing your project, does it?
16:42:59 Then we could do waivers.
16:43:03 >>> Well, I would go along with whatever you say.

16:43:05 The only thing that I was told was that the protected
16:43:08 radius of the tree root is along the alley, behind my
16:43:12 property.
16:43:12 So people driving on that, the best specimen of tree
16:43:23 on the property.
16:43:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's the way it's been anyway.
16:43:29 I mean, the tree is there.
16:43:31 The alley is there. The project is not changing
16:43:33 either.
16:43:36 >>> Well, no, on the site plan if you will look at the
16:43:41 protected radius of the tree, the root system goes
16:43:43 along the alley.
16:43:45 And we are coming in off of Mitchell.
16:43:50 You would not have to drive over that root system.
16:43:52 You would come in ahead of the tree.
16:43:57 So you would avoid that.
16:44:00 >> But you are still going to do that.
16:44:02 I mean, we are not going to change your entryway.
16:44:05 You can keep your entry where you want it to be.
16:44:07 But we would just legally be leaving the alley open,
16:44:12 legally.
16:44:13 I'm not saying -- I don't think you would have to

16:44:15 approve it.
16:44:18 I don't think that's necessarily a requirement.
16:44:24 >>> Yeah, if you think it will work, fine with me.
16:44:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's hear --
16:44:34 >>> Mary Daniel Bryce, Land Development Coordination,
16:44:37 tree and Lang landscaping, I have been sworn.
16:44:39 Basically the alley is six feet away from the tree
16:44:41 F.the alley were ever improved the best trees on-site
16:44:44 that we worked to save, preserve, would then be
16:44:49 compromised.
16:44:51 There is a much larger tree that had grand status,
16:44:54 it's a hazard but we are allowing to be removed, to
16:44:57 have them save this cluster.
16:44:59 And we always like to preserve in a cluster form.
16:45:03 The alley currently is not being utilized for vehicles
16:45:10 and is currently blocked, and we would prefer to have
16:45:14 the alley unused and have it become part of the
16:45:18 parcel.
16:45:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Not to be argumentive but with all
16:45:24 due respect you are here to advocate for the tree,
16:45:27 okay?
16:45:28 There's other people, perhaps in transportation, who

16:45:30 are here to advocate for the grid.
16:45:32 Or one would hope.
16:45:34 So, you know, different competing departments have
16:45:37 different interests.
16:45:38 And at the end of the day it's our responsibility to
16:45:39 figure out which interests prevail.
16:45:42 So we totally respect your position on that.
16:45:46 And we'll just have to see.
16:45:53 >> Move to close.
16:45:53 >> Second.
16:45:54 (Motion carried).
16:45:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What do you want to vote on first?
16:46:01 >>> I do want to let you know if it is your pleasure
16:46:06 to ask the petitioner to redesign this project with
16:46:09 the removal of the alley and just using their current
16:46:13 property, that would be considered a substantial
16:46:15 change.
16:46:16 Cot not go to first reading tonight and would need
16:46:18 redesign.
16:46:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: When can we have first reading?
16:46:23 >>> If you first choose to be an evening meeting, then
16:46:25 that would be January 10th.

16:46:27 If you would choose a morning meeting, then I would
16:46:29 have to check on with the clerk on the availability of
16:46:32 morning meetings.
16:46:32 Because your first one is December 6th.
16:46:35 And I'm not sure your schedule in December is because
16:46:38 now we are on the first and third Thursday.
16:46:40 >>CHAIRMAN: We are going to read it and see where it
16:46:43 goes.
16:46:44 The vacating first.
16:46:49 You have to get an ordinance first.
16:46:50 Do we have an ordinance for vacating?
16:46:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move to deny the vacating.
16:46:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
16:46:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The reason being, I don't believe
16:47:00 the public purpose is really met.
16:47:02 You know, we address these issues pretty often.
16:47:07 And it's a short-term issue versus a long-term issue.
16:47:10 And the short term, it might be some trash back there,
16:47:13 and there might be some vagrants back there, but as
16:47:15 this area improves, if we vacate the alley -- and
16:47:20 here's a classic example downtown in Channelside.
16:47:22 We vacated Cumberland street, how many, 50 years ago,

16:47:28 and today we were scrambling and thrilled to be
16:47:30 getting it back.
16:47:32 And that's what happens when you vacate public
16:47:34 rights-of-way.
16:47:35 You vacate them forever.
16:47:37 And we don't want to do it on the basis of what's good
16:47:42 tonight in the short term.
16:47:43 We want to look at the long-term and say what's in the
16:47:46 best interest of the City of Tampa long-term?
16:47:49 And allies are good.
16:47:51 Allies create additional networks.
16:47:54 Allies give people opportunities to enter properties
16:47:56 from the rear, so we don't have all this front entry.
16:48:02 There's lots of reasons for alleys that I don't need
16:48:04 to go into.
16:48:05 But, anyway, you know, with all due respect, and Ms.
16:48:14 Aiello is a very good friend of mine and I'm not
16:48:16 trying to kill the project but any means.
16:48:18 But I think we can do both, build save the alley and
16:48:23 build the project.
16:48:23 That's the reason I would move to deny the vacating.
16:48:27 But my intent would be to move the -- when we get the

16:48:30 chance in December on first reading to move the
16:48:32 rezoning forward.
16:48:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to speak in support of
16:48:37 protecting the alley, also.
16:48:40 Just to the east of this is Ybor City, where we
16:48:43 specifically protect alleys.
16:48:45 And I think that alley protection is one of those
16:48:47 ideas that we are kind of coming back to and
16:48:50 recognizing the value of.
16:48:52 And I encourage my council members.
16:48:55 We can do as Mr. Dingfelder said, have this project
16:48:58 happen and protect the alley.
16:49:02 >>GWEN MILLER: The alley is not being used, has never
16:49:04 been used, there's only one house there, so nobody is
16:49:07 going to be using the alley, and hasn't used it.
16:49:10 So I don't see how we could take it if it's never been
16:49:14 used.
16:49:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I agree with you.
16:49:18 When you look at that alley, it runs from Mitchell to
16:49:21 Taliaferro which is a very short block and right to
16:49:25 the west of that what do you have?
16:49:27 The expressway.

16:49:29 And that is not going to be a usable for what we
16:49:33 intend.
16:49:33 And I understand the conversation that we have had
16:49:36 here, and I agree with that, if there was somewhere
16:49:40 else.
16:49:40 But this is not somewhere else. This is in an area
16:49:43 there that is transitional, and risky at best for the
16:49:46 developer to take this risk.
16:49:47 And I want to give that developer the opportunity to
16:49:50 be successful, and in a meaningful way.
16:49:54 I'm not telling you she's not going to be successful.
16:49:56 But that is an intricate part.
16:49:58 Ybor City is close by.
16:49:59 But it's about two miles away.
16:50:05 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a motion for denial.
16:50:07 Nall favor?
16:50:08 Opposed?
16:50:09 Do we have an ordinance of vacating?
16:50:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Could I have an announcement of the
16:50:13 vote?
16:50:14 >>THE CLERK: First I did not get a second on that
16:50:16 motion.

16:50:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena seconded it.
16:50:21 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: We have a roll call?
16:50:23 >>GWEN MILLER: He knows who it was.
16:50:24 >>THE CLERK: Motion did not carry with Miranda,
16:50:34 Miller, Scott, and Caetano voting no.
16:50:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I am going to move the vacation.
16:50:42 And the reason I am going to support Mr. Miranda has
16:50:44 already stated, but he's absolutely right.
16:50:47 It's never going to be used.
16:50:49 And hasn't been used.
16:50:50 Never will.
16:50:51 And this is a very good project.
16:50:56 Very good project.
16:50:57 And I hope we move forward.
16:51:00 It will add a lot to this area.
16:51:01 I will move, Madam Chair, an ordinance vacating,
16:51:06 closing, discontinuing and abandoning a certain
16:51:08 right-of-way all that alleyway lying south of east
16:51:12 forest Avenue, north of east Columbus drive, east of
16:51:15 north fall yeah fer oh Avenue, and west of north
16:51:19 Mitchell Avenue, in Centralia subdivision, a
16:51:24 subdivision in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County,

16:51:27 Florida as more fully described in section 1 of this
16:51:32 resolution.
16:51:32 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor?
16:51:35 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena,
16:51:38 Dingfelder, and Caetano voting no.
16:51:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No.
16:51:42 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: No, Mulhern.
16:51:44 >>> Motion carried with Saul-Sena, Dingfelder and
16:51:47 Mulhern voting no.
16:51:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And the second reading for that?
16:51:52 >>> Second reading and adoption will be on December
16:51:54 6th, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.
16:51:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: With regard to the rezoning, Madam
16:51:59 Chair, there are certain conditions that are
16:52:01 highlighted in yellow, on your agenda which the staff
16:52:04 had highlighted.
16:52:05 I just want to be clear from the petitioner that she
16:52:07 understands it's her desire to have those place on the
16:52:10 site plan between first and second reading.
16:52:13 Is that correct?
16:52:17 She indicates the answer is yes.
16:52:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we have an ordinance?

16:52:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again, council, for your benefit,
16:52:25 those are highlighted in yellow, and with your motion
16:52:27 would ask those additions be read into the record so
16:52:30 they are clear for the staff.
16:52:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move following rezoning
16:52:38 Z-07-70, ordinance rezoning property in the general
16:52:42 vicinity of 708 east Columbus drive and 2702 north
16:52:45 Mitchell Avenue in the city of Tampa Florida more
16:52:48 particularly described in section 1 from zoning
16:52:49 district classification RS 50 residential
16:52:50 single-family to PD planned development, mixed use,
16:52:53 business professional office, store-front residential,
16:52:57 providing an effective date, and staff will include
16:52:58 the following changes, when we come back for second
16:53:02 reading, including the addition of the following, and
16:53:05 note of compliance with the East Tampa overlay design
16:53:07 standards, and/or illustration to address the required
16:53:12 buffers on the north and west of the property
16:53:14 including required hedges, movement of compact spaces
16:53:17 on the western boundary five feet to the west,
16:53:19 correction of the parking data, and waiver number 1 to
16:53:22 reflect required parking spaces as 16 spaces, revision

16:53:26 of the tree table, revision of the green space
16:53:28 calculations, including residential and VUA,
16:53:33 identification of protected radius for all protected
16:53:36 trees, additional landscape notes as identified in the
16:53:38 staff report, correction of the stormwater standards
16:53:40 to include compliance with 4-C, 2-B and C.
16:53:45 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
16:53:47 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
16:53:53 Second reading and adoption will be on December
16:53:54 6th, 2007, at 9:30 a.m.
16:53:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 16.
16:54:19 >>> Item number 16 this evening is Z 07-89 located at
16:54:33 the southwest corner of Bayshore and Bay to Bay
16:54:35 Boulevard.
16:54:36 The petitioner is requesting rezoning from RN 35 to --
16:54:41 RM-35 to PD planned development multifamily.
16:54:45 There are no waivers required with this petition.
16:54:47 Petitioner is requesting to rezone the property
16:54:49 located in the southwest corner of Bayshore Boulevard
16:54:51 and Bay to Bay Boulevard for residential multifamily
16:54:55 to planned development.
16:54:57 The petitioner is proposing the construction of 31

16:54:59 dwelling units, the building is composed of seven
16:55:02 elements of varying Heights stepping up to a maximum
16:55:05 height of 190 feet.
16:55:07 The PD setbacks are as follows.
16:55:10 Front yard along Bayshore Boulevard, 75 feet.
16:55:13 Front yard along Isabella Avenue, 25 feet.
16:55:16 Corner yard along Bay to Bay Boulevard 15 feet.
16:55:20 South side yard, 20 feet.
16:55:22 The proposed design would change two large oak trees
16:55:25 along ratio Boulevard, maintain Patriot's Corner,
16:55:29 including the water and existing sidewalk and provides
16:55:32 a landscape corridor of over 14,000 square feet along
16:55:35 Bayshore Boulevard.
16:55:36 In addition to the design, all right-of-way trees with
16:55:40 the exception of one which will be replaced along
16:55:43 Isabella Avenue.
16:55:45 To direct you to the zoning atlas, I believe you are
16:55:55 familiar we've the site.
16:55:56 It is located at Bay to Bay and Bayshore Boulevard.
16:55:59 As you can see, there's a PD immediately to the north
16:56:02 from office building.
16:56:03 There is RO 1 to the west for another office building

16:56:07 and there is a similar PD diagonal from the site to
16:56:12 the northwest, another office building with parking.
16:56:15 I'll go ahead and share with you the aerial.
16:56:27 And some photos of the site.
16:56:31 This is the subject property is at the corner of Bay
16:56:37 to Bay and Bayshore, looking south along Bayshore.
16:56:48 This is a view looking down Bay to Bay.
16:56:53 And another view looking down Bay to Bay that should
16:56:58 be the office building, restaurant locate on the first
16:57:01 floor there.
16:57:03 Close up of the front of the parcel.
16:57:09 Grand tree is being saved.
16:57:11 This is a view along Isabella Avenue.
16:57:22 There is a parking lot for the office building located
16:57:24 immediately to the west of this site.
16:57:32 Staff has reviewed the application with petitioner.
16:57:39 We have found it is consistent with the applicable
16:57:41 City of Tampa code of ordinances, given the minor note
16:57:45 revisions as stated in the report below and are
16:57:48 corrected on the site plan between first and second
16:57:50 reading.
16:57:51 They are primarily related to tree and landscape

16:57:54 issues, and stormwater technical standards.
16:57:57 You will find my staff report on pages 2, 3 and 4 that
16:58:01 clearly reviews the PD criteria in relationship to the
16:58:05 site.
16:58:05 Staff is available for any questions.
16:58:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
16:58:11 I was reading your report and I couldn't understand
16:58:13 one of the comments.
16:58:14 It's on page 3, right above the 5th paragraph and
16:58:20 it says the RM 35 zoning district, which includes
16:58:24 height setbooks, does not promote a design which is
16:58:27 sensitive to the unique character of the proposed
16:58:30 project site location.
16:58:33 So that's a negative comment, or a positive comment?
16:58:36 It's hard to understand.
16:58:39 >>> That is referring to the existing RM 35 on the
16:58:42 property, which would result in a 25-foot setback
16:58:45 along Bayshore Boulevard.
16:58:51 And I guess the comment refers more to if you took
16:58:54 this RM 35 property on Bayshore, you put this RM 35
16:58:57 property on Dale Mabry, given the unique nature of
16:59:00 Bayshore, the fact that council is getting ready to

16:59:04 adopt the scenic corridor designation along that area,
16:59:07 and our inventory shows 62 feet as the average
16:59:11 setback, the RM 35 at 25 feet, which is not
16:59:16 really sensitive to the location of this site which is
16:59:19 at the corner of Bayshore and Bay to Bay.
16:59:21 >> So you are not talking about this particular
16:59:23 design, you are just talking about the RM 35 criteria?
16:59:26 >>> Exactly.
16:59:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
16:59:38 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
16:59:40 I have been sworn.
16:59:42 The subject property is located at the intersection of
16:59:49 Bay to Bay Boulevard and Bayshore Boulevard.
16:59:53 What's interesting about this particular thing is we
16:59:55 don't have too many of the existing high-rises at the
16:59:58 intersection of a collector road and arterial road.
17:00:01 It's one of the few as far as high-rises go but it's
17:00:05 connected to two major collector roads.
17:00:08 The land use designation of this proposed site,
17:00:12 property to the south, Santiago,
17:00:16 North of the Bayshore Gardens area, and residential
17:00:19 mixed use 35, to the south of Isabella Avenue.

17:00:25 One of the highest is -- this is to the south which
17:00:28 happens to be the current site.
17:00:32 (off microphone)
17:00:34 Bayshore is unique in the aspect that you are able to
17:00:36 have both ends of the spectrum exhibited on this
17:00:40 particular strip.
17:00:42 You have some of the most beautiful homes in the City
17:00:43 of Tampa along Bayshore, and at the same time you have
17:00:47 some of the largest residential towers and have been
17:00:51 able to coexist, not to everyone in the area but they
17:00:57 have coexisted for the last 35 or 40 years.
17:01:01 As far as what the applicant is proposing, going back
17:01:04 to what Ms. Feeley has stated, Mrs. Saul-Sena, under
17:01:07 the R-35 the setback that would be allowed with the
17:01:11 RM-35 would be 25 feet.
17:01:13 Applicant is proposing 75-foot setbacks from Bayshore.
17:01:16 And with that we'll create an additional 66% of green
17:01:19 space.
17:01:21 On the site.
17:01:22 That will contribute to along Bayshore, contribute to
17:01:26 the continued scenic aspect of this wonderful jewel of
17:01:30 the City of Tampa, Bayshore Boulevard.

17:01:32 Planning Commission staff found the proposed request
17:01:34 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
17:01:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
17:01:43 >>> Timothy H. Powell.
17:01:46 I'm president our address is 1016 Tampa Bay.
17:01:51 I would like to take a minute because we have a
17:01:53 PowerPoint presentation.
17:01:54 We arranged it ahead of time.
17:01:56 I would like to make sure we are all connected in.
17:01:58 Just the one.
17:02:00 Just the one.
17:02:01 Yes, I have been sworn in.
17:02:19 But the other two gentlemen who will be presenting
17:02:21 have not been sworn.
17:02:22 >>GWEN MILLER: How many people came in late and need
17:02:24 to be sworn in?
17:02:25 Would you please stand and raise your right hand?
17:02:32 (Oath administered by Clerk).
17:02:48 >>CHAIRMAN: Would you put the PowerPoint on, please?
17:02:53 There it is.
17:02:55 Okay.
17:03:07 Good to go.

17:03:13 I'm the spokes spokesperson for the Citivest
17:03:16 construction corporation, not being an attorney, I am
17:03:19 affirming that I do not render legal advice in the
17:03:21 course of this presentation.
17:03:22 However, I am a court qualified expert witness in land
17:03:25 use.
17:03:26 Citivest is requesting a planned district rezoning for
17:03:28 the property located at the southwest corner of
17:03:30 Bayshore and Bay to Bay Boulevard.
17:03:33 As staff has presented this PD request clearly meets
17:03:37 the site plan control district under section 27-321
17:03:41 and 27-327.
17:03:43 327.
17:03:44 I will be presenting this rezoning request in a format
17:03:47 of a comparative design study, presenting the PD
17:03:52 zoning request of a 31 unit condominium with an
17:03:55 integrated 70 space parking structure at a height of
17:03:58 190 feet, which will later be compared to the existing
17:04:02 RM-35 permitted site development plan, utilizing city
17:04:06 code regulations for a 31-unit condominium with an
17:04:09 accessory 70-space parking structure at a height of
17:04:13 120 feet.

17:04:14 Two designs utilize the same site dimensions, have the
17:04:17 same unit and parking space count.
17:04:20 Each of these two designs are driven by the same code
17:04:23 criteria, excepting Heights, yet produce radically
17:04:29 different results.
17:04:30 PD is 190-foot height will be shown to have a
17:04:32 significant open space design.
17:04:37 Since the PD is not achieving greater density, nor
17:04:39 some other type of added entitlement other than
17:04:42 height, I want to give a summary of how the two
17:04:45 designs evolve.
17:04:45 In 2006-2007, the city initiated the scenic corridor
17:04:50 designation process for Bayshore and held a series of
17:04:53 public works attended by concerned citizens and
17:04:56 council members.
17:04:57 Prior to the workshop, Citivest bill Robinson started
17:05:01 the R-35 permitting process, yet became involved in
17:05:04 the workshop when they began.
17:05:06 He found that he could not isolate himself from being
17:05:09 influenced by the planners, citizens and individual
17:05:12 council members involved in the corridor study that he
17:05:16 chose to be a part of.

17:05:17 His initial involvement in the workshop was as a
17:05:20 reluctant property owner, protecting his existing
17:05:22 entitlements, which he involved into an active
17:05:26 supporting role for the betterment of a public asset.
17:05:29 While permitting the site understood the RM-35 zoning,
17:05:32 he continued to revisit the site development
17:05:35 potential, under scenic corridor concept.
17:05:37 He realized, unfortunately, that an RM 35 on Bayshore
17:05:43 is the same as an RM 35 on Dale Mabry.
17:05:46 It does not take into account the unique physical
17:05:49 characteristics of the Bayshore corridor.
17:05:52 From a business perspective he saw real world economic
17:05:55 advantages of replanning his RM 35 design by treating
17:05:59 the structure and accessory parking as a flexible mass
17:06:03 compressing the building's footprint and increasing
17:06:05 the site.
17:06:06 Co-actually lessen the ground levels impact and
17:06:10 increase one of the site's limited resource, that of
17:06:13 landscape open space, which directly addresses the
17:06:17 corridor study's goals.
17:06:19 Before you is a model of the PD development, placed on
17:06:24 a rendered site plan.

17:06:26 You're welcome, by the way, to pass it around.
17:06:29 It's passible.
17:06:31 Citivest is seeking a PD incentive zoning request.
17:06:34 They are requesting the city grant air right
17:06:38 entitlement in exchange for Citivest providing ground
17:06:43 open space.
17:06:44 In other words air for dirt W.the PD having a 36%
17:06:47 building coverage and a 64% open space.
17:06:52 Right now, I'll go ahead and turn over the
17:06:54 presentation to Joe Galia who will go through a to you
17:06:59 PowerPoint presentation of the building.
17:07:02 >> Joe GALEA, architect.
17:07:13 As an architect I would like to talk more about the
17:07:15 unique characteristics of the building and howl we
17:07:17 will be perceived by the public.
17:07:19 There are several factors in considering design of the
17:07:22 building.
17:07:24 In the end, if the building complied with zoning
17:07:27 guidelines and satisfies the program, one could say
17:07:31 it's a successful project.
17:07:33 But I believe a building must also respond to the
17:07:36 unique characteristics of the site, and it must take

17:07:39 into consideration the real life human experience.
17:07:43 These are the unique factors that define the
17:07:45 difference between a co-compliant building and a great
17:07:48 work of architecture.
17:07:51 The PD process allows us to incorporate these factors.
17:07:55 To better illustrate this design I would like to begin
17:07:57 with the visual presentation of the building.
17:08:01 The first slide is a view southwest looking at the
17:08:04 building as it faces Bayshore Boulevard.
17:08:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Could we have it on the monitor,
17:08:09 please?
17:08:10 I don't believe it's on the monitor.
17:08:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
17:08:12 It's on now.
17:08:13 Go ahead.
17:08:15 >>> I designed the building, by being glass it's going
17:08:21 to reflect sky, going to create a lot of interest as
17:08:24 one looks at it.
17:08:26 The curves will reflect light as one perceives it as
17:08:31 they surround the bill building.
17:08:34 There's really no front or back to this building.
17:08:36 It's a sculpted form.

17:08:38 Its shapes are segmented.
17:08:40 The building was designed so it would look slender to
17:08:42 the eye.
17:08:46 There's 306-degree views from inside as well as
17:08:49 outside.
17:08:50 In looking at the site, I felt that the corridor was
17:08:55 the most important thing because it's on Bayshore
17:08:56 Boulevard.
17:08:58 Looking up and down the Boulevard, I know it's a great
17:09:03 landscape.
17:09:03 So my first reaction was put the building back as far
17:09:06 as I could, to actually respect that corridor.
17:09:12 In this other design that is down below, this is a
17:09:16 design that I offered for the RM-35 version.
17:09:21 It shows the 25-foot setback, and it shows basically
17:09:25 the building filling up the site.
17:09:29 The best way that I felt that we could really look at
17:09:33 what's going to happen if we build this building would
17:09:35 be to compare it to a RM-35 building.
17:09:41 This view here is actually a photograph.
17:09:43 It's taken about 100 feet north of the property line.
17:09:46 And it's looking south.

17:09:51 On the left you will notice the building is pushed
17:09:53 back, and it is -- it's 75 feet from the property
17:09:58 line.
17:10:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I ask you a question on that
17:10:02 before we change this line?
17:10:04 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dingfelder?
17:10:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't see anything particularly
17:10:08 unattractive about the glass part.
17:10:12 When I look at the right-hand side, my right-hand
17:10:14 side, the 120-foot building, okay, on the right side,
17:10:20 I don't see anything particularly unattractive about
17:10:23 the glass part that looks like perhaps it starts maybe
17:10:27 50 feet back or so.
17:10:28 But the little two-story concrete bunker-looking
17:10:34 thing, obviously is intentionally made to look really
17:10:39 ugly along Bayshore to make your point.
17:10:42 But putting that aside, what is the function of that
17:10:45 little two-story thing?
17:10:48 >>> Well, to answer your question, right now it's
17:10:51 shown as stucco and glass to perhaps blend in with the
17:10:54 streetscape of Bayshore.
17:10:57 It could be glass.

17:10:58 And even if it were glass, it would still be a
17:11:01 structure that would be 25 feet back.
17:11:04 >> I understand that.
17:11:04 But what's going on in that two-story pedestal?
17:11:08 >>
17:11:08 >> The first floor is parking and the second floor is
17:11:11 residential.
17:11:11 >> Okay.
17:11:15 And is there any reason that you couldn't lap off that
17:11:18 two-story part and take it to the rear of the
17:11:20 property?
17:11:22 Because I can't see what's happening on the rear of
17:11:25 that.
17:11:26 What's that, the Isabella side?
17:11:28 >>> My answer to that is right now, in order to get
17:11:31 the 31 units and stay within the setbacks, we need to
17:11:37 fill up the site the way it is shown right now and
17:11:41 still maintain the program.
17:11:42 >> Okay.
17:11:47 So, in other words, did you do a design on the
17:11:50 Isabella side of this for us?
17:11:52 >>> Yes.

17:11:53 If I could go back to the site plan.
17:11:58 Otis a bell aside you will see that the setback is
17:12:02 essentially the same takes PD.
17:12:03 So it still has a full lot coverage.
17:12:09 But parking.
17:12:10 >> So my question would be, then, everybody knows PDs
17:12:15 exist.
17:12:16 You're coming in for a PD.
17:12:17 Why wouldn't Tau this entire 120-foot building, okay,
17:12:23 and slide it back to the Isabella line, which we are
17:12:30 capable of doing for you as a PD.
17:12:31 And you still have the 120-foot building, you still
17:12:35 have your 31 units.
17:12:37 Because you built them in.
17:12:39 And yet you have maintained the Bayshore buffer, and
17:12:41 you have encroached on Isabella.
17:12:44 >>> Well, if I could, it would still not comply with
17:12:47 the setbacks.
17:12:48 >> Right.
17:12:48 But we have the ability to waive the setbacks in a PD,
17:12:51 which you know.
17:12:56 I'm asking the architect.

17:12:57 Because I'm just wondering from an architectural
17:13:00 perspective if we took that 120-foot building design
17:13:03 that you have there and just slid it back towards
17:13:04 Isabella, then everything would still work.
17:13:08 >>> Well, no, but I would have to -- and keep the
17:13:10 two-story on Bayshore?
17:13:13 >> Yes.
17:13:14 >>> But that would not respond to the corridor.
17:13:17 It would still be a two-story structure, 25-foot back
17:13:21 from the property line.
17:13:22 >> It wouldn't be 25 feet back.
17:13:24 Right now you have it at 25 feet.
17:13:25 But it looks like you have 25 feet back on Isabella.
17:13:29 I'm say field goal you slide it back, slide the whole
17:13:31 thing back, then you have 50 feet on Bayshore, zero on
17:13:34 Isabella, nobody cares about Isabella except maybe the
17:13:36 folks in the apartment there but I'm sorry.
17:13:38 But most people care about Bayshore more.
17:13:41 I'm just wondering if that's something feasible that
17:13:44 an architect could do.
17:13:45 >>> Well, there is very limited turning radius
17:13:51 requirement for the trucks.

17:13:51 >> A little louder, I'm sorry.
17:13:53 >>> Back there, there is a very limited turning radius
17:13:57 requirement for the loading of the trucks. In fact
17:13:59 that complies with the local traffic laws.
17:14:01 So that pretty much sets the setbacks of the base at
17:14:06 that location.
17:14:06 >> Did Tau a real serious look at the possibility of
17:14:09 doing way just described?
17:14:12 Did you spend a lot of time looking at that?
17:14:13 >>> I spent a lot of time on this, yes.
17:14:16 >> No, spent a lot of time looking at the scenario
17:14:19 that I just described, of sliding this thing back
17:14:21 toward Isabella and leaving it at 120 feet?
17:14:24 >>> I did not look at that.
17:14:25 >> Okay, thank you.
17:14:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, continue.
17:14:33 >>> Going back to this slide, this is about 120 feet,
17:14:36 as I said.
17:14:37 And what I wanted to show was what the person would
17:14:40 actually experience walking down Bayshore Boulevard or
17:14:43 even driving down Bayshore Boulevard.
17:14:44 If you notice, this is a computer software drawing

17:14:47 where both buildings are set on the site as per the
17:14:50 site plan.
17:14:50 And if you look at the two tops, there is not a
17:14:54 dramatic difference in height in this picture.
17:14:56 And the reason is because the PD pushes back 75 feet
17:15:02 at 190 feet versus 120 feet pushed back 50 feet.
17:15:07 It's all about perception of the pedestrian.
17:15:13 As you move south, this is now at the corner.
17:15:16 It's about 30 feet from the corner.
17:15:19 And way wanted to show was again the experience one
17:15:23 goes through when they walk up and down Bayshore.
17:15:25 On the PD, the landscape is very inviting.
17:15:28 The building is set back where it's not imposing,
17:15:32 versus on the RM-35 even if it were all glass, do you
17:15:36 have parking at grade level.
17:15:42 If I turn at round and started looking north on the
17:15:46 same side of the street, this slide on the left PD
17:15:50 shows that the main building actually has a grand
17:15:54 setback.
17:15:54 Views up and down, particularly that building on
17:15:56 Bayshore, is maintained.
17:15:58 This view by the way is about at the property line.

17:16:03 In comparison, the RM-35 shows again the street wall
17:16:08 is there.
17:16:08 There's a minimum amount of setback.
17:16:10 And what you really see at the moment is more of a
17:16:14 parking garage.
17:16:16 The last slide is moving up the site, again feeling
17:16:21 the preservation of the corridor, the trees, versus
17:16:25 the interruption of the corridor, and the predominance
17:16:29 of the streetscape.
17:16:33 >>> Continuing on.
17:16:41 I want to list what Citivest and city gets from the PD
17:16:45 incentive zoning request.
17:16:47 The Citivest advantages of the PD design, one, becomes
17:16:51 an asset to Bayshore corridor.
17:16:53 Two, retains Patriot's Corner.
17:16:56 Three, that the smaller footprint with the less
17:17:00 impact.
17:17:00 Four, increased landscape open space achieving
17:17:03 marketable amenity status.
17:17:06 Five, enhanced site lines at lower and upper floors.
17:17:09 Six, design suppression of the parking structure.
17:17:12 And seven, tree preservation along Isabella Avenue.

17:17:17 And last, eight, its qualifications as a LEED project.
17:17:23 City advantages of the PD design, one, maximizes
17:17:26 Bayshore scenic corridors, landscape open space, two,
17:17:30 retains patriot's corner, three, obtains visually
17:17:34 accessible open space and indirect economic benefit of
17:17:37 a visually enhanced public space.
17:17:39 Four, increase Bayshore setback to 75 feet, which is
17:17:43 three times the code, and 20% increase over the
17:17:46 current average setback for all Bayshore structures of
17:17:50 62 feet as per city staff survey.
17:17:53 To answer councilman's Dingfelder's question, though,
17:17:58 even if you were able to add another five or ten feet
17:18:01 you are not going to even come close to the 75-foot
17:18:04 plus the fact that he minimized the problem, the
17:18:06 design problem on the backside.
17:18:08 You have got to have a service entrance.
17:18:09 The problem with a service entrance, you have to have
17:18:12 clear space.
17:18:13 So, therefore, you have to have a certain amount of
17:18:16 setback in order to be able to get the trucks,
17:18:18 et cetera, on the backside of the building.
17:18:22 Five, closed parking structure is a benefit to the PD,

17:18:25 design to the city.
17:18:26 The close parking structures shielded from Bayshore
17:18:30 Boulevard.
17:18:31 Six, the compressed building footprint with more green
17:18:35 and open space and less impervious surfaces.
17:18:38 7, tree preservation along Isabella Avenue.
17:18:41 Only one 13-inch tree South Carolina removed on
17:18:43 Isabella under the PD.
17:18:45 And eight, again, it's an advantage to the city, you
17:18:49 are encouraging LEED certified development.
17:18:52 Citivest has also constructed a model of the R-35 --
17:18:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
17:19:00 Point of order.
17:19:01 I've got point of order.
17:19:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If it's a point of order that's
17:19:09 relevant.
17:19:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I do it with Mr. Powell's
17:19:14 comment.
17:19:14 Point of order on Mr. Powell of the comment.
17:19:16 Mr. Powell, you indicated earlier you have been
17:19:19 qualified and qualified and numerous times over land
17:19:22 use over your long career, correct?

17:19:24 >>> Yes, sir.
17:19:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But I would also presume perhaps
17:19:29 that you are not qualified as an expert in
17:19:32 transportation issues, correct?
17:19:34 >>> No, sir.
17:19:35 >> Okay.
17:19:36 Because what you testified to a little while ago, in
17:19:39 regard to the service entrance and trucks and that
17:19:42 sort of thing, you might have a transportation person
17:19:44 here who could corroborate that.
17:19:46 But I wouldn't want council to be misled into thinking
17:19:49 that you are an expert on transportation issues.
17:19:50 >>> No, but I comment on urban planner site plan
17:19:55 standpoint, not as a transportation engineer.
17:19:58 >> Thank you.
17:20:01 >>> Okay.
17:20:02 The results -- and unfortunately this is somewhat
17:20:06 different than what was presented earlier.
17:20:08 The result of the RM-35 design had not been
17:20:12 deliberately slanted to produce a preferable and
17:20:15 nonpreferable design.
17:20:17 The RM-35 design will, one, provide a viable economic

17:20:21 return on the same number of units as the design, two,
17:20:26 retain the patriot's corner.
17:20:27 Three, will force an open parking structure to be
17:20:30 pushed toward Bayshore and spread out over the entire
17:20:34 site, to obtain maximum site utilization due to the
17:20:38 restricted height.
17:20:39 Four, not embrace the spirit and intent of the
17:20:42 Bayshore scenic corridor plan amendment.
17:20:44 Five, reduce the southern side yard to 7 feet instead
17:20:48 of the PD 20 feet.
17:20:49 Six, eliminate of one, 26-inch oak on Bayshore's front
17:20:54 yard and all but one of the existing trees on ace bell
17:20:57 a.
17:20:57 Seven, had difficulty qualifying as a LEED project due
17:21:00 to site coverage.
17:21:03 This shown RM-35 plan is as permitted by the city
17:21:07 under project number 291560, control number 53133,
17:21:13 with the city approval date of July 13th, 2007.
17:21:18 In conclusion, each professional planner involved in
17:21:21 the review of this project, both public and private,
17:21:25 supports this PD zoning submittal, providing written
17:21:28 documentation that it meets the purpose of the city

17:21:31 code and the comprehensive plan, and further the
17:21:34 stated purpose of the Bayshore scenic corridor
17:21:37 regional attracter plan.
17:21:40 As a 35-year experienced planner and urban designer in
17:21:43 Tampa, having been brought to Tampa to design the
17:21:46 original Franklin Street mall, with a working
17:21:49 knowledge of Bayshore Boulevard, to me, this submittal
17:21:52 is simple to analyze.
17:21:54 The current RM-35 height limitation forces the
17:21:58 building's footprint to spread out to achieve the most
17:22:02 efficient use of a costly piece of property.
17:22:05 The PD raises the allowable height, allowing the
17:22:11 footprint to become smaller and less of an impact to
17:22:14 the surrounding property, with the resulting green
17:22:17 space and open space becoming a visual and physical
17:22:21 asset to Bayshore Boulevard.
17:22:23 It's Hite does not set a precedent as eight other
17:22:27 Bayshore structures are as tall or taller than this
17:22:30 PD.
17:22:32 My involvement in this rezoning is also my planning
17:22:34 endorsement to what I consider a far superior design
17:22:38 than currently allowed under the existing zoning.

17:22:42 I ask you not only to be appropriate administrative
17:22:44 body for the size of the zoning but also to be a
17:22:49 design jury.
17:22:50 You have the power to elevate a code compliant, good
17:22:54 RM-35 development to a creative, great PD site plan
17:22:59 controlled zoning.
17:23:01 Since an RM-35 development does not come before
17:23:04 council, you have the power to influence the
17:23:07 development on this corner under this PD development.
17:23:11 I'll go ahead and turn over the presentation to Mr.
17:23:14 Robinson.
17:23:16 >>> We are not sure how much time we have left because
17:23:28 of the question and answer section.
17:23:29 >>GWEN MILLER: How much time left?
17:23:31 >> A half a minute?
17:23:37 Did you stop for my questions?
17:23:39 How much time do you need?
17:23:52 >>> About two minutes.
17:23:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move to waive the rules and
17:23:59 give him three more minutes.
17:24:00 >> Motion and second.
17:24:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If you give petitioner three minutes

17:24:21 you have to give three more minutes --
17:24:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Sir, with an opportunity to be heard,
17:24:26 anybody can speak on the issue, as long as they are
17:24:31 not a part of the petitioner's presentation for a
17:24:33 total of three minutes.
17:24:35 There's a speaker waiver form that has seven people to
17:24:38 waive that they can speak up to ten minutes until they
17:24:40 have had the opportunity to be heard.
17:24:42 I should also point out under the new rules, requests
17:24:45 for additional time may only be granted if the party
17:24:48 making the request establishes to the satisfaction of
17:24:50 council that additional time is necessary to afford
17:24:52 procedural due process.
17:24:53 Council members shall by majority vote grant or deny
17:24:56 the request and determine the additional time, if any.
17:24:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we should give him three
17:25:01 more minutes to make sure they have plenty of due
17:25:02 process.
17:25:03 That's my motion.
17:25:05 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
17:25:09 You have three more minutes, sir.
17:25:10 >>> Thank you very much, council.

17:25:12 My name is William Robinson.
17:25:14 I have been sworn.
17:25:16 With Citivest construction, 3014 west PALMIER Avenue.
17:25:24 Citivest constructed many types of various buildings
17:25:27 over 20-plus years in Tampa.
17:25:29 Everything from single-family residential, multifamily
17:25:33 office, our latest project we just complete was on the
17:25:37 corner of, in West Tampa on the corner of Columbus and
17:25:40 MacDill, the fountain plaza retail center.
17:25:43 So I have been in Tampa many years, providing
17:25:47 employment.
17:25:47 And in construction services.
17:25:50 My plan to speak this evening during this point, the
17:25:56 neighborhood support that I have been able to enjoy,
17:26:01 but first I wanted to announce that I'm really pleased
17:26:05 that we are going to be going for gold LEED
17:26:08 certification.
17:26:09 We need 39 points in our pro forma draft.
17:26:13 We have already accumulated 43 points.
17:26:17 We accumulate a lot of points from the sustainable
17:26:21 sites category with the PD, existing habitat and tree
17:26:30 canopy and providing a higher ratio of open space.

17:26:34 We are really excited about that.
17:26:38 We have all the other five categories, sustainability,
17:26:45 and we reviewed every one of them, and I feel
17:26:47 confident that we are going to make gold without much
17:26:51 of a problem.
17:26:56 I want to bring attention to the Elmo.
17:27:03 How do you turn the Elmo on?
17:27:05 >>GWEN MILLER: It's on.
17:27:05 Take the hand mike.
17:27:09 >>>
17:27:12 The captions are blocking.
17:27:23 >> There you go.
17:27:25 I made a presentation.
17:27:31 You will see in the packet that there's a summary of
17:27:34 neighborhood meetings and contacts.
17:27:35 I gave a presentation to the Bayshore Gardens
17:27:38 neighborhood association.
17:27:39 I gave a presentation to Bayshore square condominium
17:27:43 on Isabella, as well as all the other individual
17:27:46 property owners that you see highlighted on the
17:27:48 summary of neighborhood contacts.
17:27:50 If you look at the Elmo, all those in the subject

17:27:55 property is blue.
17:27:55 All those in green are people who have no objection to
17:27:57 the PD, or who have expressed actual support for it,
17:28:02 affirmatively.
17:28:04 Together, people that I contacted which are all in the
17:28:08 summary and the backup data that I sent you e-mail
17:28:11 contacts, that they have been contacted some numerous
17:28:14 times, and have not responded at all.
17:28:17 I had one person who did respond but they took no
17:28:20 position, and one objection.
17:28:22 We have an active amount of support in the area, the
17:28:36 PD concept, that people overwhelmingly said that they
17:28:41 did not like the idea of no respect for corridor on
17:28:45 Bayshore Boulevard.
17:28:50 >>> I'll reserve any further comment for rebuttal.
17:28:54 Thank you for the extra time.
17:28:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
17:28:56 would like to speak on item 16?
17:28:58 Anyone want to speak on item 16?
17:28:59 Would you please line up and come up and speak?
17:29:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: A reminder if you do speak tonight
17:29:06 and do wish to use the speaker form, please hand it up

17:29:10 before you begin speaking.
17:29:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Please come up and speak if you are
17:29:13 going to speak.
17:29:21 >>> Karen Crawford, 1406 South Moody Avenue and I have
17:29:25 been sworn.
17:29:26 I'm here on behalf of the Bayshore Gardens
17:29:28 neighborhood association.
17:29:29 On October 13th, Mr. Robbins met with our board
17:29:31 and presented his rezoning plan.
17:29:33 We requested his presence at our annual neighborhood
17:29:35 meeting on Tuesday night, October 16th, in order
17:29:39 for him to present his plan and listen to neighborhood
17:29:41 concerns and answer questions.
17:29:43 At the conclusion of his presentation, we encouraged
17:29:45 all those in attendance to call or e-mail with any
17:29:48 concerns and attempt to make tonight's council hearing
17:29:51 to express their position.
17:29:53 A notice was sent to all members on record to notify
17:29:57 them of this hearing.
17:29:59 A mixed use neighborhood of condos, apartment
17:30:02 complexes, townhouses and single-family homes.
17:30:06 Comments and concerns expressed by the residents

17:30:08 focused on traffic, stormwater, lack of sidewalks,
17:30:12 near to our streets.
17:30:13 Issues are all exacerbated by zoning requests that
17:30:16 cretin creases in density.
17:30:18 This parcel because it's currently zoned for 31 units
17:30:22 and the PD request no increase in density beyond that
17:30:25 31 units.
17:30:26 We all recognize and must accept that any development
17:30:28 on a currently undeveloped lot will increase density
17:30:31 and affect the neighborhood.
17:30:34 The proposed PD has advantages over the current
17:30:36 zoning, it does respect the Bayshore scenic corridor,
17:30:39 providing more green space, and preserve more of the
17:30:42 tree canopy, provides more impervious surface which is
17:30:45 very much needed to address our stormwater concern.
17:30:47 The mechanical services has been located to the rear
17:30:52 of the property in order to be preserve a pedestrian
17:30:54 friendly streetscape.
17:30:55 We discussed with Mr. Robinson the neighborhood
17:30:57 concerns about traffic backup for cars turning onto
17:30:59 Bayshore, from Bayshore onto Bay to Bay, the
17:31:02 intersection of Bay to Bay, Isabella and the Crosstown

17:31:04 is a quagmire complicated by the fact that the lanes
17:31:09 are not clearly marked and drivers are confused to who
17:31:11 has the right-of-way.
17:31:11 We suggest that traffic calming measures including a
17:31:14 pork chop to force traffic coming out of this
17:31:16 development to only be able to turn right.
17:31:18 Any other traffic calming or directional would be
17:31:21 helpful.
17:31:22 Board has received very few e-mails and phone calls
17:31:24 concerning rezoning, and there is no clear consensus.
17:31:28 Therefore we are not taking a formal position but have
17:31:30 encouraged those residents of strong feelings for or
17:31:32 against the rezoning to attend this hearing.
17:31:34 And I'll be glad to answer any questions and
17:31:37 appreciate your consideration.
17:31:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
17:31:40 Next speaker.
17:31:43 (off microphone).
17:32:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Come to the mike.
17:32:04 >>> With the map of the area, here's all the
17:32:14 statistics that were compiled for the scenic corridor,
17:32:20 presentation.

17:32:23 This is the only information that I could gather.
17:32:27 >> Put your name on the record first, please.
17:32:28 Back up.
17:32:30 >>> Marilyn Weekley, 2619 Bayshore, I'm a member of
17:32:35 the Bayshore Gardens association.
17:32:39 I also have handouts for City Council.
17:32:41 I have a written presentation, because I want to be
17:32:56 certain to include a lot of facts.
17:32:58 But one thing that's very curious to me, tonight we
17:33:01 heard the representative for Citivest talking about
17:33:04 how much support Citivest gave to the scenic corridor
17:33:09 ideals, and was very supportive of it, and I
17:33:13 questioned that simply because, well, in June, before
17:33:18 the Hillsborough county Planning Commission and then
17:33:21 right here in these chambers, June 28th, Citivest
17:33:27 in the voice of John Grandoff, legal counsel, was
17:33:30 opposed to the scenic corridor idea.
17:33:34 At any rate, my presentation in the e-mail, I am going
17:33:37 to read it.
17:33:38 It's got a lot in it.
17:33:39 During the scenic corridor proposal hearing of
17:33:42 6-28-07, councilman Miranda asked a very appropriate

17:33:46 and direct question, which led me to the quest for
17:33:50 information.
17:33:51 Councilman Miranda wanted to know how many properties
17:33:53 on Bayshore could be developed for high-rises.
17:33:56 It would seem that this question should have received
17:33:58 a very quick and straightforward answer.
17:34:00 The answer he received was both disturbing and
17:34:03 intriguing.
17:34:03 It was disturbing because it demonstrated that no one
17:34:06 involved in the conservation of Bayshore Boulevard had
17:34:10 ever anticipated it.
17:34:12 And just what the buildout possibilities are which
17:34:16 seemed to be essential knowledge to have before any
17:34:19 PDs could be given that could impact future high-rises
17:34:22 by virtue of precedent.
17:34:24 To the best of her abilities, after some studies of
17:34:27 the map, Abbye Feeley answered 26.
17:34:30 And please refer to the text I gave you.
17:34:33 I decided to research this T statistics.
17:34:36 Let us emergency that all of -- imagine that all of
17:34:41 these 26 properties were sold to condominium
17:34:42 developers and those developers were sitting in this

17:34:44 room tonight requesting the same 60% increase over the
17:34:48 zoning height of Citivest is requesting.
17:34:51 Would the City of Tampa be willing to see concrete
17:34:55 rise above Bayshore?
17:34:57 Would the joining neighborhood ever see the morning
17:34:59 sun again?
17:35:00 Would you explain to them that this project on Bay to
17:35:02 Bay was the last one that you are willing to give a
17:35:04 height concession to?
17:35:05 Attempting to provide council with all of the exact
17:35:08 statistics of how many properties there are with the
17:35:11 potential for condominium development, zoning
17:35:14 permitted height, plus whatever percentage of
17:35:16 additional height may be requested is a daunting task.
17:35:20 I wish to thank Ms. Feeley for the study she provided
17:35:23 and for her patience in explaining the statistics and
17:35:26 the time that she spent with me in my quest for what I
17:35:29 consider would be a very easily obtainable
17:35:31 information.
17:35:33 Ms. Feeley stated that the city had never undertaken
17:35:35 this task in estimating less buildout because of the
17:35:39 immense manpower and time required.

17:35:41 After poring over these many calculations, being
17:35:44 overwhelmed by the various factors in each parcel, I
17:35:48 came to one conclusion.
17:35:49 With my time restrictions this task is impossible to
17:35:52 accurately accomplish.
17:35:54 Yet one fact emerged.
17:35:58 Well, I'm sorry.
17:35:59 >>GWEN MILLER: How much more do you have, a lot?
17:36:02 >>> No.
17:36:03 Just a half page.
17:36:03 >> A half a page?
17:36:05 All right.
17:36:05 Read quickly.
17:36:06 >>> Thank you.
17:36:10 More questions that arose from this endeavor than
17:36:13 answers.
17:36:13 And both questions asked, are there single-family
17:36:15 homes with multifamily zoning yet on Bayshore?
17:36:19 Yes.
17:36:19 Are there multifamily development that is could be
17:36:21 redeveloped as high-rises even without even having to
17:36:24 ask for rezoning?

17:36:26 Yes.
17:36:26 Are there high-rise that is could be demolished and
17:36:29 developed even higher?
17:36:30 Yes.
17:36:30 Is it possible to purchase aggregate properties and
17:36:33 develop them with high-rises? Yes.
17:36:35 Do some of these properties extend beyond the Bayshore
17:36:38 frontage and into neighborhoods?
17:36:39 Yes.
17:36:40 Can any of the above questions be answered
17:36:43 definitively this evening to the maximum buildout of
17:36:45 each?
17:36:46 No.
17:36:47 With all of these possibilities hanging in the air,
17:36:49 how can we consider a precedent setting rezoning in
17:36:52 order to add more height to the fragile Bayshore
17:36:57 skyline which is now teetering between alternating
17:37:00 spots between masses and front and side.
17:37:03 I appreciate council members asking questions, to get
17:37:05 answers to some of this before you go ahead with a PD
17:37:08 and set another precedent for future development.
17:37:10 Thank you.

17:37:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
17:37:12 Next speaker.
17:37:14 >> Good evening.
17:37:32 I'm George deacon.
17:37:34 I live at 1408 south DeSoto.
17:37:37 I'm a resident of Tampa.
17:37:39 And I am a registered professional engineer for over
17:37:43 30 years.
17:37:45 However, I'm not a landscape expert -- or land
17:37:48 planner, actually.
17:37:50 I just want to make a few comments.
17:37:54 I'm not against development.
17:37:56 I think a developer has engendered many good ideas as
17:38:03 he changing project responds to the neighborhood
17:38:06 comments.
17:38:07 I think, however, it's not appropriate to have an
17:38:11 upzoning, increase the height 60 feet, while we are on
17:38:17 the verge of having the scenic corridor study, with
17:38:24 the scenic corridor study.
17:38:26 I guess the main thing I want to talk with you, my
17:38:31 experience in traffic, is that the access to the site
17:38:36 to me is very dangerous.

17:38:37 I checked the staff report, the traffic report, and
17:38:45 Melanie Calloway signed off, said there's no traffic
17:38:50 study required, only asking for 31 units.
17:38:53 But yet the traffic is having access to and from Bay
17:38:56 to Bay Boulevard, and near Bayshore, traffic that
17:39:00 wants to go west on Bay to Bay, cuts across Bay to
17:39:03 Bay, traffic that wants to come in from Bayshore up
17:39:06 Bay to Bay and turn left into the site.
17:39:11 There's, I think, access in and out of the project on
17:39:14 Bay to Bay, near Bayshore is a real problem.
17:39:19 I think it's going to cause accidents.
17:39:22 The city in theory has to look at their transportation
17:39:27 exception area.
17:39:28 They don't have to look at volume of traffic.
17:39:30 But this is a different concept.
17:39:32 This is site access.
17:39:33 This is safety and traffic operation.
17:39:35 It doesn't have anything to do with the volume.
17:39:38 It's the same volume whether it's on 35 or PD, whether
17:39:43 it's site access, safety and traffic operation.
17:39:46 I think it's a real concurrence, with access that
17:39:48 close on Bay to Bay and Bayshore.

17:39:51 Thank you for your time.
17:39:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Sir, I was talking with -- in the
17:40:02 area.
17:40:03 What are your feelings about the compatibility with B
17:40:04 the proposed development?
17:40:05 >>> I would think -- I'm not against development.
17:40:15 I think development should be by standard guidelines.
17:40:22 I can't speak for anybody what he knew by he knew the
17:40:32 standard and I think he should follow those.
17:40:34 >>CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
17:40:34 Next speaker.
17:40:37 >>> Elizabeth Johnson, 1819 Richardson Place.
17:40:47 One thing I'm really excited about is the idea of
17:40:50 potentially working with this developer, because I
17:40:53 think that he is trying to do some tradeoffs.
17:40:57 But I think that to hear this right now is too much
17:41:01 too soon.
17:41:01 We are on the eve of working out the scenic corridor
17:41:05 designation.
17:41:06 You all asked Mr. Deacon and Ms. Weekley and myself
17:41:11 and many other citizens to participate in that.
17:41:14 And so I would urge you to wait and see what those

17:41:17 corridor impacts entail.
17:41:20 And then we can look more closely at Bayshore.
17:41:23 Another thing I talked to you about is transfer of
17:41:27 development rights.
17:41:27 I met with David Smith earlier this week, that I
17:41:31 predicted a year from now we wouldn't be any closer to
17:41:33 transfer of development rights than we were last year
17:41:36 in 2006.
17:41:38 And he laughed.
17:41:39 And really we are not there yet.
17:41:41 But how ironic that we have parcels in Bayshore and
17:41:47 the historic district, we have parcels on Bayshore
17:41:50 where there are some people in support of some working
17:41:53 together.
17:41:54 And yet we have no mechanism in the city to make
17:41:59 outcomes together and work together and protect these
17:42:03 fine beautiful scenic corridors that we have.
17:42:09 Getting a handle on this as Ms. Weekley said is so
17:42:12 essential when Mr. Miranda asked those essential
17:42:15 questions several months ago, Ms. Feeley came back and
17:42:21 said there are 37, talking about on Bayshore, that
17:42:23 have a single-family zoning of RM 35 or higher.

17:42:28 Eleven of those are currently zoned PD.
17:42:30 So if you keep track of those would be 26 that are not
17:42:33 currently site plan controlled but could be developed
17:42:36 that way.
17:42:38 I beg you, please, let's get a handle on what we are
17:42:42 going to do with Bayshore.
17:42:46 I have three little girls, and I wonder if Bayshore is
17:42:48 going to look anything like anything else but
17:42:52 high-rises.
17:42:52 And I want to quote from the scenic corridor that you
17:42:56 all are considering.
17:42:59 It talks about several multifamily condominiums
17:43:04 high-rise structures have been developed through
17:43:06 Bayshore's history both in the northern and central
17:43:08 section.
17:43:09 These perform a unique experience for those that
17:43:14 utilize support or recreation, congregate in adjacent
17:43:17 uses, et cetera.
17:43:18 It also talks about the single-family homes in the
17:43:21 historic structures on the Bayshore.
17:43:23 But if you let this go through you get the domino
17:43:27 effect.

17:43:27 What does the agent say?
17:43:29 He said eight others are as tall or taller.
17:43:32 So give us this leeway.
17:43:34 Well, what does that mean when we get a ninth and a
17:43:37 tenth and an eleventh?
17:43:42 One thing I do agree with the agent is this: You have
17:43:44 the power to influence the development on the corner.
17:43:47 And you have the power to influence the development on
17:43:51 all of Bayshore.
17:43:52 Please don't ask us to come to scenic corridor
17:43:55 meetings and get our pictures taken and sit around a
17:44:00 table and chat and not get a handle on this problem.
17:44:06 Two weeks before you are about to look at scenic
17:44:09 corridor designation is not the time to let another
17:44:12 exception through.
17:44:13 There may be ways we can work with this developer.
17:44:16 I'm really excited about his willingness to work now.
17:44:21 Maybe there are some ways we can work through all of
17:44:23 Bayshore.
17:44:23 But let's not do it right now.
17:44:26 Two weeks before you're on the cusp of doing something
17:44:29 great.

17:44:29 Thank you.
17:44:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
17:44:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Johnson, thank you.
17:44:35 Ms. Feeley, when she made her staff presentation,
17:44:38 referenced the scenic corridor process that you and I
17:44:44 and many others, Ms. Saul-Sena, went through, in terms
17:44:47 of the public participation.
17:44:50 'N and Ms. Feeley referenced the setback issue.
17:44:54 I didn't hear her reference the height issue.
17:44:58 And I could have sworn, and your memory is better than
17:45:00 mine, but I could have sworn that we had discussions
17:45:04 in the public about the height issues along the
17:45:07 Bayshore.
17:45:08 And I recognize, as I said earlier, everything we do
17:45:11 up here is a trade-off.
17:45:13 But clearly it looks like they are looking to trade,
17:45:17 you know, the setback for the height.
17:45:19 That height was one of the things we discussed as part
17:45:21 of the scenic corridor, wasn't it?
17:45:23 >>> That's right.
17:45:24 And you can't ignore one for the other.
17:45:26 And I guess that's a central point.

17:45:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Ms. Johnson, could you speak to the
17:45:34 question of compatibility, specifically in terms of
17:45:37 height?
17:45:39 >>> Well, I think that some of the work you have
17:45:42 already done speaks to that.
17:45:43 It talks about, on the chart, it talks about most of
17:45:46 the single-family buildings on Bayshore are two-story.
17:45:51 Most of the multifamily buildings now have an average
17:45:54 building height of eight.
17:45:56 Now, you heard that there's other parcels that have a
17:45:58 potential for going multifamily.
17:46:00 So we are looking at compatibility right now.
17:46:06 My dad was stationed at MacDill Air Force in the late
17:46:10 '70s. You could go down Bayshore and see all those
17:46:12 beautiful homes.
17:46:13 I used to dream up stories about it.
17:46:14 That is compatibility.
17:46:15 But if we allow an 8th, a 9th, a 10th
17:46:19 high-rise, like I said before, what is compatible will
17:46:22 be what we don't want.
17:46:23 >> What did you reference?
17:46:27 What are you referring to?

17:46:28 >>> This was given to Ms. Weekley by Ms. Feeley, the
17:46:30 Bayshore Boulevard tractor designation prepared by the
17:46:35 City of Tampa growth management services.
17:46:37 And I'll put it into the record along with the
17:46:39 transcript that I read.
17:46:41 And also a letter from Sam Gibbons that I read to you
17:46:44 before about how Bayshore used to look.
17:46:47 Thank you.
17:46:49 >>GWEN MILLER: You wanted to say something?
17:46:56 Let Ms. Feeley speak first.
17:46:59 >>> Council, I would like to verify that pursuant to
17:47:01 scenic corridor policies that were transmitted to the
17:47:05 Department of Community Affairs height was not handled
17:47:07 within the current scenic corridor language.
17:47:09 I did want to make that clarification.
17:47:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Correct.
17:47:13 And I didn't say it was.
17:47:14 I said it was something we had discussed as a
17:47:16 community, and that we still might address down the
17:47:19 road.
17:47:20 And I think we left the opportunity, as I recall the
17:47:23 language was broad enough for to us leave the

17:47:26 opportunity to address height as we go into an
17:47:28 ordinance.
17:47:31 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Yes, I believe confirmed that in the
17:47:34 corridor we did, in the scenic corridor policies and
17:47:37 regional tractor that's coming before you in two weeks
17:47:40 we did address height, and we did not in those current
17:47:43 policies.
17:47:43 We did leave that up, should an overlay be developed
17:47:46 for those items to be handled.
17:47:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
17:47:55 >>> Jeanne Holton, 16318 McGannry road and a past
17:48:00 president of the Historic Hyde Park neighborhood
17:48:02 association.
17:48:04 Grew up, lived my whole life within two miles of the
17:48:07 Bayshore.
17:48:08 Three generations of women at the academy of holy
17:48:12 names.
17:48:12 I have a long history of looking at the Bayshore.
17:48:15 But things change and I didn't really come to speak
17:48:18 for or against this project, as a matter of fact.
17:48:20 I think I came as a former member of the Bayshore task
17:48:24 force that councilman Dingfelder, just as a concerned

17:48:28 citizen that wants to support communities that spend
17:48:31 an unbelievable amount of time studying these kinds of
17:48:34 things in general.
17:48:36 I'm not talking about this particular project.
17:48:38 But I am talking about the Bayshore.
17:48:40 And we spend hours and hours and days and weeks, and
17:48:43 New Mexico my case years, trying to improve the
17:48:46 quality of the community.
17:48:48 And we would like to think that that time means
17:48:51 something.
17:48:52 And so I have not participated in the Bayshore
17:48:54 corridor meeting.
17:48:55 But I'm very anxious to see what they have come up
17:48:58 with for all their time and effort and I would like
17:49:01 the opportunity to have a chance to be heard and all
17:49:03 the people that work in that process to be heard so
17:49:06 that we could have a plan of the Bayshore, and not
17:49:09 something piecemeal and haphazard but rather an
17:49:13 overall plan of what this city wants Bayshore to look
17:49:16 like before we go on to eight, nine, ten, eleven, how
17:49:20 many we grow as we increase that without really having
17:49:22 that overall plan in front of us.

17:49:24 So speaking for the community, I hope you will maybe
17:49:26 consider waiting until they hear those results before
17:49:29 you make a decision on this.
17:49:30 Thank you.
17:49:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
17:49:38 >> Matt Wood, I live at 2902 West Angelos, Palma Ceia
17:49:43 Park.
17:49:43 And I want to say I think that the proposed change
17:49:47 gives a much more aesthetically pleasing project as
17:49:52 you are going down buy shore, and I walk down that way
17:49:54 with, the setback it's much better than what you would
17:49:56 have if you went RM 35 as it stands.
17:50:01 That's all I have to say.
17:50:02 Thank you.
17:50:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question.
17:50:04 I think we have a new policy, and this goes to
17:50:08 everybody.
17:50:08 If there's any relationship between you or the project
17:50:11 or you or the developer or anything like that, or are
17:50:14 you just here as an interested citizen?
17:50:15 >>> I'm speaking just as a citizen.
17:50:17 >> I mean do you have a relation with the project?

17:50:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Professional?
17:50:22 >>> Well, I am a banker and I work with the gentleman.
17:50:24 >> You're Mr. Robinson's banker?
17:50:27 >>> Yes.
17:50:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
17:50:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, do you want rebuttal?
17:50:35 >> Thank you for asking.
17:50:39 >>> William Robinson again.
17:50:41 I would like to speak briefly to the come pat --
17:50:45 compatibility issues that have been raised, by Mrs.
17:50:49 Saul-Sena and Mr. Dingfelder I believe.
17:50:51 It's quite clear from the staff report that the RM 35
17:50:53 design is not compatible with the Bayshore corridor.
17:51:00 We have a permitted site plan for that design.
17:51:04 And I hope -- I'm not in any way trying to-believe me,
17:51:10 I'm not trying to feel like we are strong arming or
17:51:13 anything like that in, lay terms.
17:51:15 We have a project number.
17:51:16 We have a site plan.
17:51:18 Approved site plan for the RM 35 which is in front of
17:51:22 you.
17:51:22 Mr. Dingfelder, I'm a little surprised you're

17:51:27 encouraging, if I may be so bold, you're encouraging,
17:51:32 if I understood you correctly, to take this building
17:51:34 and put it right on the back property line.
17:51:37 The whole building.
17:51:40 How would be there any access?
17:51:44 No driveway or nothing?
17:51:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER:Co right into a high-rise like they
17:51:48 do in New York City.
17:51:50 You come right into the high-rise.
17:51:55 >> There's no way. This is your setback.
17:51:58 There's a traffic engineer that sits up here, and I'm
17:52:03 surprised that he didn't object to that when he talks
17:52:05 about turning on the Bay to Bay.
17:52:07 Okay.
17:52:09 That's a very provocative approach to traffic.
17:52:12 It really is.
17:52:14 Nevertheless, the compatibility issue is one that has
17:52:20 been discussed and reviewed by staff.
17:52:23 And there is no question, people I have talked to in
17:52:29 the neighborhood, that with a 75 and ultimately a
17:52:37 106-foot set back between the 17th and 18th
17:52:41 floor is a much better plan than the RM 35.

17:52:45 And if that's not what is desired then we'll just
17:52:47 proceed with the RM-35.
17:52:50 I'm okay with that design as well.
17:52:52 Thank you.
17:52:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Robinson, I have a great
17:53:00 proposal.
17:53:01 It's a compromise.
17:53:01 What if you build the PD but only to 120 feet?
17:53:05 That would make everyone happy.
17:53:07 You would have a much more attractive product, and we
17:53:10 would have something that is not so tall.
17:53:13 But the paper that Marilyn weekly sent around, the
17:53:18 average height of multifamily on Bayshore is 108 feet.
17:53:23 What you would be doing would be within your
17:53:25 development entitlement and it would be higher than
17:53:28 most of the high-rises along Bayshore.
17:53:31 What we object to is the height.
17:53:36 >>> Height, just height?
17:53:42 >> When you compare the RM-35 design, which everyone
17:53:45 agrees is unattractive, people wouldn't buy it as
17:53:49 willingly as the PD plan which is much more
17:53:51 attractive, but too tall.

17:53:53 So what I'm suggesting to you is that you go forward
17:53:57 with the PD proposal, but stop it at 120 feet.
17:54:01 That would be the compromise that would be the
17:54:04 preferable one.
17:54:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
17:54:10 >> I would like to know we thought about that.
17:54:13 >>> Of course you just mentioned it.
17:54:16 But are you saying that we would be allowed the
17:54:25 footprint, that is 120-foot high, that respects the
17:54:35 corridor, in other words, 75-foot setback?
17:54:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You would have your PD plan, the
17:54:45 one that's before us today, but instead of being 190
17:54:49 feet tall it would be 120 feet tall.
17:54:54 The PD.
17:54:57 The smaller more elegant footprint, but a lesser
17:55:02 height.
17:55:08 >>> I can't get anywhere near 31 units in 120 feet.
17:55:12 Plus I have three levels of parking underneath that.
17:55:15 Okay?
17:55:16 >> If it were shorter you just maybe only need two.
17:55:21 >>> I have three levels of parking beneath the
17:55:23 structure.

17:55:25 I have two levels that I need for support, storage,
17:55:30 generators, pumps, electric rooms.
17:55:41 There's 12 floors.
17:55:43 That's 24 units.
17:55:46 One penthouse is
17:55:50 I have six more units.
17:55:55 All those things I told you would support them.
17:55:59 The first three levels are parking.
17:56:05 Some sort of reduction.
17:56:17 But the point is, I still need square footage, enough
17:56:24 height, since I am divvying up all this area here that
17:56:28 I am not building, to amass square footage of units
17:56:33 on.
17:56:34 And I'm not asking any more than 31 units but I need
17:56:37 31 units.
17:56:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: May I say one more thing?
17:56:40 I think the most elegant building in Tampa right now
17:56:44 is at the base of the Meridian street bridge to Harbor
17:56:47 Island on the east side.
17:56:49 It is a 12-story building.
17:56:51 Every floor its own unit.
17:56:54 Each unit is very expensive, very beautiful, very

17:56:57 exclusive.
17:56:58 I know it's profitable.
17:56:59 But I'm suggesting to you if do you something smaller
17:57:02 and more elegant.
17:57:03 And respect the 120-foot height element.
17:57:06 I think the elegance you have achieved in terms of the
17:57:08 smaller footprint, I'm suggesting fewer, more --
17:57:14 >>> I can't sell -- with the prices of land and
17:57:18 everything, I cannot move six or seven or eight units
17:57:23 out of the -- the economics are not there. I wish
17:57:27 they were.
17:57:28 And that's part of the whole rationale.
17:57:36 To be able to amass the 31 units.
17:57:40 The unit footprint is only about 6800 square feet.
17:57:45 I am only going to be about 70% efficient, meaning I
17:57:48 am only going to deliver a little over 4800 square
17:57:51 feet.
17:57:52 4900 square feet.
17:57:59 Electric, air conditioning, et cetera.
17:58:00 So the units are only going to be about 25 to 2600
17:58:03 square feet as it is.
17:58:06 So the trade-off was, either reduce the footprint, and

17:58:12 roll the property back, bump up the height because if
17:58:14 you squeeze them it goes up, obviously.
17:58:18 Or we play by our rules, and stick with the RM 35
17:58:25 design, which is what we did with the Construction
17:58:26 Services Center and got a site plan.
17:58:29 This is not a phantom building, an ugly building just
17:58:29 to make a point.
17:58:29 >> It seems that way.
17:58:34 >> But, no, this is a viable project.
17:58:44 Actually the project number is in the record.
17:58:59 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (off microphone) Madam Chairman,
17:59:00 point of order --
17:59:00 >> It's 291560 is the project number.
17:59:00 >> -- if they're done, could we move on? (Off
17:59:00 microphone)
17:59:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, just a reminder, that
17:59:10 petitioner has approximately three minutes more of
17:59:12 rebuttal time, just so he's aware if he wishes to take
17:59:15 it.
17:59:16 >>> I would like to respectfully just close out.
17:59:20 It will probably only take me two minutes.
17:59:25 The point is in closing to my rebuttal to counter the

17:59:27 opposition statement, I offer the following as
17:59:30 provided within your city staff reports, and I quote:
17:59:34 The project promotes a greater setback along Bayshore
17:59:36 Boulevard which is consistent with the city's recent
17:59:39 scenic corridor and regional attractor designation as
17:59:43 well as the combination of setbacks along Bay to Bay,
17:59:45 Isabella and the southern property line.
17:59:47 Another quote:
17:59:48 The RM 35 zoning district, which includes height
17:59:52 setbacks, does not promote a design which is sensitive
17:59:55 to the unique nature of the proposed site location,
17:59:58 and, additionally, they quote, although the RM 35
18:00:02 would result in a maximum building height of 120
18:00:04 feet -- and this is most important -- it would also
18:00:07 result in a 25-foot setback along Bayshore Boulevard
18:00:10 and a 7-foot side yard setback along the southern
18:00:14 property boundary, which is far more incompatible with
18:00:17 the existing built environment and scenic corridor
18:00:21 designation than the additional 70 feet of building
18:00:24 height that's being requested.
18:00:26 And to kind of follow up on the question and answer
18:00:30 between councilwoman Saul-Sena.

18:00:33 Obviously, I think we are all forgetting what the
18:00:36 definition of incentive zoning is.
18:00:39 Incentive zoning isn't you give up everything and give
18:00:42 us what we want.
18:00:43 It is a trade-off.
18:00:45 And what you are asking him to do is stay at 120 feet,
18:00:49 and still give you the open space.
18:00:54 All that is not incentive zoning. All that is, no,
18:00:55 give us what we want, and that's it.
18:00:58 There's in a compromise.
18:00:59 So there is no incentive zoning.
18:01:02 I want to go back.
18:01:03 My client is asking for an incentive zoning request
18:01:07 here.
18:01:07 They are not asking for we'll give you everything and
18:01:10 not get anything in return.
18:01:11 It's incentive zoning.
18:01:13 That's the definition of incentive zoning.
18:01:16 Been around since I think the 70s outs of New York
18:01:18 City.
18:01:20 It is a very, very viable process to use.
18:01:23 If you want to go ahead and build RM 35, he's directed

18:01:27 me to say, he'll go ahead and do it.
18:01:29 I just feel from a planner, I feel, what a loss.
18:01:32 I mean, what a loss.
18:01:33 You have the opportunity to come up with a darn good
18:01:37 project.
18:01:39 And the attitude is, sorry, just go build it.
18:01:42 I'm sorry.
18:01:43 Thank you very much for your time.
18:01:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
18:01:45 Mr. Dingfelder.
18:01:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A couple of questions to staff.
18:01:49 Wilson Stair?
18:01:51 Come on down.
18:02:00 Wilson, why is it you look rather nauseous whenever I
18:02:04 call your name?
18:02:05 >>> Wilson Stair, manager architectural review, urban
18:02:08 design division, and I have been sworn.
18:02:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Where is the model of the squatty
18:02:17 building?
18:02:21 Sort of.
18:02:23 Can you give that to me?
18:02:24 Thank you.

18:02:25 You heard my question earlier about sliding that
18:02:33 shorter, 120-foot building, and all the appurtenances
18:02:38 back towards Isabella.
18:02:39 There had been objection from Mr. Powell saying he
18:02:41 couldn't function with deliveries.
18:02:44 You know, this council has been approving buildings in
18:02:48 Channelside and downtown, they have virtually zero
18:02:53 setbacks, and go straight up, I mean except for the
18:02:56 sidewalks.
18:02:56 But other than that they go straight up off the
18:02:58 property line.
18:02:59 And so there must be a way to build these high-rises,
18:03:02 you know, without these additional exposed to the sky
18:03:07 spaces.
18:03:07 >>> That's correct.
18:03:09 >> So theoretically, could a developer, this
18:03:14 developer, if they wanted to, slide this 120-foot
18:03:18 building that had 31 units in it, if we gave them a
18:03:22 PD, could they slide it back and make it work?
18:03:29 They might have to Jimmy around a little bit but could
18:03:32 they make it work?
18:03:33 >>> I believe it could be done.

18:03:34 Normally, they have loading docks, and they'll give a
18:03:39 certain amount of depth inside the building, so trucks
18:03:42 can back in and go from there.
18:03:45 Or they can orient the trucks the way they come in
18:03:51 that are more parallel to the building, too.
18:03:53 I mean, it's like a drive aisle.
18:03:58 But there are alternative ways that can be functional
18:04:02 and slide the building back.
18:04:04 Yes, sir.
18:04:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
18:04:11 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Mr. Dingfelder, we did work -- there
18:04:15 are 21 right-of-way trees, substantial can open a
18:04:19 longus a bell a that provides buffering.
18:04:21 And one of the reasons we reworked those from the
18:04:24 original submittal on this plan was in order to
18:04:27 preserve every one of those trees.
18:04:29 We have been able to do it and just lose one, in which
18:04:33 tree replacement was going to be provided.
18:04:35 So I think part of that design along Isabella is
18:04:38 sensitive to the existing tree canopy that is there.
18:04:41 That was determined to be substantial.
18:04:42 >> I'm familiar with the trees and none of them are

18:04:45 grand trees.
18:04:47 And your department gives permits right and left to
18:04:50 eliminate protected trees all over this city, all the
18:04:53 time.
18:04:53 So I appreciate your comment.
18:04:55 I don't agree it with but I appreciate it.
18:04:59 I guess, Julia, let me ask one another question
18:05:01 because I want to show the record is abundantly clear.
18:05:06 And this has to do with reasonable beneficial use and
18:05:08 the PD versus the Euclidean zoning, okay?
18:05:13 Right now, they have Euclidean zoning at RM-35, that
18:05:17 can allow 31 units, and they have said on the record
18:05:19 that they can build it today.
18:05:21 That's your understanding?
18:05:22 >>> That's what I heard.
18:05:24 >> From your legal opinion is that a reasonable
18:05:26 beneficial use today, without the PD that they are
18:05:28 asking for?
18:05:29 >>> If you are asking whether or not, if City Council
18:05:33 dense this whether or not I thought there was a taking
18:05:37 claim, it's my legal opinion from way heard today that
18:05:39 there is not a taking claim, the question would be one

18:05:44 of code requirements, and the general --
18:05:47 >> So you are not concerned about a taking issue or
18:05:49 about property rights or about Burt Harris?
18:05:52 >>> With the Burt Harris plan, that has a lower
18:05:56 standard.
18:05:56 But -- and I never want to say 100%, but if you win or
18:06:02 lose a case that's not fair to any client.
18:06:04 But I feel good that as made part of this record I am
18:06:11 comfortable there is not a cognitive taking and a Burt
18:06:15 Harris claim.
18:06:16 You may litigate it, and I can't tell you, however, I
18:06:21 don't feel an ultimate result which would come out of
18:06:24 the denial.
18:06:24 >> Based on a property right.
18:06:27 And the property right is a right to build at 120 feet
18:06:31 with 31 units, which they have a right to do. But
18:06:34 they don't have a property right to the PD, is that
18:06:37 correct?
18:06:37 >>> That's my understanding of the law.
18:06:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Julia, my question, I have some kind
18:06:47 of new questions, as a new person.
18:06:56 This is probably for Abbye do. We use incentive

18:06:59 zoning?
18:06:59 I haven't heard that as a policy before.
18:07:03 >>> The PD zoning process does allow for alternative
18:07:06 design, with a site plan and petitioner can ask for
18:07:10 waivers, if site plan requirements, site requirements,
18:07:15 that would fall under the Euclidean district.
18:07:18 So the Euclidean is what you see in the RM-35.
18:07:21 The PD does allow for waivers to that, which -- the PD
18:07:29 concept is incentive zoning.
18:07:31 It's not meeting the standards that are currently
18:07:32 under the traditional zoning district.
18:07:35 >> And then RM-35 would allow, on this site, 31 units
18:07:42 maximum?
18:07:43 >>> If the RM 35 allows for 35 units to the acre, and
18:07:46 based on the land area, it would be 31.
18:07:50 >> So that's the maximum allowed, not the required --
18:07:54 it's not a requirement that you be able to -- have
18:08:00 that many units.
18:08:01 >> No.
18:08:02 There is no minimum requirement under the RM 35.
18:08:04 >> Okay.
18:08:06 Thank you.

18:08:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Madam Chair, I very patiently
18:08:11 listened to all the details, when I was taking a
18:08:13 little snack there so I could keep my energy level up.
18:08:18 What I've heard on all sides is, A, they can build
18:08:22 what they have now on the first lesser height of 120
18:08:27 feet, 31 units, with a setback of 25 feet on the
18:08:32 Bayshore, which is something that the corridor review,
18:08:36 and all adhere to protect the integrity of the
18:08:39 Bayshore would not look so glamorous.
18:08:51 Other side you have 31 units where they set back 35
18:08:55 feet which would satisfy the beautiful Bayshore.
18:09:11 We are not talking anything that's insurmountable
18:09:15 other than height.
(TIME CODE ADJUSTMENT)
18:09:22 So the question we have in my mind anyway, you go with
20:09:23 31 units which you have now, or do you go with 31
20:09:26 units, and disclosed smaller footprint of which you
20:09:32 get more open space, but you get -- you lose 70 feet
20:09:36 or more height.
20:09:37 And I think that's the question that I think looking
20:09:41 at in the that way.
20:09:45 I remember Mr. Buckhorn and I used to discuss, council
20:09:47 would be a great job if I didn't have Thursday nights.

20:09:52 When I talked about I was going to run for office the
20:09:55 first thing he told me is, remember Thursday nights.
20:09:57 So I'm remembering Mr. Buckhorn right now.
20:10:00 And it goes, no matter if it's Bayshore or East Tampa
20:10:04 or West Tampa or South Tampa, Jackson Heights, Belmont
20:10:06 Heights, Drew Park, not one of them, no matter what
20:10:14 I'm out of money on the zoning, it could be a
20:10:17 ten-by-ten room and somebody is going to like it,
20:10:20 somebody is not going to like it.
20:10:22 And these are the things that I look at.
20:10:24 But that being said, that's the question that I pose
20:10:27 to myself.
20:10:29 And it's a 50-50 feat deal.
20:10:32 You have what you can get right now with 31 units.
20:10:35 And you lose 50 feet of setback on Bayshore.
20:10:40 So I leave it up to see what happens.
20:10:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby?
20:10:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I just want to remind you
20:10:47 that the purpose of rebuttal is to have the petitioner
20:10:50 have the opportunity to address any testimony or
20:10:54 opportunity to respond to anything that has been
20:10:57 raised from an evidentiary standpoint.

20:11:00 There were questions that were asked of staff
20:11:04 subsequent to rebuttal.
20:11:06 It would be my recommendation that the petitioner be
20:11:09 allowed to respond in rebuttal.
20:11:11 If there is no further testimony that council wishes
20:11:14 to seek, if there's no further questions that need to
20:11:16 be asked, he be allowed to have his rebuttal.
20:11:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: He did.
20:11:20 >>GWEN MILLER: But he's saying that staff, he can have
20:11:27 rebuttal to that.
20:11:28 Come on and rebuttal.
20:11:30 >>> It will take less an minute.
20:11:33 I can move with taking 20 feet more off the building
20:11:36 and leave it exactly the way it is with the setbacks.
20:11:41 75-foot setbacks.
20:11:45 The building just as it is, instead of 190, we'll go
20:11:48 to 1 0.
20:11:50 That's 50-foot.
20:11:52 Of the 50-foot increase and the 120.
20:11:56 It's also 50-foot more than -- almost one to one.
20:12:03 It's 25-foot.
20:12:08 50-foot, correct?

20:12:10 So I'm basically saying, setting back one foot, one
20:12:16 foot of height.
20:12:17 One to one.
20:12:18 I can live without those two but I can't -- I'm
20:12:25 embarrassed to say how much this property cost.
20:12:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question on that offer.
20:12:32 Or that suggestion.
20:12:35 So you're talking about 170 -- 170 feet maximum
20:12:39 height.
20:12:40 Whenever we get into height, there's always like is
20:12:42 that the height of the top of the building or the
20:12:44 height of the top of the air conditioning structure or
20:12:46 the height of the little tower?
20:12:48 I'm sorry?
20:12:49 >>> It's the height to the main room as described in
20:12:53 section 27 -- he.
20:12:54 >> The height of the roof.
20:12:56 What is on top of the roof?
20:12:57 >>> An elevator, a shaft, equipment.
20:13:05 There will be equipment.
20:13:05 I mean, he have building -- those are exempted from
20:13:08 height in the code.

20:13:10 Under 27 --
20:13:11 >> I just want to make sure we are all speaking the
20:13:13 same language.
20:13:14 Okay.
20:13:15 >>> The parapet can be no more than five feet high.
20:13:18 Above that, a flat roof.
20:13:22 A par a met is no more than five foot.
20:13:28 >> Usually staff in the report tells us about prior
20:13:30 rezoning.
20:13:33 This property was here in front of this council, a
20:13:36 prior council, for a PD request about a year and a
20:13:38 half, two years ago.
20:13:41 >>> Yes, sir.
20:13:42 >> And we turned it down.
20:13:43 >>> Yes, sir.
20:13:44 But it was a much different project.
20:13:46 It was 41 units.
20:13:53 Also a parking garage for the public use.
20:13:56 Also granting that the whole front yard become a
20:14:01 public park.
20:14:01 And I think that was the consensus, because everybody
20:14:08 started raising issues of what if a car blows up in

20:14:10 the parking garage, and on and on and on.
20:14:12 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
20:14:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
20:14:15 >> Second.
20:14:20 Council, do you want to read the ordinance and see
20:14:22 where it goes?
20:14:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me take a stab at this, if I
20:14:26 have the floor.
20:14:28 I'm one that's willing to consider compromises.
20:14:30 But again, I don't think we are at the point for
20:14:33 compromise right now, because what the gentleman said
20:14:36 from Citivest, Mr. Robinson, I believe his name is, is
20:14:39 not what we have in front of us.
20:14:41 We have two options.
20:14:42 We have an option of 120 feet, 31 units with, a
20:14:45 25-foot setback on Bayshore, A.
20:14:52 That was on the right side of the presentation, I
20:14:53 believe, that was presented to us, on the left-hand
20:14:56 side you have a much sleeker, nicer looking building
20:14:59 in my opinion.
20:15:00 I'm not an architect or anything of that nature.
20:15:02 But it's 190 feet or 70 feet larger, taller, than the

20:15:07 one on the right which is the one that's 120 feet.
20:15:10 So what we have in the proposal that's been presented
20:15:12 is 170 feet with a nicer, sleeker looking building
20:15:18 with a setback of 75 feet.
20:15:20 Am I correct so far?
20:15:24 So I don't have that.
20:15:27 I don't see how I can vote today on something that I
20:15:30 don't have.
20:15:30 >>CHAIRMAN: Ms. Feeley?
20:15:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand that.
20:15:36 >>> Council, if it is your pleasure to make that
20:15:38 motion and the petitioner has agreed to that, you
20:15:41 could likely -- like wave done in previous, go for
20:15:45 first reading, with the condition after you make that
20:15:48 motion that it come back with the building redesigned
20:15:51 at 170 feet.
20:15:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.
20:15:56 Although I don't live in Bayshore, I remember the
20:16:00 beautification of Bayshore when the streetcar used to
20:16:02 run through it, in the center.
20:16:05 When I used to get a bicycle to Ballast Point park to
20:16:10 go fishing.

20:16:10 And it's just a gem not only in this city, I guess
20:16:13 maybe one of the 20 most beautiful sights in the
20:16:16 country when you look at living and so forth.
20:16:19 So just to see where we are at, to find out how we
20:16:22 feel, I think it's incumbent upon somebody to make a
20:16:26 motion for 170 feet, as requested by the petitioner
20:16:29 and see how council feels.
20:16:32 I make that motion for approval of 170 feet.
20:16:37 >>CHAIRMAN: Second?
20:16:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Dies.
20:16:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Dies for lack of second.
20:16:42 Does anyone else have a proposal?
20:16:44 Ms. Mulhern?
20:16:46 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to say that the
20:16:50 architect has done -- designed a really beautiful
20:16:54 building, and the PD, the building on the left.
20:17:03 And I think this architect could certainly build
20:17:05 something as attractive that would fit into this RM-35
20:17:11 category.
20:17:13 And I think it would be quite possible to sell those
20:17:17 units if it just didn't look so quite unattractive on
20:17:21 the Bayshore side.

20:17:22 And I think that Mr. Stair and Mr. Dingfelder pointed
20:17:28 out have given some good suggestions for how you could
20:17:32 redesign it.
20:17:33 And I just feel that this is a very interesting way to
20:17:40 approach a request for a zoning change, by giving an
20:17:47 attractive option and unattractive option.
20:17:50 And I don't know.
20:17:53 I don't favor that kind of decision, having to be made
20:17:57 like that.
20:17:58 But I just would like to suggest that this could
20:18:00 certainly work.
20:18:02 And I don't see a reason to allow this incompatible by
20:18:08 height building that will certainly continue the
20:18:13 precedent of allowing more and more height on
20:18:16 Bayshore.
20:18:17 And especially as many of the neighbors suggested
20:18:20 tonight were working on creating a scenic corridor
20:18:26 guidelines, and we might as well wait.
20:18:30 And could you hopefully come back with something that
20:18:32 would fit within those guidelines.
20:18:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Is that a motion?
20:18:43 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Madam Chairman, I would like to

20:18:45 move the petition as presented, 190 feet, 31 units as
20:18:50 present before this body.
20:18:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Read the ordinance.
20:18:54 Is that a motion?
20:18:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: May I speak one more time?
20:18:59 I understand what you're saying, Mr. Caetano.
20:19:02 But I don't think that's going to fly.
20:19:07 When 170 feet fly.
20:19:10 190 feet is 20 feet higher.
20:19:12 Only thing I'm trying to get something moving here,
20:19:14 because like you he had said earlier, we have been on
20:19:18 this thing for an awful long time and I don't mind
20:19:20 doing that.
20:19:21 But the motion is on the floor.
20:19:23 I think the only other motion you have is the other
20:19:27 RM-35 presently, where the one has got the design and
20:19:30 approval for construction.
20:19:34 I don't think we have any other option, other than
20:19:36 that option to construct whatever this corporation has
20:19:40 worked out with the building department.
20:19:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm going to move to deny.
20:19:47 On the following grounds.

20:19:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
20:19:49 >> I believe the PD is inconsistent with section
20:19:52 27.321(6), that promotes development with surrounding
20:20:00 neighborhood pursuant to the evidence that's in front
20:20:02 of us.
20:20:04 I believe clearly the evidence that I heard over and
20:20:07 over and over from some very, very intelligent people
20:20:12 is that this sets a bad precedent.
20:20:15 There are currently 26 parcels up and down the
20:20:18 Bayshore that could be coming in front of us like this
20:20:21 today.
20:20:21 And each one of them represents 120 feet today,
20:20:25 without a PD.
20:20:26 Okay?
20:20:27 And these a lot of building and a lot of height.
20:20:29 And I think that if we open the door now and start
20:20:33 allowing these PDs, you know, they might not build
20:20:37 this thing for five years or ten years or 20 years.
20:20:39 But 20 years later somebody will say, what was wrong
20:20:41 with that council 20 years ago?
20:20:44 And they set this back precedent of getting higher and
20:20:47 higher.

20:20:48 And pretty soon we look like Chicago on Lake Michigan
20:20:51 there.
20:20:52 I think it sets a bad precedent.
20:20:54 I agree that it's a Domino effect.
20:20:57 I think that currently they have a reasonable
20:20:59 beneficial use of their property, they can build a
20:21:04 120-foot building today, they can build itself within
20:21:06 their existing zoning, it's incompatible.
20:21:10 Mr. Stair testified that they could be more creative
20:21:13 and away from the Bayshore and still stay at 120 feet.
20:21:17 So with all that, if Mr. Shelby thinks that that's
20:21:20 established adequate record for the Florida supreme
20:21:23 court, then we'll go from there.
20:21:25 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
20:21:27 Questions on the motion?
20:21:28 All in favor --
20:21:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may speak on that motion.
20:21:32 I'm not totally against the motion.
20:21:34 But I also can't redesign projects when I'm here.
20:21:37 I either got to approve them or reject them.
20:21:39 May I ask staff a couple of questions?
20:21:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We closed already.

20:21:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm not going to reopen the public
20:21:47 hearing.
20:21:47 I don't want Mr. Caetano to get upset.
20:21:51 But what I'm saying is, in my view, they can certainly
20:21:58 build what they have now.
20:22:00 There has been no evidence.
20:22:02 I don't know of any waivers that were requested under
20:22:05 the original setback of 25 feet, with 120-foot
20:22:11 ceiling.
20:22:12 And since I can't ask anybody, I don't know if I'm
20:22:15 right or wrong.
20:22:16 But so I'll ask the attorney.
20:22:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You're asking for a question of fact,
20:22:22 if it determines whether or not you support the
20:22:23 project, then I suggest you reopen the public hearing.
20:22:28 I can't opine as an -- you're the finder of fact.
20:22:33 If you need that, you have to reopen if you feel it
20:22:37 necessary for to you do so.
20:22:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Then I move we reopen the public
20:22:41 hearing.
20:22:41 >> Second.
20:22:42 (Motion carried).

20:22:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: May I continue on that line of
20:22:45 questioning?
20:22:46 As you well understand what I just asked, I believe,
20:22:48 do they have the right to build what was on that right
20:22:51 side of this shorter building of the two, 120 feet in
20:22:59 height, 25-foot setback from Bayshore, with how many
20:23:03 waivers are included?
20:23:04 >>> Mr. Miranda, I know the RM 35 they are not allowed
20:23:09 to ask for waivers.
20:23:09 >> So there aren't any waivers at all.
20:23:11 >> There are no waivers asked for.
20:23:13 >> So they comply with the ordinance 100%, that's what
20:23:16 you are saying?
20:23:17 >> yes.
20:23:18 And I have confirmed with construction service that is
20:23:19 it is an improved site plan for construction.
20:23:22 >> So do I read that we are turning down a possibly,
20:23:26 before I vote in my mind, we are going to go and
20:23:33 refuse a zoning based on what has all the approvals in
20:23:41 the city, and meaning the Planning Commission,
20:23:43 yourself, the people at construction services?
20:23:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Construction services hasn't seen

20:23:51 the PD. Where's the other one?
20:23:52 Where is the other model?
20:23:54 >>> The RM 35 model has been approved and is
20:23:59 permitted.
20:24:00 Yes.
20:24:00 >> That's what I'm talking about.
20:24:01 >>> Yes, it is.
20:24:02 >> Thank you very much.
20:24:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
20:24:08 I think that given the state of the market now, if we
20:24:11 are looking at an unattractive project, it's not going
20:24:15 to fly.
20:24:16 And I think what petitioner is attempting to do by
20:24:20 sharing with council something unattractive versus
20:24:22 something attractive, he's trying to obviously get us
20:24:25 to choose the attractive presentation, but it don't
20:24:29 doesn't conform to the existing zoning so he's asking
20:24:31 for a PD.
20:24:32 I think that we are smarter than that.
20:24:34 I think that this council can recognize that we are
20:24:37 being -- when we are being shown something that --
20:24:41 this is not the hot market that it was three years

20:24:43 ago.
20:24:44 There are gorgeous, drop-dead projects that are
20:24:46 sitting there waiting for financing.
20:24:48 In a one is going to rush out and build this RM-35
20:24:52 proposal that's so profoundly unattractive.
20:24:55 I simply think that council is too smart to be
20:24:59 intimidated into trying to not approve this other
20:25:02 thing because they are going to get something ugly on
20:25:06 Bayshore.
20:25:09 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing
20:25:11 again.
20:25:11 >> So moved.
20:25:12 >> Second.
20:25:14 Mr. Shelby?
20:25:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And that motion and second?
20:25:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The motion still stands.
20:25:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
20:25:24 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second for denial.
20:25:26 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda and Caetano
20:25:32 voting no.
20:25:36 >>GWEN MILLER: And Miller voting no.
20:25:39 >>> Correction, motion carried with Miranda, Miller

20:25:41 and Caetano voting no.
20:25:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could we take a five-minute break,
20:25:48 please?
20:25:48 >>CHAIRMAN: Who needs a break?
20:25:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I do.
20:25:55 I'm out of saliva.
20:25:59 >>GWEN MILLER: We'll be in recess for five minutes.
20:26:02 >>CHAIRMAN: Tampa City Council is called back to
20:35:14 order.
20:35:15 Roll call.
20:35:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
20:35:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
20:35:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
20:35:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
20:35:26 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
20:35:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
20:35:33 We are now on item 17.
20:35:34 >> I think the previous petitioner wanted to get a
20:35:43 clarification on the road.
20:35:44 >>THE CLERK: Motion to deny the petition, the motion
20:35:46 carried with Miranda, Miller and Caetano voting no.
20:35:56 >>CHAIRMAN: Number 17.

20:36:01 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Case Z 0-92.
20:36:07 I provided some site plans to Mr. Caetano.
20:36:09 I will ask that if I can have those back at then of
20:36:11 the hearing.
20:36:16 This site is 1202 north governor street.
20:36:23 We were here a little over a year ago on this exact
20:36:26 project that was Z-06-113.
20:36:32 Petitioner is here before you tonight to add a
20:36:36 thousand uses to the project that were not previously
20:36:39 a part of the project.
20:36:43 And rezoned from RM-24 and PD to PD mixed use,
20:36:49 residential, commercial, office, hotel, and school.
20:36:51 The office and hotel uses were not previously approved
20:36:55 uses.
20:37:00 There are seven waivers.
20:37:02 These were all waivers part of the previous PD and
20:37:04 that are being brought for the.
20:37:07 First is to waiver buffer requirements.
20:37:09 Second is the to reduce the protected tree canopies
20:37:12 from 50% to 17%.
20:37:14 The third is to reduce all parking drive aisles from
20:37:17 26 to 24 feet.

20:37:19 Fourth is to allow maneuvering in the right-of-way for
20:37:21 loading.
20:37:22 The fifth was to allow the removal of two grand trees.
20:37:24 The sixth was to waive required buffers adjacent to
20:37:28 vehicle use areas.
20:37:29 And the seventh was to waive required 20-foot vehicle
20:37:32 use area green space.
20:37:34 What I would like to do is direct you to page 3 of my
20:37:37 staff report, and which I compared the uses that were
20:37:41 previously approved, and those proposed.
20:37:44 In the multifamily residential previously approved was
20:37:48 2030 units, proposed is 1513, which is a difference of
20:37:52 517 units.
20:37:55 The office use was previously approved at 59,000
20:37:59 square feet and they are asking for 183,000 square
20:38:02 feet which is an increase of 124,000 square feet.
20:38:07 Commercial use -- commercial retail to go from 50,000
20:38:12 to 85,000 which is an increase of 35,000 square feet.
20:38:15 The additional hotel use will introduce 200 hotel
20:38:19 rooms to the site.
20:38:20 Museum community services remain the same.
20:38:24 The middle school also remain the same.

20:38:26 The project F.A.R. also remains the same given the
20:38:30 reduction of the multifamily units of 2.3 F.A.R.
20:38:38 Just to familiarize you with the site, Central Park
20:38:42 Village, if you know its location given its activity
20:38:45 last year on this site.
20:38:46 If you have been out there recently, you will see that
20:38:49 it's been demolished.
20:38:53 It is just north of the central business district.
20:38:56 There is CBD2.
20:38:59 To the south, CBD1 to the west.
20:39:03 Just a couple pictures of the site.
20:39:10 Prior to demolition.
20:39:13 There's a picture of Meacham school.
20:39:22 And another.
20:39:24 Staff has reviewed and finds the proposal consistent
20:39:28 with all principal city of T Tampa code ordinances.
20:39:35 There are a couple of revisions and those revisions
20:39:37 have been outlined in your agenda this evening, in
20:39:40 order to take care of a couple items other than staff
20:39:44 is available for questions.
20:39:57 >>
20:40:01 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

20:40:03 You have two land use categories for this particular
20:40:09 site, central business district.
20:40:11 It is significantly under the F.A.R. of 3.5 as the
20:40:15 proposed site is 3.3.
20:40:17 Ms. Feeley has already told you about basically what
20:40:22 they are for, a change in the retail, residential uses
20:40:25 to more retail an office uses.
20:40:29 Planning Commission staff finds the proposed staff
20:40:31 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
20:40:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:40:34 >> David Smith, 401 East Jackson Street, 33602,
20:40:42 planner with the law firm of Stearns, Weaver, Miller,
20:40:45 I have been sworn.
20:40:45 This is Central Park Village.
20:40:47 I know many of you remember it.
20:40:50 Those that weren't on council probably heard about it.
20:40:53 I will go forth very quickly.
20:40:56 I know there's a long night still ahead of us.
20:41:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Are you aware of any opposition?
20:41:03 >>> I'm not aware of any opposition.
20:41:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Is anyone here to speak on item number
20:41:07 17?

20:41:14 Did you come to speak?
20:41:15 No.
20:41:16 >>> Basically we are trying to provide the flexibility
20:41:20 on the three high-rise sites.
20:41:22 We have straightened out the street which goes all the
20:41:24 way through to Nebraska.
20:41:25 We have shortened the block which was a concern of
20:41:27 block 11.
20:41:28 We provided for grocery store site.
20:41:30 And so all in all, nothing but positive things.
20:41:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
20:41:36 >> Second.
20:41:37 (Motion carried).
20:41:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm honored to move to rezone
20:41:43 property in the 1202 north governor street and 1225
20:41:48 India street in the city of Tampa, Florida more
20:41:51 particularly described in section 1 from zoning
20:41:53 district classifications RM-24 residential multifamily
20:41:57 and PD planned development mixed use, residential
20:42:00 commercial school, to PD, planned development, mixed
20:42:03 use residential, commercial, office, hotel, school,
20:42:07 providing an effective date.

20:42:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
20:42:10 Question on the motion?
20:42:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We are all really familiar with
20:42:15 this project, which is why we don't need to spend more
20:42:17 time discussing it.
20:42:18 But I just want to say I'm so pleased about the
20:42:21 grocery store, the cut through the block which I
20:42:23 thought was too big to walk around.
20:42:26 I think this is a much improved, more flexible plan,
20:42:29 and I'm glad that -- and now just need the state
20:42:33 supreme court to straighten out what's happening.
20:42:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And I was going to ask that question.
20:42:39 Once this passes it will come back before the CRA
20:42:41 board as well.
20:42:44 I like the concept.
20:42:47 I was out there yesterday, I think it was.
20:42:49 >> Second reading on December 6th.
20:42:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
20:42:52 (Motion carried).
20:42:53 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
20:42:58 Second reading and adoption will be on December
20:42:59 6th, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.

20:43:02 >>CHAIRMAN: Before we go to item 19, Mr. Miranda has
20:43:06 to put something in the record.
20:43:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We all govern ourselves
20:43:11 accordingly, and the next item, number 19 and 20, had
20:43:15 discussion this morning with our City Council
20:43:17 attorney, who advised me that since I have been
20:43:22 noticed as a property owner on the next two items, 19
20:43:25 and 20, my wife and I do have a property in the
20:43:28 adjacent notification area within 250 feet.
20:43:31 So I am going to file the disclosure.
20:43:34 So I will abstain from voting.
20:43:37 >>CHAIRMAN: Ms. Feeley?
20:43:38 >>> Item 19 and 20 that Mr. Miranda is referring to do
20:43:46 function together.
20:43:46 So I know you opened all of the public hearings.
20:43:49 So I am going to present the appeal, and then Ms.
20:43:55 Finney -- Mrs. Karsi, will present the rezoning.
20:43:59 I have some revised staff reports for you.
20:44:16 The appeal before you this evening on V 07-38, at 1106
20:44:25 and 1108 north Howard Avenue, I think I just gave you
20:44:30 mine.
20:44:31 Located at 1106, 1108 north Howard Avenue.

20:44:55 On a special use 1 as we have had several details
20:44:59 lately, pursuant to code, a petitioner must meet all
20:45:03 of the criteria for the special use 1 in order for
20:45:06 that to be administratively approved.
20:45:08 In this case, as you can see in the staff report, on
20:45:15 page 4, that the accessory use under B-1, location of
20:45:26 access drive must be approved by the department of
20:45:28 public works.
20:45:31 If you then go to the top of the page, I'm sorry, two
20:45:35 pages, at the top, section 27-246-J, talks to how
20:45:40 those access points are allowed.
20:45:45 And pursuant to D, no residentially zoned property
20:45:49 exists on the affected segment of a local street where
20:45:52 ingress or egress is proposed for nonresidential
20:45:54 parking lot or garage.
20:45:55 This application did not meet that criteria.
20:45:58 Therefore, transportation would not award the access
20:46:01 to the local street, which is the objection.
20:46:05 What is before you tonight, you do have the ability to
20:46:09 do that.
20:46:13 I show you the site.
20:46:18 The case was Z-07-63.

20:46:23 The site we are talking about where parking is located
20:46:26 right here on Howard just north of Gray Street, I
20:46:34 believe that one of the properties zoned by the
20:46:36 petitioner, one is not -- therefore not to be rezoned
20:46:40 but would be applicable to the special use.
20:46:42 However, given not by having the single-family
20:46:46 residential uses on those sides transportation could
20:46:52 not award that access there.
20:46:58 I would like to speak to the larger rezoning case,
20:47:01 that being the parking lot facility.
20:47:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There's an off-site sign referred
20:47:09 to.
20:47:09 Could you locate that on the map for us?
20:47:12 And do you have a photograph of it?
20:47:13 >> Could you say that again?
20:47:16 >> An off-site sign that was referred to?
20:47:25 >> I don't -- it's on the site plan.
20:47:46 >>> That is located in the middle of the property
20:47:49 along Howard, shown here on the site plan as the
20:47:53 circle.
20:47:57 Right hear on the site plan.
20:47:59 And that is to remain, that sign.

20:48:04 This is a sign for the building to the north of it.
20:48:09 Maybe when the petitioner speaks they can address it.
20:48:13 I believe it's an advertising sign.
20:48:15 Well, my question was, now, we are doing this whole
20:48:17 thing.
20:48:18 It's going to be really beautiful.
20:48:19 Well, I guess this is a question the petitioner can
20:48:22 address, why -- why would they possibly want to keep
20:48:26 that off-site sign there?
20:48:57 >>> Jill Karsi, Land Development Coordination.
20:49:01 You are here for petition Z 07-63 located at 1104,
20:49:06 1202 north Howard Avenue, 2321 and 2323 west Nassau
20:49:12 Avenue, 2311 and 2315 Gray Street, going from a CI
20:49:18 commercial intensive zoning, and RM-16 residential
20:49:22 multifamily zoning to a PD planned development with
20:49:25 office, business professional uses and parking,
20:49:28 offstreet commercial.
20:49:30 The petitioner proposes to rezone the property to a PD
20:49:33 in order to redevelop the site containing a historic
20:49:36 cigar factory with a proposed use of professional
20:49:39 office and off-site parking area.
20:49:41 The site is located within an area of Tampa that hold

20:49:45 historical significance and revitalization.
20:49:48 PD contains 52,345 square feet.
20:49:54 Approximately 1.2 acres.
20:49:56 The PD setbacks are as follows.
20:49:59 North 30 feet to the building, south 6.6 feet, east
20:50:05 4.9 feet, and west 130 feet.
20:50:08 A maximum of 60 feet of height has been proposed.
20:50:12 These measurements are consistent with the current
20:50:14 configuration of the existing site.
20:50:16 A total of 115 parking spaces are required, and 71
20:50:21 spaces are provided.
20:50:22 Of the required parking, 35 of those spaces are
20:50:25 located on a lot approximately one block south of the
20:50:29 historic cigar factory.
20:50:32 A special use 1 has been requested for another lot
20:50:36 located between the cigar factory and the lot is one
20:50:38 block south of the site.
20:50:40 Request was denied and is being appealed before City
20:50:43 Council, concurrence of the PD request.
20:50:46 Here is a zoning map of the local area.
20:51:04 And here is an area with Howard directly to the east
20:51:11 and Armenia to the west of this site.

20:51:15 That site in the middle here is the S-1 that was
20:51:19 denied.
20:51:22 Here is a picture of the existing structure on the
20:51:29 site that's going to have the reuse.
20:51:34 This here is the parking lot that was denied.
20:51:43 >> And there's the sign.
20:51:46 >>> And this is the portion to the -- the parking
20:51:50 portion to the south with the alley.
20:51:51 You can see it's visible between the two.
20:51:55 This is located directly across the street.
20:52:03 This is to the north on Howard.
20:52:05 This is located to the east of the site as well.
20:52:12 And this was directly across from the existing
20:52:16 structure looking north on Howard.
20:52:25 City staff found the plan to be inconsistent.
20:52:31 The two objections were technical in nature.
20:52:34 They came from the transportation department.
20:52:36 And as in every situation when commercial -- a local
20:52:43 road, they have objections based on that and also a
20:52:46 reduction of 38% parking, they consider that to be
20:52:50 excessive, if it's council's pleasure to approve that
20:52:56 if they so desire.

20:52:57 What's not on the plan is something that had
20:52:59 transpired from further discussion with the
20:53:01 transportation department and petitioner.
20:53:08 As you can see, the current configuration of the
20:53:20 parking has the ingress coming in just off of Howard.
20:53:25 Although it wasn't raised as an objection, it was
20:53:28 mentioned that they had -- transportation mentioned
20:53:31 they had concern particularly in the morning when the
20:53:33 cars are coming into the lot that queuing could happen
20:53:36 on Howard, and they had concerns for that.
20:53:38 So the petitioner has designed a plan that they can
20:53:42 submit between first and second reading, if it's your
20:53:44 desire, and it's basically a mirror image.
20:53:51 It would switch the parking arrangement so now the
20:53:54 ingress would be on this side, to the west, and the
20:53:57 egress would be to the eastern side.
20:54:00 So there would not be any conflict with queuing.
20:54:07 Also, the petitioner has agreed to add a statement to
20:54:13 the site plan to note number 16, to say if any of the
20:54:18 gates indicated on the site plan become a safety
20:54:20 hazard as determined by the transportation division
20:54:23 then such gate will either be removed or redesigned to

20:54:28 the operation of such great with the approval of the
20:54:31 transportation division to resolve such hazard.
20:54:34 And also they were to revise note number 18 to say if
20:54:38 decorative payment is proposed to be installed within
20:54:40 any city right-of-way, any such proposed installation
20:54:44 shall be subject to review and approval by the city
20:54:47 transportation division.
20:54:48 If the installation of any such decorative pavement is
20:54:51 approved, the developer will enter into an appropriate
20:54:53 maintenance and hold harmless agreement with the city
20:54:56 in connection with such alternative pavement
20:54:59 materials.
20:55:04 And as I said, the petitioner wishes to move forward
20:55:08 with two technical objections from transportation.
20:55:12 That concludes my presentation.
20:55:15 Thank you.
20:55:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I understand that they are going to
20:55:22 do a beautiful job in renovating the building and I
20:55:24 believe the building is protected -- is there any kind
20:55:27 of official stamp of approval from the ARC on it, the
20:55:31 HPC?
20:55:32 >>> I would ask Mr. Wilson to answer that.

20:55:43 They have --
20:55:45 >> Shouldn't that be part of what comes before us?
20:55:50 >>> Yes.
20:55:50 If he would have objected it would have been brought
20:55:52 forward.
20:55:52 >> I just want to hear it real fast.
20:56:08 >>> Wilson Stair, architectural review and urban
20:56:13 design division.
20:56:15 My understanding right now is the building is going
20:56:18 through the designation process.
20:56:22 And that's all I know at this time.
20:56:32 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
20:56:33 I have been sworn in.
20:56:34 I am going to first go through the special use request
20:56:39 that's before you.
20:56:41 The site is locate in the West Tampa historic
20:56:43 district.
20:56:45 It's within the West Tampa overlay district.
20:56:51 Commercial 24 along Howard, residential 10.
20:56:57 This is the proposed site in question.
20:57:00 Additional parking to the site.
20:57:04 (off microphone).

20:57:12 Technical objection regarding access to a local
20:57:14 street.
20:57:14 In the grand scheme of things I think we all know that
20:57:18 historic districts have their own share of
20:57:19 difficulties that they must try to overcome with the
20:57:23 progress, and the evolution.
20:57:28 That being said, I think council will remember members
20:57:30 of council that were present when baker and company
20:57:32 was approved.
20:57:34 They had a very similar situation, approved for
20:57:39 ingress and egress to a local street to allow that
20:57:42 business to report and I believe it has become one of
20:57:45 the more successful businesses.
20:57:47 That being said, going back to the question, this is
20:57:51 going to be covered as I understand from the proposed
20:57:55 request and the connectivity from the public site to
20:58:03 the cigar factory which is going to be -- of course
20:58:06 the site is going to be primarily used for the
20:58:08 employees of the rezoning. (Off microphone)
20:58:12 Planning Commission therefore, as far as the special
20:58:12 use is concerned, found the proposed request
20:58:19 consistent with the comprehensive plan.

20:58:20 As relates now to the rezoning.
20:58:23 The rezoning (off microphone) ... (coughing)
20:58:41 The cigar factory is a 1904 cigar factory, was known
20:58:49 as the historic 1904 Tampa Cuba cigar factory, also
20:58:53 known as one of the brand names of one of the cigars
20:58:57 that was manufactured in there.
20:58:59 I think Mr. Miranda was probably present at the grand
20:59:01 opening in 1904.
20:59:05 [ Laughter ]
20:59:06 As you can see in this particular area of West Tampa
20:59:17 you have two other cigar factories.
20:59:20 Another here on the southwest corner of Howard Avenue.
20:59:28 It is going to be corporate headquarters, will have
20:59:33 approximately 100 people, and vitality and economic
20:59:40 development.
20:59:41 Planning Commission staff finds the proposed request
20:59:44 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
20:59:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
20:59:53 >>> Gordon Schiff, with Schiff law group, located at
20:59:59 1211 North Westshore Boulevard, suite 401.
21:00:02 We represent the petitioner.
21:00:04 We have with us tonight Thomas March, who the chief

21:00:09 executive officer for Intelident Solutions, and also
21:00:12 our planners, Wilson Miller, in particular Michael
21:00:15 English, along with Adam Carnegie, and we also have
21:00:18 Stephani Gaines, from Curts Gaines Hall Jones,
21:00:21 architect on the project.
21:00:23 To put this into context -- and I have been sworn.
21:00:27 To sort of put this into context for you, this is a
21:00:30 headquarters project in West Tampa on the edge of
21:00:34 north Hyde Park in the City of Tampa.
21:00:39 I think you are fairly familiar with the location.
21:00:41 There is a process that you go through when you try to
21:00:45 rehabilitate an existing building with really
21:00:50 insufficient infrastructure in order to use it without
21:00:54 adding additional land.
21:00:55 So what you have before you is what the code allows,
21:00:58 if you will, for a project like this.
21:01:01 Unfortunately, what the code allows for a project
21:01:03 under these circumstances is we had to make two
21:01:06 applications, and that is because part of the land
21:01:09 that was, if you will, assembled for the property is
21:01:13 leased.
21:01:15 Ms. Saul-Sena asked a question about a sign.

21:01:17 The sign is on the portion of the property we lease.
21:01:20 We don't have a right to do anything with the sign.
21:01:24 Hence that's why it's there.
21:01:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Can I interrupt you a minute?
21:01:27 Is there anyone in the audience that wants to speak on
21:01:30 items 19 or 20?
21:01:31 >>> If council is inclined we can keep our
21:01:41 presentation very short.
21:01:42 There is substantial evidence in the record to support
21:01:44 approval of this project.
21:01:46 We have demonstrated the appropriateness --
21:01:51 >> Well, if anyone here is in opposition.
21:01:57 >> We do have our people present to answer any
21:02:00 questions you have, Commissioner Scott.
21:02:01 And we also have we do have some minor refinement to
21:02:08 the site plan mentioned by Ms. Finney which must get
21:02:11 in the record.
21:02:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Put those on the record for us.
21:02:14 >>> Mr. Carnegie is providing those to you.
21:02:18 >> Put those on the record.
21:02:25 >>> A letter from Michael Randolph I would like
21:02:28 submitted into the record from the West Tampa overlay

21:02:30 and they are in support of the project as well.
21:02:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: A question for staff, please.
21:02:39 Have you had the opportunity to review those sheets
21:02:41 that have been pass out?
21:02:43 >>> Yes, yes.
21:02:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is it acceptable them for them to be
21:02:49 made part of the record so they don't have to be read
21:02:51 verbatim and you understand what the purpose is, and
21:02:54 the understanding of the petitioner to have that done
21:02:56 T between first and second reading?
21:02:58 >>> Yes.
21:02:58 There are minor refinements for S-1 and for the PD
21:03:01 which have been submitted to council.
21:03:03 Staff has also seen them.
21:03:04 >>CHAIRMAN: Questions by council members?
21:03:07 >> So staff is in agreement.
21:03:11 >>> Yes.
21:03:16 >>CHAIRMAN: I have a motion.
21:03:16 >> Second.
21:03:17 (Motion carried).
21:03:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you have the ordinance?
21:03:21 Reverend Scott.

21:03:26 19 first.
21:03:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Move an ordinance approving a special
21:03:31 use permit S-1 on appeal from a decision of the zoning
21:03:34 administrator waiving the required access to arterial
21:03:38 or collector streets and approving access to a local
21:03:41 street in a CI commercial intensive zoning district in
21:03:44 the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
21:03:46 described in section 1 waiving the requirement,
21:03:49 section 27-272, to allow access to a local street,
21:03:53 providing an effective date.
21:03:54 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
21:03:55 (Motion carried)
21:03:57 Anything else?
21:03:59 >> Motion carried with Miranda abstaining and
21:04:07 Dingfelder absent at vote.
21:04:09 Second reading and adoption will be on December
21:04:10 6th, 2007 at 9:30 a.m
21:04:25 >> (Off microphone)
21:04:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Are you all going to read the next
21:04:41 one?
21:04:43 I move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
21:04:46 vicinity of 1104 and 1202 north Howard Avenue, 2321

21:04:51 and 2323 west Nassau street, and 2311 and 2315 and
21:04:57 2307 west grace street from zoning district
21:05:00 classification CI commercial intensive and RM-16
21:05:05 residential multifamily planned develop, office,
21:05:07 business, professional park and offstreet commercial,
21:05:10 providing an effective date.
21:05:12 Also, I want to include, have agreed to these
21:05:16 additional requirements.
21:05:18 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and second.
21:05:20 (Motion carried).
21:05:21 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda abstaining
21:05:25 and Dingfelder absent at vote.
21:05:27 Second reading and adoption will be on December
21:05:29 6th, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.
21:05:32 >>CHAIRMAN: Item 21.
21:05:55 >>> Jill Karsi, Land Development Coordination.
21:05:57 I have been sworn.
21:05:58 We are here for petition Z-07-72 located at 3112 west
21:06:03 Bay to Bay going from CI commercial intensive and
21:06:06 RM-16 residential multifamily to PD planned
21:06:09 development with the proposed uses of office and
21:06:12 business and professional.

21:06:14 The petitioner proposes to rezone the property in
21:06:17 order to develop the site for professional office
21:06:19 uses.
21:06:21 10,000 square foot site is located within a
21:06:23 predominantly commercial an office portion of Bay to
21:06:25 Bay, while the lot encompasses the entire block from
21:06:30 north to south abutting residential uses to the south.
21:06:34 According to the site plans the petitioner is
21:06:35 proposing a 3-story, 45-foot height maximum, 5500
21:06:41 square foot professional office building.
21:06:43 The PD setbacks are as follows: From the north, 3
21:06:46 feet 3 inches.
21:06:48 From the south, 91 feet.
21:06:50 From the east, 3 feet 4 inches.
21:06:52 From the west, 4 feet 4 inches.
21:06:54 A total of 15 parking spaces are required and 14
21:06:58 parking spaces are provided.
21:06:59 Therefore, a waiver of the deficit for one parking
21:07:02 space has been requested.
21:07:08 Here is a zoning map of the area.
21:07:22 Running north to south along the east side you will
21:07:23 see the Crosstown with Bay to Bay.

21:07:30 And here is the site in question.
21:07:43 Here is a picture of the subject property.
21:07:53 Directly to the west.
21:08:03 Here are the single-family homes which I have been
21:08:09 told are used for office, should be east of the site.
21:08:13 You can see the Crosstown further down to the east.
21:08:18 Across the street to the north.
21:08:36 City staff has found the site plan to be consistent
21:08:44 with all regulations and I also have a letter from the
21:08:49 property owner that owns the -- what appears to be the
21:08:53 single-family houses, 3110 and 3008 that are directly
21:08:58 abutting this property to the east in support.
21:09:01 They were here this evening but had to leave.
21:09:02 I would like to submit that into the record.
21:09:05 And that concludes my presentation.
21:09:08 Thank you.
21:09:26 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
21:09:27 I have been sworn.
21:09:28 Just a couple of additional comments to Mrs. Karsi's
21:09:31 comments.
21:09:32 The predominant land use...
21:09:41 Is request will be PD.

21:10:04 Presently under a CI zoning district.
21:10:06 Request is providing a reduction in intensity for the
21:10:09 site.
21:10:10 For the applicant to come in and request any kind of
21:10:14 future increase in intensity, would have to come in
21:10:19 for another PD.
21:10:20 So in effect, it's effectively a reduction of the CI
21:10:24 potential that currently exists on the site.
21:10:26 Planning Commission staff found the request proposal
21:10:34 consistent.
21:10:34 >>STEVE MICHELINI: We have been -- we have developed
21:10:39 what we think is an attractive building on an in-fill
21:10:45 site.
21:10:46 If you look on the Elmo, you can see that the
21:10:48 property -- this is the subject property and it backs
21:10:52 up to the Crosstown expressway.
21:10:54 So there's no commercial traffic on Santiago.
21:11:02 You already have other parking lots accessing at the
21:11:04 entrance of Bay to Bay, and it's a one-way driveway.
21:11:08 We are saving two grand oak trees, one 36 inches, and
21:11:12 one is 42 inches.
21:11:14 And that's what's driving our request for the

21:11:16 reduction of one parking space.
21:11:18 We have done the best that we can with this site.
21:11:21 We actually have in excess of green space being
21:11:23 provided.
21:11:25 867 square feet is required.
21:11:27 And we are providing 1760 square feet.
21:11:30 The drainage will be handled in an underground vault.
21:11:34 And basically we respectfully request your approval.
21:11:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Michelini.
21:11:40 It looks really good.
21:11:42 Are you able to do anything green in front?
21:11:45 >>STEVE MICHELINI: There is some green in the front.
21:11:47 But there's a change in grade elevation there with a
21:11:51 retaining wall.
21:11:52 But there is some green in the front and directly in
21:11:55 front of the building.
21:11:57 We are mainly using the green space along the side and
21:12:00 in the back with the oak trees on the side there to
21:12:04 sort of mitigate for that.
21:12:07 >> Do you know what the use is going to be?
21:12:09 >>> It's business and professional office.
21:12:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that

21:12:12 wants to speak on item 21?
21:12:15 >> Move to close.
21:12:16 >> Second.
21:12:16 (Motion carried)
21:12:20 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance rezoning property
21:12:33 in the general vicinity of 3112 west Bay to Bay
21:12:36 Boulevard in the city of Tampa, Florida and more
21:12:38 particularly described in section 1 from zoning
21:12:41 district classifications CI commercial intensive and
21:12:44 RM-16 residential multifamily to PD planned
21:12:48 development, office, business, professional, providing
21:12:51 an effective date.
21:12:52 >> I have a motion and second.
21:12:53 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
21:12:55 Opposed, Nay.
21:12:55 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Thank you very much.
21:12:57 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being
21:12:59 absent at vote.
21:13:01 >> Second reading and adoption will be on December
21:13:03 6th, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.
21:13:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 22.
21:13:22 >> While we are waiting anyone that came in late on

21:13:25 the second shift, if you plan to speak on item 22?
21:13:30 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 22 and 23.
21:13:31 >>GWEN MILLER: 22 and 23.
21:13:34 Would you please stand and raise your right hand to be
21:13:37 sworn in?
21:13:38 (Oath administered by Clerk)
21:13:51 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Item number 22 and 23 are vacating and
21:13:54 the rezoning that are associated.
21:13:56 For item number 23, I do have certified site plans
21:14:01 that have been certified by the zoning administrator
21:14:03 pursuant to the previous first reading.
21:14:06 For item number 22, I would offer Mr. Cook is
21:14:11 available for questions.
21:14:13 And I'm available for questions for the rezoning.
21:14:17 >>CHAIRMAN: Petitioner.
21:14:21 >>> David Smith, 401 East Jackson Street, for the
21:14:29 petitioner.
21:14:31 I just want to ask you a question.
21:14:32 Is Mr. Dingfelder here?
21:14:33 >>GWEN MILLER: He's in the back.
21:14:35 >>> Okay, thank you.
21:14:38 In the interest of time, I know there's a lot of

21:14:40 people to speak tonight. This is a second reading
21:14:42 tempt.
21:14:42 We have the consultants available to answer any
21:14:44 questions that the council members may have.
21:14:48 >> Here!
21:14:50 >>> Thank you.
21:14:52 Other than that we would save our time for rebuttal in
21:14:54 the interest of time since there are so many speakers.
21:14:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, thank you.
21:14:58 Anyone in the public that wants to speak on item 22
21:15:01 and 23?
21:15:02 Would you please come up and speak now?
21:15:04 Do we have some for and some against?
21:15:18 All the against stand on my left.
21:15:20 All the for, stand on the right.
21:15:22 We are going to rotate.
21:15:26 All against stand to my left.
21:15:32 All for the project stand to my right.
21:15:34 We are going to rotate, one and one.
21:15:38 We'll start with against first.
21:15:40 Come up, sir.
21:15:43 >> Mr. Straley has a speaker waiver form.

21:15:46 Joanne McCullough?
21:15:49 I don't see anybody responding.
21:15:52 Scratch.
21:15:54 Joanne McCullough is not present.
21:15:58 Pardon?
21:16:00 >>> Yes.
21:16:00 >> You're here.
21:16:01 Okay.
21:16:01 Marie Ballin? Did I say that correctly?
21:16:05 You're here, too?
21:16:06 >>CHAIRMAN: Say it again.
21:16:08 Marie?
21:16:13 >> Correct.
21:16:13 >> Who is Joanne McCullough?
21:16:16 Okay.
21:16:16 Then Joe Maruddy and Judy Taylor.
21:16:23 Three extra minutes.
21:16:24 >> My name is Mark Straley.
21:16:26 My address is 100 East Madison Street, suite 300, in
21:16:31 Tampa.
21:16:31 I'm an attorney, and I represent a large group of
21:16:34 Beach Park residents, many of whom are here tonight,

21:16:38 who oppose the closing of Ward Street.
21:16:42 Let me begin by pointing out why there's so many of us
21:16:45 here tonight and why we weren't here for first
21:16:48 reading.
21:16:50 Unfortunately, many of the residents of the Beach Park
21:16:53 area were not adequately informed of what was before
21:16:57 council in terms of the closure of Ward Street.
21:16:59 The city -- and I'm not suggesting that the notice the
21:17:02 city provided didn't comply with the code, because as
21:17:05 far as I know it did.
21:17:06 But the 250 feet radius type notice that the code
21:17:11 requires is not really adequate when you are talking
21:17:14 about a road closure that affects hundreds of Beach
21:17:18 Park residents.
21:17:19 So there are literally hundreds of people, that
21:17:23 weren't formally notified by the city of what was
21:17:26 going on here.
21:17:27 To exacerbate the problem, there were notice issues
21:17:31 within the context of the Beach Park homeowners
21:17:34 association.
21:17:35 For example, I'm a resident of Beach Park.
21:17:38 Received a notice.

21:17:39 My first notice from the homeowners association about
21:17:41 this issue was an e-mail I received yesterday.
21:17:46 I think this is a situation, unfortunately, where the
21:17:51 board of the Beach Park homeowners association misread
21:17:57 the community sentiment with respect to this
21:17:58 particular issue, and I think the testimony that the
21:18:01 council is going to hear this evening will amply
21:18:05 demonstrate that this is a community that's very
21:18:07 divided on this subject.
21:18:09 In fact it's created a schism both within our
21:18:14 homeowners association and most neighbors, which is an
21:18:17 unfortunate situation.
21:18:21 There are also residents that are not within Beach
21:18:23 Park that are adversely affected by the closure of
21:18:26 Ward Street, and I understand a representative is here
21:18:29 from Maryland street condominium association who will
21:18:36 also speak.
21:18:37 I mention that because I think when council approved
21:18:40 this road closure on first reading, some council
21:18:43 members may have thought we are disregarding what our
21:18:46 city staff has suggested is appropriate here.
21:18:50 What we are doing is this is something the

21:18:52 neighborhood wants.
21:18:53 And I would submit to council that the testimony you
21:18:56 are going to hear this evening will demonstrate amply
21:18:58 that this is not by any means something that a
21:19:02 majority of the neighborhood supports.
21:19:08 I have a visual aid that Mr. Stair prepared.
21:19:11 Can everybody see that?
21:19:14 >>GWEN MILLER: We see it, yes.
21:19:19 >>> This is Kennedy Boulevard right here.
21:19:26 This is north.
21:19:27 This is Westshore over here.
21:19:30 And I don't need to spend a lot of time telling
21:19:33 council that Kennedy is a major arterial, there's a
21:19:37 regional mall here, and that particularly at peak
21:19:40 hours, Kennedy Boulevard in this area can be very
21:19:44 congested.
21:19:44 Westshore Boulevard, which is the principal
21:19:48 north-south collector road, is well beyond any kind
21:19:53 of -- it's got incredible levels of congestion on it,
21:19:57 especially in peak hours, but it's a unique situation.
21:20:01 As far as I know it's the only road that is addressed
21:20:04 in the Tampa comprehensive plan that this road cannot

21:20:08 be widened.
21:20:09 And I'm not suggesting for a moment that anyone thinks
21:20:12 it should be widened.
21:20:14 But the point is that Westshore, which is essentially
21:20:17 two lanes, south of Azeele, is a very congested road.
21:20:23 As a result of that -- and I'm not talking about Ward
21:20:25 Street specifically, I'm just talking about local
21:20:28 streets in Beach Park, because of the way this area
21:20:31 has evolved, because we have got major business and
21:20:34 commercial development to the north, it's an area
21:20:40 which the local streets generally get more pressure
21:20:44 and use, simply because there's a lot of congestion on
21:20:48 collector roads.
21:20:49 I mean, I live on Widner, the other side of Westshore
21:20:52 down here, and there's lots of so-called cut-through
21:20:55 traffic that people living west of Westshore can't
21:20:58 make a left turn, can't make a right turn, there's a
21:21:01 break in the action, and dash across Westshore, and,
21:21:05 you know, find their way alongside streets, local
21:21:08 roads, to get to Lois or to get out of the
21:21:11 neighborhood.
21:21:11 That's just a fact of life, frankly, in Beach Park.

21:21:15 Now, if you look at the schematic -- and this was
21:21:20 prepared by Mr. Stair --
21:21:23 >> A little higher.
21:21:23 It looks like it's chopped off.
21:21:26 >> Thank you.
21:21:39 >>> You can see the north-south streets that have been
21:21:41 closed, or cul-de-sacked by action of the city.
21:21:45 And they are all depicted in yellow, meaning Ward
21:21:49 Street is really the last north-south street that
21:21:52 provides access for people living west of Westshore
21:21:55 who are seeking to get directly onto Kennedy, because
21:21:59 all of the ones depicted in yellow are no longer
21:22:03 available for use.
21:22:06 Not withstanding that fact, as matters exist today,
21:22:14 and just without regard to this rezoning, the traffic,
21:22:18 the city had done a traffic study which indicates that
21:22:21 there's something on the order of 1500 trips a day on
21:22:26 Ward Street, in the area between Ward Street and
21:22:28 Cleveland.
21:22:29 >> Would you point outward, please?
21:22:31 >> It's little on that map.
21:22:34 >>> It's the only one remaining open.

21:22:37 So there's 1500 trips a day on this segment, Mr.
21:22:42 Gentry from the traffic department is here and can
21:22:44 talk to you further about it.
21:22:45 But as he's explained to the me, 1500 is considered
21:22:48 normal on a local street, meaning as matters exist
21:22:53 today, Ward Street has a normal volume of traffic.
21:22:56 If it had 2,000 or more trips a day, then it might be
21:22:59 a situation where traffic calming devices might be
21:23:02 called for, but that isn't the present situation.
21:23:10 There's in a question but the project will increase
21:23:14 traffic in this area.
21:23:15 The question is, what is the solution to this proposed
21:23:20 project and the proposed increase in traffic
21:23:25 associated with it?
21:23:26 I would submit that closing Ward Street is not going
21:23:29 to solve any traffic congestion problem, because this
21:23:33 area is essentially built out, and to the extent that
21:23:36 this proposed project results in more trips and more
21:23:39 traffic when Ward Street is closed, all that will do
21:23:43 is serve to increase congestion on Kennedy, increase
21:23:46 congestion on Westshore.
21:23:53 Let's talk a little bit about the record, because I

21:23:55 know there was an extensive hearing, and I have read a
21:23:58 transcript of the record before council at first
21:24:00 reading.
21:24:01 Council heard from Catherine Coyle, from Wilson Stair,
21:24:04 and from Melanie Calloway, all members of city staff,
21:24:08 all of whom objected to this proposed road closing.
21:24:11 The basic thrust of what city staff said to council
21:24:15 was that access to this area is already restricted --
21:24:20 restricted, especially at peak hours, and that this
21:24:23 proposed closure makes the situation even worse.
21:24:26 >>CHAIRMAN: Time is up.
21:24:27 >>> That's it?
21:24:29 >>GWEN MILLER: That's it.
21:24:29 Six minutes.
21:24:30 >>> Let me see if I can borrow some more time.
21:24:32 >>GWEN MILLER: No, can't borrow more time.
21:24:35 That's it.
21:24:35 Next.
21:24:38 He's got a question.
21:24:41 >> You live on Woodmere.
21:24:43 Which side of Westshore?
21:24:45 >>I live on the east side.

21:24:46 >> Okay.
21:24:46 >>> I live in Beach Park north of the bayou.
21:24:50 >> Just north of the bayou.
21:24:54 If you were going from your house, okay, or your
21:24:59 neighbors were going from your house to the proposed
21:25:02 grocery store, the shortest distance, because we all
21:25:07 drive the shortest distance, can you show us with your
21:25:10 finger -- roughly, signing to have map, then coming
21:25:15 onto the map on Westshore, how would you get there?
21:25:18 >>> To the proposed grocery store?
21:25:20 >> To the proposed site, yes.
21:25:21 >>> I would come here, turn on Westshore and probably
21:25:26 take Cleveland over to Ward Street.
21:25:28 If the road remained open.
21:25:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
21:25:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker?
21:25:36 >>> Judith Powell, 207 south Sherill street.
21:25:43 I have been sworn.
21:25:43 And I have lived in that house for 39 years.
21:25:47 There's a reason why council inquired that only people
21:25:50 within 250 feet be -- receive notification, because we
21:25:54 are the ones most directly affected.

21:25:57 I might also point out that I am not on the board of
21:26:00 the Westshore homeowners association.
21:26:02 I'm not even a member.
21:26:03 And I had ample notice from them as well as from the
21:26:05 city.
21:26:07 While you may hear many speakers, and this prior
21:26:11 speaker, talk about Beach Park, what you consider
21:26:15 Beach Park is in the eye of the beholder.
21:26:17 I think you need to consider those residents who are
21:26:19 most directly affected, not the people up on Woodmere
21:26:24 who are coming back through our neighborhood.
21:26:26 My daughter lives on Westshore and Beach Park.
21:26:29 She will not be affected.
21:26:31 This little pocket of about 150 homes has maintained
21:26:36 with the help of prior councils the character of our
21:26:40 neighborhood for many years.
21:26:42 We have had many challenges to that.
21:26:45 This neighborhood is a fine neighborhood.
21:26:48 There are older people like me who have lived there
21:26:50 for almost 40 years, and there are some turnover of
21:26:53 young families with very young children.
21:26:56 People walk in this neighborhood.

21:26:58 They have children that play in this neighborhood.
21:27:01 That ride their bikes in this neighborhood.
21:27:04 We provide a good tax base for the city especially as
21:27:07 these houses are turning over to young families.
21:27:10 If you are willing to turn Cleveland street and Azeele
21:27:15 into also major collector roads, that will be a death
21:27:18 knell for this little pocket of South Beach park -- of
21:27:23 north Beach Park, excuse me.
21:27:26 I would also like to point out that while some people
21:27:30 may raise the issue of ambulances, the ambulance that
21:27:33 services this area come from the church street
21:27:35 station.
21:27:36 It goes down Azeele.
21:27:37 My husband is a physician.
21:27:39 He has many occasions when he has to need an ambulance
21:27:43 for a neighbor, in fact, and he has actually had to
21:27:48 send himself a few years ago.
21:27:49 The ambulances would have a more difficult time
21:27:52 reaching our neighborhood if Azeele had an increase in
21:27:55 traffic, which it will have.
21:27:58 Azeele and Cleveland will become collector roads.
21:28:02 The prior speaker said there are 1500 people at

21:28:06 present using Wood Street, and that's not a problem,
21:28:10 and it may even go to 2,000.
21:28:13 It's going to go to 5,000.
21:28:15 There are 1600 or plus parking spots in this proposed
21:28:19 development.
21:28:21 If it turns over just twice a day, and that's
21:28:24 conservative, we would have 3,000 more cars coming out
21:28:29 onto Ward Street using Cleveland street and Westshore
21:28:33 as their collector road.
21:28:35 So I implore you to stay with your vote and preserve
21:28:40 this very nice pocket of Beach Park.
21:28:42 Thank you.
21:28:42 >>GWEN MILLER: No applause.
21:28:49 No, no, no.
21:28:51 >>> Good evening.
21:28:52 My name is Jared, I live west of Westshore.
21:28:59 I use this road daily to go to and from my work.
21:29:03 If you close this road you will force me to stay on
21:29:06 Kennedy Boulevard and then go to Westshore and turn
21:29:08 back to my house and cost me an extra ten minutes.
21:29:12 Ten minutes is okay.
21:29:13 But the pollution and the congestion I can tell you

21:29:16 are those two roads, between my house is on the corner
21:29:20 of Westshore and Neptune way.
21:29:23 I do not leave my house from 4:00 to 7:00 that I can't
21:29:29 get out.
21:29:30 This evening I left my house at 3:30, had to go home
21:29:32 to pick somebody up and was a half mile backup on
21:29:35 Westshore already.
21:29:39 And sometimes it takes me as much as 10 minutes,
21:29:43 because I have to cross Westshore to go north of
21:29:45 Westshore.
21:29:46 It takes me as much as 10 minutes.
21:29:48 And I have witnessed many, many accidents in front of
21:29:52 my house.
21:29:53 So the more traffic you put on the road the worst it's
21:29:57 going to get.
21:30:02 You know, this is the only street I can take when I go
21:30:04 to the airport, without going on Westshore or Kennedy.
21:30:07 This is the only street I can go to the airport or go
21:30:10 to Clearwater or St. Pete.
21:30:11 Thank you.
21:30:12 That's all I have.
21:30:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question.

21:30:14 Sir?
21:30:16 Hello?
21:30:22 I think I know generally where you live.
21:30:24 I'm curious why you wouldn't zig your way over to
21:30:27 Azeele, drop off down Azeele to the light, and get out
21:30:31 at the light at Azeele and Westshore.
21:30:33 I mean, that's not ten minutes to get out, if you use
21:30:36 the light.
21:30:38 >>> If I come out of my house, I try to make a left
21:30:41 turn on Westshore to go north to Kennedy --
21:30:44 >> No.
21:30:44 What I'm saying, isn't there a way to zig your way
21:30:47 through your neighborhood to get over to Azeele, drop
21:30:50 down on Azeele and come out at the light?
21:30:53 >>> Yes, there is.
21:30:54 >> Okay.
21:30:55 >>> But if you have this extra traffic come in because
21:30:58 you can't go on Ward, you will have a delay.
21:31:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:31:03 Next speaker.
21:31:09 >>> Bart Bejack, a homeowner at 5013 West Azeele
21:31:17 street, here tonight speaking not only for myself but

21:31:19 over 120, that's 120 Beach Park residents who in the
21:31:22 last couple of weeks have signed these petitions to
21:31:27 close Ward Street.
21:31:28 And I just want to share with you a couple of the
21:31:30 reflections, a couple of the concerns that I heard
21:31:33 from my neighbors, as they walk the western portion of
21:31:36 the neighborhood over the last couple of weeks.
21:31:39 My first point would be that I was struck by the fact
21:31:42 that our neighborhood, those particularly closest to
21:31:46 the development in the northwest quadrant, want this
21:31:49 street closed.
21:31:50 And going door to door and having only one person
21:31:54 close to the development who is adamantly opposed to
21:31:57 closure with a couple that had mixed feelings and one
21:32:00 undecided, our neighborhood especially those most
21:32:03 effective were close to a development are
21:32:05 overwhelmingly with our neighborhood association on
21:32:07 this Ward Street closure.
21:32:09 I want to say something about the opposition that's
21:32:12 coming to this street closure.
21:32:14 Most of that is coming from folks who live far away
21:32:16 from the proposed development.

21:32:18 And for these people, closing ward would be an
21:32:22 inconvenient annoyance.
21:32:23 But for those of us in the immediate vicinity who are
21:32:26 heavily impacted by this, we have much more at stake.
21:32:30 We are overwhelmingly in favor of closure and because
21:32:33 we would be impacted much more than the far away
21:32:35 residents it is our preferences that should carry more
21:32:39 weight.
21:32:40 Second many of the neighbors have expressed concern to
21:32:42 me, and while I was walking the neighborhood and
21:32:46 collecting these 120 signatures, about the loss of
21:32:49 safety and the residential character of our
21:32:51 neighborhood.
21:32:52 These are thousands of additional cars and trucks that
21:32:54 will travel through the neighborhood on a daily basis
21:32:57 if Ward is not closed.
21:32:59 Many residents, one thing I heard over and over that
21:33:02 told me that there's already a tremendous amount of
21:33:04 cut-through traffic in Beach Park, and a large
21:33:08 development with a thousand space parking garage which
21:33:12 turns over a few times a day would only greatly
21:33:14 exacerbate this.

21:33:16 Parents of young children, like my wife and I who are
21:33:19 expecting in February, told me that they wanted Beach
21:33:21 Park to remain a family friendly neighborhood that was
21:33:25 safe for their children.
21:33:27 And the concern that I heard was that keeping Ward
21:33:29 open would change our neighborhood from the
21:33:31 residential community that it is to something else,
21:33:35 which is a commercial cut-through and the main way
21:33:37 that thousands of people get to Publix each day.
21:33:40 Some people have said that there's no public benefit
21:33:43 to closing the street.
21:33:44 But I disagree.
21:33:48 Closing the street is necessary to maintain the
21:33:50 residential character and safety of Beach Park, which
21:33:52 is one of the city's great urban neighborhoods.
21:33:55 And if Tampa wants to remain a great city, it needs to
21:33:59 continue to attract young professionals with families
21:34:02 who have many housing options throughout the bay area.
21:34:06 And we have to be able to protect our urban core
21:34:09 neighborhood.
21:34:09 Closing Ward is in the best interest of the city
21:34:11 because it will help do that.

21:34:13 Thank you for voting to close Ward on first reading
21:34:16 two weeks ago.
21:34:17 I'm asking that tonight you finalize your first vote
21:34:20 and protect our neighborhood.
21:34:21 It's in the best interest of our Beach Park community
21:34:23 and City of Tampa.
21:34:25 Thank you.
21:34:27 I want to submit these petitions into the record.
21:34:36 I think I submitted them.
21:34:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
21:34:44 >>> I appreciate the opportunity to voice my opinion.
21:34:48 I have written down the issues that I would like to
21:34:50 address.
21:34:50 My name is Nancy Hite and I have lived in Tampa for 62
21:34:53 years.
21:34:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could you speak up a little please?
21:34:58 >> My name is Nancy Hite.
21:34:59 I lived in Tampa for 62 years and have been a
21:35:01 homeowner at 14 Sandpiper road for 32 years and I have
21:35:05 been sworn in.
21:35:06 I would ask you to give careful consideration before
21:35:09 closing Ward Street permanently.

21:35:10 Once the street is vacated it cannot be reopened.
21:35:13 I've seen O'Brien, Cheryl, Gardenia, and we are being
21:35:18 cut off from having access to our neighborhood.
21:35:20 I use that street all the time as well as many of my
21:35:22 neighbors do.
21:35:23 I understand the concerns of the neighbors that live
21:35:25 on Cleveland for their small children, but small
21:35:28 children should not be playing in the middle of the
21:35:30 street.
21:35:30 That's why we have parks and playgrounds.
21:35:32 I drive and walk my dog frequently on Cleveland and
21:35:35 Azeele and I bike frequently in the neighborhood,
21:35:38 also.
21:35:39 And if you use reasonable care you'll be safe.
21:35:41 I want to state that because we use the street to go
21:35:45 to a destination and back to our homes that we are not
21:35:49 cult-through traffic.
21:35:50 We are going to destinations and should be able to use
21:35:52 the road as we as taxpayers have paid for.
21:35:57 I couldn't get to my house a few months ago because of
21:35:59 a downed power line on sandpiper. What if that
21:36:03 happened on Hoover and Kennedy?

21:36:04 There would be no street stow access Kennedy
21:36:06 Boulevard.
21:36:06 Azeele has been flooded many times as well as Hoover.
21:36:09 I drove my boat down Azeele after it came out of a
21:36:12 boat house during hurricane Charley when it passed
21:36:15 nearby Tampa, down O'Brien, down Azeele, back into my
21:36:18 canal, and that's a 20-foot maker, that's a lot of
21:36:24 water in the street.
21:36:25 I also had my car stall out on Azeele near Gardenia
21:36:29 and had to be pulled out by another vehicle.
21:36:31 Also during a storm we had an oak limb fall in front
21:36:34 of our car that would have crushed us if we had been a
21:36:37 minute earlier.
21:36:37 My point is that we need roads that were put in place
21:36:40 by our city planners to stay open as they were
21:36:43 intended for access to and from the neighborhood.
21:36:45 We don't know what disasters are life threatening
21:36:48 situations will occur in our future, but cutting us
21:36:50 off permanently from being able to have alternate
21:36:52 choices of travel is wrong.
21:36:55 It limits us drastically because of our water
21:36:57 boundaries, which is why I moved here to be able to

21:36:59 boat and fish and enjoy all the wonderful wildlife in
21:37:03 the area behind my home.
21:37:05 People that live in this neighborhood within the last
21:37:10 neighborhoods new that Kennedy was one of the busiest
21:37:12 streets, one block away from their home and also
21:37:14 Westshore mall is one block away from Cleveland.
21:37:17 That doesn't give them the right to close the road
21:37:19 because it's inconvenient systems from parenting their
21:37:24 children or because it takes a few more moments for
21:37:26 them to back out of their driveways.
21:37:29 We all have to bear the responsibility of our own
21:37:31 safety.
21:37:32 I love Tampa and I love my area.
21:37:34 Please let me enjoy it and not get trapped in my own
21:37:37 neighborhood.
21:37:38 Thank you.
21:37:42 >>GWEN MILLER: We don't need no clapping.
21:37:44 >> I'm Kristen Bejack.
21:37:49 I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you tonight
21:37:51 once again.
21:37:52 I wanted to point out that increasing vehicular
21:37:55 traffic impact that this proposal would have as a

21:38:00 resident on Azeele one house down from the corner of
21:38:03 Ward I can attest to the fact that the vehicular
21:38:05 traffic is already very strong, the cut-through
21:38:07 traffic is very strong, to cross the street and I
21:38:14 wanted to raise your attention tonight again, the
21:38:17 point I articulated earlier for the benefit of those
21:38:19 who are present, and that is just the primary issue
21:38:22 that I see here, which is on one hand the issue of
21:38:26 safety for our children.
21:38:28 On the other hand, the issue of convenience.
21:38:31 I used the analogy last time as a contractor when you
21:38:35 see traffic trying to get on base, it's something that
21:38:37 you appreciate, and you don't mind that little
21:38:40 inconvenience of the extra ten minutes because you
21:38:41 know that the service members are keeping you safe and
21:38:45 it's worth the trade-off.
21:38:46 And I have a lot of respect for my neighbors on the
21:38:50 opposition side.
21:38:50 I really hope they will really think about what we are
21:38:53 asking because we are not planning to let our children
21:38:55 run and play in the middle of the street, but I
21:38:57 certainly don't intend to have my twins in the middle

21:38:59 of the street.
21:39:00 This is just a matter of safety for them.
21:39:02 And I would hope that the folks would be willing to
21:39:05 make that sacrifice.
21:39:07 It seems like a lot of folks forget what it's like to
21:39:10 make sacrifices anymore, autumn though I see it at
21:39:12 work, and just stare at the service members.
21:39:18 I would like to close by saying that you have seen
21:39:21 tonight there's been an attorney testify, and a lot of
21:39:24 our neighbors on the other side would like to be able
21:39:29 to hire the attorney and live on the cul-de-sacs, and
21:39:33 farther from the malls and farther from Kennedy.
21:39:35 Those of us who live closer, and we didn't choose to
21:39:38 live closer we don't have as much material wealth but
21:39:41 we are blessed to live in this wonderful community of
21:39:43 Tampa, we feel blessed for the camaraderie.
21:39:46 We may not be part to get the material things but we
21:39:49 are really rich in community spirit.
21:39:50 We love our neighbors.
21:39:51 We love the families.
21:39:53 We have a lot of camaraderie.
21:39:55 And really that isn't what we are talking about -- is

21:39:58 what we are talking about when we speak about livable
21:40:00 communities, like the development, having an urban
21:40:05 neighborhood in the center of Tampa with young
21:40:07 professionals and public and private sector feels that
21:40:10 believe in their families, strong families, and also
21:40:13 want to give back to the community through
21:40:15 volunteerism, and community service, and all of us are
21:40:18 just asking you to preserve our neighborhood, because
21:40:20 we don't want to move to the suburbs.
21:40:21 We don't want to leave Tampa.
21:40:23 We want to stay here.
21:40:25 And we appreciate those who stood by us all along and
21:40:29 we hope you will have the courage to continue to
21:40:30 support us.
21:40:31 And I thank you for your time this evening.
21:40:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:40:39 >>> My name is Arthur Henecky, and my residence is
21:40:46 5701 West Mariner Street.
21:40:50 I have been a resident of the area for 30 years.
21:40:52 And I'm here to represent myself, and as president of
21:40:55 the Mariner north condominium association.
21:40:58 I'm actually representing all 44 families of Mariner

21:41:01 north condominium.
21:41:03 At our Mariner condominium October 9th board
21:41:06 meeting we passed a resolution condemning the proposed
21:41:09 closing of Ward Street, and respectfully asked the
21:41:12 council to please consider not closing Ward.
21:41:17 I've watched the closing of Occident, Gardenia, Farrow
21:41:22 and O'Brien streets ever since they tore down the old
21:41:27 INN and it's left Ward as our only access to Kennedy.
21:41:30 Residents of the northwest Beach Park area, and I know
21:41:33 the Beach Park people shutter when they hear us, us
21:41:36 Mariner people describe ourselves as even related to
21:41:38 Beach Park.
21:41:39 But we have always felt that we had a close
21:41:41 association with the neighborhood.
21:41:43 And we need more than just one way to get in and out
21:41:46 of our neighborhood.
21:41:48 At rush hours, and that's morning hours our, there's a
21:41:51 lunch time rush hour and an evening rush hour.
21:41:54 Kennedy Boulevard is one of the busiest roads in
21:41:59 Hillsborough County.
21:42:01 Why force more traffic onto an already grossly
21:42:04 overloaded street?

21:42:05 It just makes the area everyone more impassable.
21:42:09 I see in a general public benefit in closing Ward
21:42:11 Street, as taxpayers.
21:42:13 We paid for the street.
21:42:15 We own the street.
21:42:15 And we use the street for our convenience.
21:42:18 I find it hard to believe anyone living in the
21:42:20 neighborhood would want to create a hardship for
21:42:22 themselves, and others, by wanting to block the
21:42:26 street.
21:42:27 It makes no sense.
21:42:28 Earlier, it was mentioned the city was glad to get
21:42:31 back a street in the Channelside district.
21:42:33 Well, the Westshore area is far busier than
21:42:36 Channelside.
21:42:36 And by all means, we need all the rights-of-way that
21:42:40 we can get in that area.
21:42:41 Just to facilitate getting around the neighborhood.
21:42:47 I would have to say that the alleged justification of
21:42:49 closing from a few selfish individuals who don't
21:42:53 really care about the needs of the general public seem
21:42:57 to emphasize that over the years we have seen our

21:43:01 government at all levels make a lot of bad decisions
21:43:04 based on the wishes of relatively small special
21:43:06 interest groups.
21:43:08 The people in the Mariner north condominiums hope you
21:43:11 don't make a bad decision to close Ward Street.
21:43:13 Please consider the needs of the general public.
21:43:16 We need the use of the street.
21:43:18 Long-term.
21:43:19 It's going to do nothing but help facilitate getting
21:43:22 around the neighborhood.
21:43:25 Myself and the 44 families of Mariner hope you please
21:43:29 vote to not close Ward.
21:43:30 Thank you very much.
21:43:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question, sir.
21:43:36 >> Yes.
21:43:37 Your voice comes from high up.
21:43:40 [ Laughter ]
21:43:42 >> Actually a ventriloquist act.
21:43:49 Looking at the map, Mariner is out on the point?
21:43:54 >> Yes.
21:43:55 You can see Hoover right here.
21:43:57 And Mariner is the street this way.

21:43:59 >> Right.
21:44:00 And you led me right into my question, which is you
21:44:03 say that Ward Street is the one you need, the one you
21:44:06 want.
21:44:06 But the first outlet you hit is Hoover.
21:44:08 >>> The very first outlet is Hoover.
21:44:11 But as an alternative, Kennedy is totally blocked up.
21:44:16 And at Wachovia bank is right here.
21:44:19 And it's so much easier almost any time of day to come
21:44:23 right down Cleveland street and go into Ward.
21:44:26 Into the bank.
21:44:27 And I'm one of the 1500 cars probably every day that
21:44:30 makes that trek.
21:44:31 And it's not that we are passing through the
21:44:38 neighborhood.
21:44:39 It's a destination.
21:44:40 >> Isn't there a light at Hoover and Kennedy?
21:44:42 >> There is a light at Hoover and Kennedy.
21:44:44 Hoover and Kennedy is not the problem.
21:44:46 It's Kennedy and Kennedy.
21:44:48 Where Kennedy meets memorial.
21:44:49 And right in front of Westshore plaza. From there on

21:44:52 its extremely congested.
21:44:54 >> Thank you.
21:44:58 >>> Good evening.
21:45:01 5414 west Azeele.
21:45:05 I want to say a few word.
21:45:06 New to the area and one of the main reasons why I
21:45:08 moved into the neighborhood.
21:45:09 Not only because it's a beautiful community, beautiful
21:45:12 neighborhood.
21:45:14 I saw immediately just connected to my neighbors.
21:45:18 When I met everybody in the neighborhood before I
21:45:20 moved in, and I just felt at ease and connected to
21:45:22 them.
21:45:23 And I just want to say this afternoon we hear talk
21:45:31 about convenience.
21:45:32 And I see it every day.
21:45:33 I live right at the corner of Ward and Azeele.
21:45:36 And for those who say that if we don't close Ward,
21:45:39 then we are selfish because we want it closed, well, I
21:45:43 say to them, if you really want to sacrifice
21:45:48 convenience for our safety?
21:45:49 I moved into the neighborhood because I want to raise

21:45:51 a family in our neighborhood.
21:45:52 This is a place write want to live for a very long
21:45:55 time.
21:45:56 I'm comfortable with my neighbors.
21:45:57 I love the neighborhood.
21:45:58 I go for neighborhood walks all the time.
21:46:00 And I see people from other ends of the neighborhood
21:46:05 screaming past us to make to the their bank, to make
21:46:09 it to their shortcuts to where they want to go to
21:46:12 Kennedy.
21:46:13 And I hate to say it but Ward is not the only street
21:46:16 that you can take to get to Kennedy or can get to
21:46:19 Westshore where you need to go.
21:46:21 I have only lived there for about seven months and
21:46:23 there are plenty of streets to take.
21:46:25 My concern is that we are not being selfish and acting
21:46:31 for Ward to be closed.
21:46:32 In fact I think those who are thinking that way may be
21:46:35 selfish that they are not realizing who this project
21:46:40 is directly impacting.
21:46:41 It's impacting those who are right around Ward.
21:46:44 And we live right around Ward.

21:46:48 And I just say to them, do you really want to
21:46:51 sacrifice safety for your convenience?
21:46:55 Thank you for your time.
21:46:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:46:58 >>> Good evening councilmen and women.
21:47:04 Thank you for your continued efforts to help the city
21:47:06 become a better place.
21:47:07 My name is Arlen Hubbard, I reside at 15 West Spanish
21:47:11 Main Street.
21:47:12 I have been sworn in.
21:47:15 I would like to give you a technical, logical and
21:47:21 moral reason why those of you who voted for this
21:47:24 closing can change your mind.
21:47:28 First, there have been some factual issues that I
21:47:31 would like to bring to your mind.
21:47:33 Lack of democracy in the Beach Park homeowners
21:47:35 association.
21:47:35 I'm very sad to bring that to your attention.
21:47:38 They have refused repeatedly to vote, in the bylaws,
21:47:42 and I would like to provide those to you.
21:47:46 They are required to vote before taking any action or
21:47:52 representing neighborhood in any fashion.

21:47:55 They refused to do that over and over again.
21:47:58 I have asked other people of that.
21:48:00 So they have been up here and testified that they are
21:48:04 the majority of people that are for the closing of the
21:48:06 street.
21:48:07 And I'm not quite so sure that that is the fact.
21:48:12 Also the real issue is closing the street for traffic.
21:48:23 Nobody here is speaking for this project.
21:48:26 Have you noticed that?
21:48:28 Nobody wants the project.
21:48:29 Nobody is interest in the project.
21:48:30 They just want the traffic closed.
21:48:33 Okay?
21:48:34 Well, let's take a look at this map.
21:48:36 We have O'Brien.
21:48:41 We have far O.we have Gardenia.
21:48:44 We have four examples of how to close the street.
21:48:48 Transportation can do it.
21:48:52 It's administrative.
21:48:54 So the idea that you have to give valuable city
21:48:58 property in a street, worth millions of dollars, if
21:49:00 you consider the right-of-way and the setbacks and all

21:49:02 that stuff, it's a pretty big piece of property, worth
21:49:06 many millions of dollars, why do you have to give that
21:49:08 to them?
21:49:09 You don't.
21:49:09 If you want to close the street, and if there is a
21:49:12 majority of people in this neighborhood that want it
21:49:14 closed, it can be closed.
21:49:16 So let's separate the issues.
21:49:19 And so I think that takes you off the hook here.
21:49:22 Because now what are you stuck with?
21:49:24 You can see that this can be done a different way.
21:49:27 So are you going to set the precedent that all the
21:49:31 developer has to do is figure out a good piece of
21:49:34 property that's underdeveloped on either side of the
21:49:38 street, they go out and scare people about how bad the
21:49:42 traffic is going to be, and you guys come in here and
21:49:45 award them a bunch of property worth millions of
21:49:48 dollars, plus the opportunity of it.
21:49:50 Now, on top of that, you look at the way this
21:49:53 development is, and they have got eight different --
21:49:58 they are going to have a bunch of trees, they are
21:50:01 reducing one of the setbacks on Kennedy to two feet.

21:50:05 You are giving them all this property and they still
21:50:07 can't do it right.
21:50:08 I don't think that they have got much to hang their
21:50:11 hat on here.
21:50:13 And I'm sorry that I had to bring this to your
21:50:15 attention about Beach Park not being a democracy.
21:50:18 I hope that changes.
21:50:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Over here.
21:50:27 >>> Good evening, council members.
21:50:28 My name is Debra Fulton.
21:50:30 You already heard from my husband.
21:50:31 I just want to reiterate many of the things that have
21:50:34 already been said.
21:50:35 This is a neighborhood that we have put roots down in.
21:50:39 We are in this community.
21:50:40 We plan to be in this community for a very long time.
21:50:43 We love our neighbors and our home.
21:50:44 We have made a lot of improvements to it.
21:50:48 We are on the street that gets the cut-through
21:50:51 traffic.
21:50:51 And many of the 1500 cars that come by every day.
21:50:55 I see them every day while I water the flowers or what

21:50:58 have you.
21:50:58 And we will be dramatically impacted.
21:51:02 If Ward stays open because of the thousands of cars
21:51:05 that will continue to come through, and the trucks,
21:51:08 the delivery trucks that will cut through as well.
21:51:11 And while I a sure you our neighbors and children do
21:51:15 not play in the street and my children when I am
21:51:17 fortunate enough to have them will not play in the
21:51:19 street, but it is a safety concern.
21:51:22 And we don't want to have to move.
21:51:24 And we might have to move.
21:51:29 If this becomes an issue.
21:51:31 And we are just very concerned about the traffic, the
21:51:33 late night deliveries.
21:51:35 It's just not -- it would not be the neighborhood we
21:51:38 moved into.
21:51:38 And so we urge you, once again as my neighbor
21:51:42 mentioned to have the courage to continue voting in
21:51:44 the manner you did before.
21:51:46 We truly hope that Ward is closed.
21:51:48 And thank you for hearing us on a very long night.
21:51:51 Thank you.

21:51:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
21:51:56 >>> My name is Grace Kathy Green, I live at 218 South
21:52:03 Gardenia Avenue, and I have been sworn.
21:52:05 My family has lived on Gardenia Avenue for the past 49
21:52:09 years.
21:52:10 We have never had a traffic problem, even when
21:52:14 Gardenia was still open prior to the closing.
21:52:17 In fact, we were upset that Gardenia had been closed.
21:52:24 We have been members of the Beach Park homeowners
21:52:26 association for years and have never been consulted
21:52:29 prior to the closing of all the streets from Cleveland
21:52:32 to Kennedy.
21:52:34 I resent the fact that the officers and directors of
21:52:37 the Beach Park homeowners association allegedly speak
21:52:41 on behalf of all of the Beach Park residents when they
21:52:44 have never even asked our opinion.
21:52:48 I was pleased to hear that we were going to have a
21:52:51 grocery store in our area.
21:52:52 But when I asked a board member how we could get to
21:52:55 the store, she informed me, if we close Ward Street,
21:52:59 she informed me that I could walk to the store.
21:53:02 I then asked her how I could get my groceries home,

21:53:05 and she said I should figure that out for myself.
21:53:08 I am totally opposed to closing Ward Street.
21:53:14 I made numerous calls for ambulances because of my
21:53:18 mother's heart problem.
21:53:19 They always arrived quickly.
21:53:20 But now with our whole area becoming a cul-de-sac, I
21:53:25 worry about emergency vehicles being able to gain
21:53:27 access to our homes.
21:53:30 I respectfully ask that those of you who voted to
21:53:33 close Ward Street, please reconsider.
21:53:36 In fact, I would love to see some of the other
21:53:39 streets, including Gardenia, reopened.
21:53:42 Thank you.
21:53:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Over here.
21:53:45 No clapping.
21:53:49 >>> My name is Holly Shalino, and I live at 5105 west
21:53:54 Cleveland street.
21:53:55 This development is directly in my backyard.
21:54:00 Unfortunately, I know that everybody has an opinion.
21:54:04 But I do feel as some of the other people have said
21:54:08 that the people who close this deserve to be heard.
21:54:10 And I thank you for being here to hear that.

21:54:13 I'm here to speak on the supporting of the vacating of
21:54:16 Ward Street.
21:54:17 It's been proven that Ward Street is used more often
21:54:20 as a cut-through for people who don't even live within
21:54:23 our neighborhood.
21:54:24 I think it's selfish for some of these people, they
21:54:27 closed all the other streets for their reasons but
21:54:29 they are not giving us the opportunity to see what
21:54:33 it's going to do to us if you leave that open.
21:54:35 Most people don't even stop at the stop sign on Ward
21:54:39 and Cleveland.
21:54:40 They roll through it or they speed through it.
21:54:43 So you add a few more thousand cars, what's going to
21:54:47 happen then?
21:54:50 The speed table, they don't work.
21:54:52 They have become a joke.
21:54:53 People run those like there's no tomorrow.
21:54:55 I mean, I'm not sure that people are looking at the
21:54:59 bigger picture here.
21:55:00 It's already an out-of-control scenario. By leaving
21:55:03 it open it's only going to get worse.
21:55:05 The fact is this property will be developed, or the

21:55:08 fact of the property being developed is inevitable.
21:55:10 We are at least being given an opportunity by the
21:55:19 development, they take any calls we have made, they
21:55:21 don't ignore us and they have answered every question.
21:55:24 They are letting us voice our concerns and minimize
21:55:28 the effect that this will have on our future when
21:55:31 the -- and the future of our neighborhood.
21:55:33 It's unfortunate that the Beach Park community has not
21:55:35 all agreed.
21:55:36 But it has brought many neighbors closer.
21:55:38 I feel by speaking tonight I can be a voice of a
21:55:41 homeowner and for the ones that are not able to make
21:55:44 this meeting.
21:55:45 In closing, I would like to thank the council members
21:55:47 that did vote earlier on this subject, and to let them
21:55:51 know that they have realized what is for the good of
21:55:54 the neighborhood.
21:55:55 For now and the continued growth that's happening on a
21:55:58 daily basis.
21:55:59 Thank you for your time.
21:56:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
21:56:13 >>> Is Kim Armstrong here?

21:56:16 Yes.
21:56:17 Brian Allaway?
21:56:21 Brian?
21:56:21 I don't see Brian Allaway. One extra minute.
21:56:28 Is Brian Allaway here?
21:56:35 Kim Armstrong, one extra minute.
21:56:38 >> My name is Neil Armstrong, I reside at 212 South
21:56:40 Ward Street, I have been sworn.
21:56:46 I have a little issue talking about people not close
21:56:48 to the -- what's happening here, if we can go to the
21:56:51 map.
21:56:55 I put a little different map up here.
21:56:57 Here's the Ward Street proposed closing.
21:56:59 Kennedy, Westshore.
21:57:00 I'm right here on Ward, which is four or five hundred
21:57:07 feet from the area.
21:57:07 I've only been living there 20 years.
21:57:10 I have kids that are 18 and 15.
21:57:12 So we have grown up with the issue.
21:57:13 We realize moving in there that traffic can change.
21:57:17 Things can go. It's a great area.
21:57:20 It's convenient.

21:57:21 We were there before the sidewalks, which was a huge
21:57:24 concern as well. But the kids did fine.
21:57:29 My neighbors to the north and to the west of me that
21:57:32 lived there 50 years, they built their houses.
21:57:35 And I had the e-mails that you guys have received.
21:57:39 They are saying they are in favor of keeping Ward
21:57:41 open.
21:57:42 There's really only one issue that we are dealing with
21:57:46 here.
21:57:46 It's solely access.
21:57:50 The question is whether we stop the cut-through access
21:57:55 at the risk -- or not the risk but cutting off our own
21:57:58 access off of Kennedy, as the traffic department says,
21:58:03 the last north-south access.
21:58:05 There's a misconception here.
21:58:07 I was told when I was doing my research that the
21:58:10 general City Council felt that Beach Park was fine
21:58:12 with having streets closed, because over the years,
21:58:15 there's been four closed.
21:58:17 And there wasn't a lot of resistance.
21:58:19 Well, why not?
21:58:20 Because even if you close one of those we still had

21:58:23 one remaining.
21:58:24 You close Ward, you have none remaining.
21:58:27 I mean, Hoover, yes, it touches Kennedy.
21:58:30 But as the gentleman before said, and you can see on
21:58:32 this map I have the traffic lights set up there, it
21:58:36 backs up from where memorial and Kennedy go west.
21:58:40 I mean, also the traffic coming off I-275, you don't
21:58:44 see the rate of speed that they come in Kennedy that
21:58:46 way crossing Hoover.
21:58:49 Not to mention what's a new six-story office building
21:58:53 that's not even occupied yet, and they are
21:58:56 redeveloping all of the office over there is going to
21:58:59 impact the area.
21:59:00 So Hoover is not a realistic option.
21:59:02 Because of the traffic patterns in the area.
21:59:07 I have a little bit different stance, as you probably
21:59:09 well know.
21:59:10 I spoke back in September here.
21:59:12 I looked at this issue and I said, well, I want the
21:59:15 access, but I also want the cut-through stopped.
21:59:19 And to me, I have a roughly 25-year background in
21:59:23 commercial real estate nationwide, primarily in recent

21:59:26 years focused in Florida and Tampa.
21:59:29 I looked at this project and said, why can't we do
21:59:32 gated access here?
21:59:34 I'm fully aware that you cannot gate a public street.
21:59:38 However, we had council member and legal counsel at
21:59:42 the September meeting recognize the fact that if you
21:59:44 vacate the road, turn it over to a private developer,
21:59:47 then it's private property, and you can gate that
21:59:49 access.
21:59:52 It gives the community, both sides, doesn't matter
21:59:54 which you are, if you want to close, actually if you
21:59:58 want the cut-through stopped, it stopped the
22:00:00 cut-through.
22:00:01 If you want the access, it gives you the access.
22:00:05 I hope City Council will look at this thoroughly.
22:00:09 It's not a difficult issue.
22:00:12 One issue of access.
22:00:13 And we have a solution that can get both sides of the
22:00:16 neighborhood what they want hopefully where everybody
22:00:20 is happy.
22:00:20 I did not see -- I proved there's another situation in
22:00:28 Tampa, presented pictures, showed it.

22:00:31 To me, it's just the only solution.
22:00:36 It gives the people that want cut-through stop, what
22:00:38 they want, the people that want access what they want.
22:00:42 Unfortunately, Beach Park homeowners association does
22:00:46 not represent the entire community.
22:00:47 In fact, they did no official poll.
22:00:51 From what I can tell they were aware of this situation
22:00:54 from September 2006 because it says in the August '07
22:00:59 e-mail that they worked with the developer for a year.
22:01:02 I just found out about this in April of 2007.
22:01:05 That's seven-month gap that to me neighbors didn't
22:01:08 know about.
22:01:09 Thank you.
22:01:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Armstrong.
22:01:12 >>> I live out in the middle -- the traffic from
22:01:25 Howard Frankland, it comes in 60, and the national
22:01:34 airport and national post office.
22:01:38 Let's don't go Kennedy because there's too many stop
22:01:41 lights.
22:01:41 They'll cut down my street.
22:01:44 One right after the other.
22:01:46 And they use get the wrong address because cutting my

22:01:52 driveway.
22:01:53 They have turned around in my driveway so much that
22:01:55 it's cracked all of the concrete.
22:01:57 I can see it.
22:02:00 And I'm getting just about had it.
22:02:03 And I'm ready to close the street.
22:02:06 Call me selfish.
22:02:09 I don't think anybody else would like it every day,
22:02:11 all day long, and when I want to come in, my garage
22:02:16 and my neighbor's garage, I want to come in to go to
22:02:23 my house.
22:02:24 He wants to come out of his.
22:02:26 Can't do it.
22:02:27 The traffic is so heavy.
22:02:29 In the mornings, and especially late in the evening.
22:02:34 That is what we get.
22:02:35 And they call us selfish?
22:02:43 Affected the most is from my house down to Azeele.
22:02:46 There's 200 families in that area.
22:02:49 And across from Azeele there are 300 families.
22:02:52 That's what I'm told.
22:02:53 I didn't make up the investigation.

22:02:58 That's just what I'm told.
22:03:00 And we get it the worst where I am.
22:03:05 And Cleveland street needs another redo, and you can't
22:03:15 drive safely around there anymore.
22:03:16 It's just impossible.
22:03:18 I thank you for the courtesy of coming here.
22:03:20 >> Thank you, Pauline.
22:03:22 And Mr. Miranda wanted to say something.
22:03:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Four or five days ago I was with my
22:03:31 wife and I stopped over at Chick Fil-A, not to make at
22:03:34 commercial, and although we didn't discuss any zoning
22:03:37 matters, this young lady looked at me like that, I
22:03:40 looked at her, and she says, I know who you are.
22:03:43 And she said, I'm from Ward Street.
22:03:46 But we never did discuss for or against.
22:03:49 But I just want top bring that up, that I had a
22:03:53 baseball cap on but they saw the bald head, I guess,
22:03:57 through the cap.
22:03:58 >>> And thank you for the courtesy.
22:04:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, ma'am.
22:04:05 >>> My name is Lewis H. Hill, III, my wife, son and I
22:04:11 resided at 31 West Spanish Main for over 10 years.

22:04:20 I heard a lot of the comments tonight.
22:04:22 I sent each of you all an e-mail outlining some of our
22:04:26 position and opposing the closing of Ward Street.
22:04:28 I would like to say that some of the young people who
22:04:31 have spoken tonight about their desire to have it
22:04:34 closed that have recently purchased there, they knew
22:04:39 the situation when they bought their home, and when
22:04:42 they brought their families there and moved them
22:04:44 there.
22:04:44 And this City Council has closed three of the four
22:04:48 streets getting into the Beach Park area there.
22:04:53 And if you take a look at these maps they have shown
22:04:56 you tonight, you either can come on Westshore, and the
22:05:00 traffic department put no-turn signs down there.
22:05:04 People have told you about the extent of the traffic
22:05:06 there.
22:05:07 Traffic department as I understand, and I did not
22:05:11 attend the prior hearings before you all because I
22:05:13 didn't know about it.
22:05:15 So I have not been members of the Beach Park
22:05:21 association since we moved into the area.
22:05:23 We are part of their security program.

22:05:24 We paid for that.
22:05:26 And there are people on the board where the board has
22:05:30 not taken a poll or a vote of the members in the Beach
22:05:33 Park civic association who live east of Westshore
22:05:37 Boulevard.
22:05:38 They aren't even affected about the Ward Street
22:05:41 closing.
22:05:42 And so the way I learned about it was going downward
22:05:46 street, which I use frequently, and from time to time
22:05:53 the city -- I talked to one of my neighbors, he said
22:05:57 what do you mean closing Ward Street.
22:05:58 >> I said, yeah, I saw the sign.
22:06:00 What is the date and time?
22:06:02 But these are matters that a small group out there
22:06:07 that consistently over the years wanted to close the
22:06:10 streets, and it doesn't affect all the people that
22:06:15 live there.
22:06:16 And their livelihood.
22:06:17 And we certainly pay enough taxes out there to the
22:06:20 City of Tampa to have equal and fair consideration on
22:06:23 that.
22:06:24 And thank you all very much.

22:06:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Hill.
22:06:31 >>> Good evening, my name is Jeffrey Shillingham, my
22:06:34 wife Holly and I reside at 5105 West Cleveland street.
22:06:38 I think the last time I was here I talked about the
22:06:42 Jeanie being out of the bottle in Westshore.
22:06:44 I really find it a shame that the neighborhood is so
22:06:47 divided like this.
22:06:50 Holly and I live right on the property that's about to
22:06:53 be developed.
22:06:54 I think it would be great if we all had the insight to
22:06:57 know that this would be developed or the city would
22:07:01 grow this much.
22:07:02 Wouldn't it have been great 30 or 40 years ago when
22:07:05 they zoned that property commercial general to know
22:07:08 that Tampa would go from 3, 000,000 people to a
22:07:10 million people, that they could build 25 feet off that
22:07:13 back wall, 45 feet high, and wipe out all the
22:07:17 residents that lived there?
22:07:19 My wife and I have lived there for 15 years.
22:07:22 We have minded our own business.
22:07:23 We love that neighborhood.
22:07:24 It's peaceful.

22:07:25 It's tranquil.
22:07:26 We don't hear any interference from Kennedy, any
22:07:29 interference from Westshore.
22:07:31 We certainly don't maned our neighbors who agree or
22:07:33 disagree with us, driving through the neighborhood.
22:07:36 But ladies and gentlemen, people don't understand the
22:07:39 impact of a Publix supermarket coming into a
22:07:43 neighborhood.
22:07:44 Their market demographics at 611 which is Dale Mabry
22:07:47 and Neptune is 36,000 to 50,000 people a week.
22:07:50 I know that because I used to sell to that store.
22:07:54 This development, if we don't close Ward Street, it's
22:07:58 not just going to get us folks that live on Cleveland.
22:08:01 We are rate on the development.
22:08:02 We are at ground zero.
22:08:03 The people on Azeele, Occident, O'Brien.
22:08:08 I was sad when they closed Gardenia myself.
22:08:12 And who will be more inconvenienced than those of us
22:08:14 who live right there? I use Ward Street every day.
22:08:16 And I'll tell you, most of us go downward, turn right
22:08:21 into Wachovia and go to the light on Gardenia because
22:08:25 we miss the light on Gardenia. This is the

22:08:29 circumstances that we now find ourselves surrounded
22:08:32 with by growth.
22:08:33 It's great to be an up and coming city.
22:08:36 But the growing pains cause a lot of pains for all of
22:08:41 us.
22:08:41 From the City Council, the neighborhood.
22:08:43 Wouldn't it be great if we could just ring a bell and
22:08:46 make it all work?
22:08:47 We have gotten to a point now where we have a
22:08:50 developer with a development who actually came in.
22:08:54 If I was on this board I would probably -- we all know
22:08:58 he could put a much bigger footprint in there.
22:09:03 Proposed, I think, a dynamite development that will
22:09:06 benefit the whole community.
22:09:08 Let's face it.
22:09:08 All of us will use it.
22:09:10 But the issue really comes down to two things.
22:09:14 Public good, safety, integrity of the neighborhood, or
22:09:18 convenience.
22:09:18 Well, guess what.
22:09:19 We are all going to be inconvenienced.
22:09:21 And if it's not for the development, you know, that

22:09:24 property has been owned by two major developers since
22:09:27 the I think early '80s.
22:09:31 If Porter doesn't develop it somebody else is going
22:09:33 to.
22:09:34 And we might have a developer come in and just thumb
22:09:37 his nose at the neighborhood, the Beach Park
22:09:39 homeowners association, in general, and just build it
22:09:42 out to the maximum footprint they can put in there,
22:09:45 and I'll tell you what, most of us will all be back in
22:09:48 here with more lawyers screaming, you have got to
22:09:51 protect us.
22:09:51 If we don't get Ward Street closed now, we'll never
22:09:55 get it closed.
22:09:55 And I'll tell you what, you experiment with the
22:09:57 integrity of the entire neighborhood.
22:10:02 And a lot of this to be developed without closing Ward
22:10:05 Street, we'll never get it closed after that.
22:10:08 Thank you very much for your time.
22:10:11 >>> My name is Carolyn Martinez Beachler, and I live
22:10:18 at 5110 west Cleveland street.
22:10:20 I have lived there about nine years and about five
22:10:22 houses down from the intersection of Cleveland and

22:10:25 Ward Street.
22:10:26 I can tell you right now, as of today, Cleveland is
22:10:30 closed right before Ward Street.
22:10:33 So the only way I can get out is to either go downward
22:10:37 street to Kennedy, or go on Ward Street to Azeele.
22:10:40 Most of the time, the street is closed either for pot
22:10:43 holes or I don't know. What else.
22:10:47 It's just very, very frequently closed.
22:10:49 So if Ward Street is closed it's going to be a greater
22:10:52 inconvenience, because I'm going to be forced to have
22:10:55 to go down top Azeele to get out of the neighborhood.
22:10:59 I think what's going to happen is it's going to create
22:11:01 a bottleneck.
22:11:02 I think that all of the traffic is going to be forced
22:11:04 to go down Cleveland street in order to get out of the
22:11:07 neighborhood.
22:11:08 You will be forced to either go right or left on
22:11:10 Westshore.
22:11:11 We all know and have talked about what a nightmare
22:11:14 that Westshore is to try to get across.
22:11:16 There's no light there.
22:11:17 And if you are coming home from Clearwater or

22:11:20 Westshore maul, you are going to have to go all the
22:11:22 way around Kennedy to get to your house when you live
22:11:25 there.
22:11:26 I think it's really also kind of ironic that we have
22:11:28 Westshore mall right across the street from us, that
22:11:32 has thousands and thousands of people there every day,
22:11:35 and it wasn't a problem for the neighborhood at that
22:11:37 point when Westshore mall was being built.
22:11:40 And people aren't cutting through our neighborhood to
22:11:42 go to Westshore mall.
22:11:44 I think the only people that are going to go to Publix
22:11:46 grocery store are the people who actually live in the
22:11:48 neighborhood.
22:11:49 Why would somebody who lives on the other side of the
22:11:51 neighborhood want to cut through our neighborhood to
22:11:54 go to Publix instead of going down Kennedy Boulevard,
22:11:57 which is a major thoroughfare?
22:11:59 I hope that you all will reconsider the closure of
22:12:01 Ward.
22:12:02 I agree with the previous statements that we have no
22:12:05 other access out of our neighborhood because of the
22:12:07 fact that Sherill street has been closed and there is

22:12:10 no other street to exit out of.
22:12:12 And with the flooding situation the way it is during
22:12:14 hurricanes seasons and thunderstorms, we are really
22:12:17 going to be stuck.
22:12:18 And I think it's definitely going to be a detriment to
22:12:21 everyone.
22:12:21 Thank you.
22:12:24 >> I live at 216 south Austin.
22:12:35 I want to start by saying that my wife's family has
22:12:39 lived in the neighborhood, at least on Occident, since
22:12:43 the neighborhood was built.
22:12:44 And it's seen a change.
22:12:47 And I've heard people talk about ward wanting to keep
22:12:50 it open.
22:12:51 However, the neighborhood has definitely changed.
22:12:55 There's a lot more traffic coming through.
22:12:56 And also with this development coming in, there will
22:12:59 be additional traffic especially coming from the
22:13:01 south.
22:13:04 Yes, there's a lot of traffic on Westshore and a lot
22:13:06 of traffic on Kennedy.
22:13:07 But those are designated as through major routes.

22:13:11 If you look at any road map or even some of the signs
22:13:13 along the road you will see that they are.
22:13:15 However, Cleveland and Azeele are not.
22:13:17 They are not designated as major routes.
22:13:20 And it seems that with additional traffic, they
22:13:24 probably will be used as if they were major routes.
22:13:28 But that's something we don't want to see in our
22:13:30 neighborhood.
22:13:31 And as far as the traffic congestion on Westshore is
22:13:33 concerned, and on Kennedy, I think that at least at
22:13:38 the county level, and the city level as well, there
22:13:41 are options that are being discussed including mass
22:13:45 transit and other things like that, which in the
22:13:48 long-term should help the traffic situation.
22:13:49 Those are things that we should be looking at for the
22:13:51 fought.
22:13:54 And then one other issue, which I don't think anyone
22:13:57 mentioned but I live right on the corner of Occident
22:14:00 and Azeele.
22:14:01 There's a lot of litter that I see in my yard from a
22:14:04 lot of the passing traffic that comes through.
22:14:06 And I think that that, in addition to safety, will

22:14:10 also be a down-side to having additional traffic cut
22:14:13 through the neighborhood.
22:14:14 Thank you very much.
22:14:16 >>> My name is LUCIA Keenan, Bayside Drive.
22:14:25 I think you are familiar with me.
22:14:27 I was here at the September 27 meeting.
22:14:28 And I sent you all several e-mails and letters.
22:14:31 So I'm not going to speak too much more to City
22:14:34 Council because you know what I think, but I want you
22:14:39 to know that I and my husband, who is out of town on
22:14:42 business, he can't be here tonight, he would
22:14:44 otherwise, but we are opposed to the vacating and
22:14:48 closing, either/or, of Ward Street and we are opposed
22:14:53 to the rezoning.
22:14:56 And mainly boxed in and flooding.
22:14:59 That's the bottom line here.
22:15:02 But I would really love to be in these City Council
22:15:05 meetings.
22:15:06 I have to come more because I learn so much.
22:15:09 We all need to be here more, I'm telling you.
22:15:11 Because tonight I hear so many things that are
22:15:13 relevant to what we are going through in our own

22:15:16 neighborhood.
22:15:16 You were talking earlier, Ms. Saul-Sena, about wanting
22:15:20 to preserve the alley grid in our historic district.
22:15:24 The alley grid.
22:15:25 I mean, we are talking about a road grid we are trying
22:15:27 to preserve.
22:15:28 An alley grid would be nice.
22:15:30 But roads are even more important.
22:15:33 They are essential for to us get around.
22:15:35 Mr. Dingfelder, you were very emphatic about the
22:15:39 Bayshore.
22:15:40 And we need to have a plan, and we need to think
22:15:44 long-term about what we are doing with development.
22:15:46 And granting all of these PDs.
22:15:50 Well, this developer is requesting a PD.
22:15:52 And I talked with so many people.
22:15:54 I still don't know what a PD is.
22:15:56 I don't know what it's going to mean to us.
22:15:59 But I did hear people say tonight that in some of
22:16:03 these things, you might grant a PD but it might not
22:16:05 get built now, it might be five years from now, but
22:16:09 it's going to be built.

22:16:10 We don't necessarily know this project is going to be
22:16:13 built now.
22:16:14 And people talk about wanting a grocery store.
22:16:17 Well, you know, that was years ago.
22:16:20 We have fresh market.
22:16:22 We have wild oats.
22:16:23 We have several Publix that developed in South Tampa.
22:16:27 We have Kash N' Karrys.
22:16:29 We have Albertson's.
22:16:31 We have lots of grocery stores.
22:16:32 We don't really need a grocery store.
22:16:34 And at Kennedy in front of Westshore? I can't imagine
22:16:36 anything worse.
22:16:38 A thousand parking spaces with traffic turnover.
22:16:41 I mean, you need to be smart about your Kennedy
22:16:45 corridor, just like you are about the Bayshore.
22:16:48 I mean, if you start letting this PD, and high-rise
22:16:52 potential and everything go up and down, you are going
22:16:54 to have it autumn the way to the Hillsborough River,
22:16:56 and they are going to be other neighborhoods like
22:16:58 Beach Park that go up the road that are going to be
22:17:01 concerned and wanting to close off their street.

22:17:03 And I told you all.
22:17:05 You all know this.
22:17:06 But I just think you need to please think through it.
22:17:09 And I would love to hear you all talking about it
22:17:11 together and not just voting, but listening to what we
22:17:16 are talking about, about growth, rampant development
22:17:19 growth and the traffic that comes with it.
22:17:21 Mass transit is not going to be viable for, what, ten
22:17:25 years or so?
22:17:25 You know, you have got to do something now to help us.
22:17:29 And the road is just a symptom of the problem.
22:17:32 And I thank you again.
22:17:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:18:09 >>> Thank you for the opportunity to have a voice.
22:18:13 My name is Ben bloom Stine and I live at 208 south
22:18:18 Gardenia Avenue.
22:18:19 I have been there for seven years.
22:18:21 And with the redevelopment of the water mark office
22:18:26 project we have seen steady increase in cut-through
22:18:28 traffic on our streets.
22:18:31 For the past year or so we find ourselves in favor of
22:18:36 things we never want.

22:18:37 We never wanted it to begin with.
22:18:39 Do we want commercial projects next to this
22:18:42 neighborhood?
22:18:44 Of course not.
22:18:45 But we are forced to choose commercial projects that
22:18:47 we can live with.
22:18:50 Before now we never wanted to vacate Ward.
22:18:53 But we find that this inconvenience is one that we can
22:18:56 live with when the following is considered.
22:19:03 All Beach Park residents will be saddened by the
22:19:06 closing of Ward Street as we use this street every day
22:19:11 for our convenience.
22:19:11 But the sad reality is that there are alternate
22:19:15 routes.
22:19:16 Even being a bit more inconvenient would preserve the
22:19:20 integrity of our quiet neighborhood streets.
22:19:24 For those who are unfamiliar with the area, I have
22:19:28 actually taken a different concept.
22:19:29 I have included a cut-through map so everybody can see
22:19:33 it.
22:19:36 You have a copy of it here.
22:19:38 But I have a view of it a little bit further out here.

22:19:42 And I want to point out that we are very fortunate
22:19:46 that in our neighborhood, we have currently, including
22:19:50 Ward, we have seven paths to exit or enter our
22:19:55 neighborhood.
22:19:56 I don't think there's any other subdivision in our
22:20:01 neighborhood west of Westshore that can say that.
22:20:05 In fact, they would love to have that many access
22:20:07 points.
22:20:12 They are here.
22:20:13 And I put arrows on yours.
22:20:16 But you have got one, two, three, four, five, six
22:20:24 And then seven.
22:20:32 With this map the red streets will be the most
22:20:41 impacted.
22:20:41 The green streets will be cut-through routes depending
22:20:46 on the traffic.
22:20:48 All other streets will get traffic that's lost and
22:20:52 looking for their way.
22:20:55 For other short-cuts.
22:21:00 The most impacted cut-through streets would be the six
22:21:04 north and south streets between and including Azeele
22:21:08 and Cleveland, with four of them being the most

22:21:10 heavily impacted.
22:21:12 Most of the heavily impacted cross streets, Ward,
22:21:15 Gardenia. Occident, Shore Crest, have very short
22:21:19 driveways.
22:21:21 And any visitors with families that have three cars
22:21:26 or -- you can fit like two cars in these driveways,
22:21:31 and you're blocking the sidewalk at that.
22:21:34 A third car would be in the street.
22:21:39 These streets are only 20 feet wide.
22:21:41 And not all of them have sidewalks.
22:21:46 These are all 500 feet long.
22:21:48 >>CHAIRMAN: Your time is up, sir.
22:21:49 >>> I'm sorry.
22:21:50 >>CHAIRMAN: Next one over here.
22:21:57 >> Michael Beachler, 5110 west Cleveland street, less
22:22:06 than a block away from ward.
22:22:10 I feel that closing Ward would be a grave error.
22:22:13 It's going to -- on Cleveland and force more traffic
22:22:18 on Azeele.
22:22:19 In the mornings that I walk my dog near Ward I see
22:22:22 quite a bit of traffic entering and exiting the
22:22:24 neighborhood on Ward.

22:22:25 Closing it is going to force traffic Hoover or over on
22:22:32 Cleveland towards the Westshore, or the light at
22:22:36 Azeele.
22:22:36 I think a light at Azeele will be our only viable
22:22:40 option to get in and out of the neighborhood if it's
22:22:43 closed.
22:22:43 So I personally feel that it should remain open.
22:22:46 Also, I'm concerned about foot traffic if Ward is
22:22:50 closed going to and from the grocery store.
22:22:52 I'd sure hate to see shopping carts left in front of
22:22:56 my home people walking their groceries home.
22:22:59 Thank you.
22:23:08 >>> Nice to see you again.
22:23:10 I'm here quite a bit lately.
22:23:13 This year and last year and the last eight years.
22:23:16 Nice to know where all our other neighbors are.
22:23:19 In the last eight years.
22:23:20 My name is Emmy Reynolds.
22:23:22 I'm the president of the Beach Park homeowners
22:23:24 association.
22:23:25 And my address is 208 South Trask Street.
22:23:28 I have lived in Beach Park for ten years.

22:23:31 I have been the president for seven years.
22:23:34 I ran unopposed and was reelected for my eighth year
22:23:38 next year.
22:23:39 I didn't think this was a hearing write was going to
22:23:40 have to come up again and defend our board, defend
22:23:43 Beach Park homeowners association, the actions of the
22:23:46 board and officers take.
22:23:47 I didn't think that was going to come up again.
22:23:50 Unfortunately, some of these people don't read their
22:23:54 mail, don't get their news letters, don't read
22:23:57 newspapers, haven't watched channel 15.
22:24:00 The fact that people saying that we have not
22:24:02 communicated to them is not true.
22:24:08 Margaret Vizzi would have been here this evening but
22:24:10 she's receiving a distinguished alumnae award in New
22:24:13 Orleans from her high school.
22:24:15 She also graduated from Loyola with a bachelors
22:24:18 science degree in medical technology so she's not just
22:24:21 some uneducated housewife like some people have
22:24:24 alluded to.
22:24:26 And I asked the City Council, you guys don't hold all
22:24:30 of the ---poll all of the residents of Tampa every

22:24:32 time you make a decision.
22:24:34 You're elected as a board, a governing body to rule.
22:24:37 Our board is elected to represent the 1300 homes.
22:24:39 We can't possibly poll every neighborhood on every
22:24:42 single issue that comes before us.
22:24:49 This is convenience versus safety and livability in
22:24:51 the city.
22:24:55 A grocery store would have traffic seven days a week
22:24:57 and it's early morning deliveries, late night,
22:25:01 constant truck traffic, and when we have met with the
22:25:04 developers, we realized something will be developed
22:25:08 there.
22:25:09 They were willing to work with the immediate
22:25:11 neighbors, and with the association to see what they
22:25:14 could do to minimize the impact.
22:25:17 They could have had a 25-foot setback.
22:25:19 They got 65 feet on one side, 45 on the other side.
22:25:23 They agreed to a limitation of the height of the
22:25:25 garage.
22:25:28 They are only developing 25% of what they could
22:25:30 develop on that site.
22:25:31 They agreed to list them, I think 48 conditions on the

22:25:34 site plan.
22:25:36 Specific things to address the neighborhood.
22:25:38 And I use Ward all the time myself.
22:25:41 And it's an inconvenience to me to not be able to use
22:25:44 it in the future if we do close it.
22:25:46 But the board is completely unselfish.
22:25:50 For those of us that don't live there realize the
22:25:52 people who are closest will be most impacted.
22:25:54 And I use it all the time.
22:25:57 I have to give up that convenience.
22:26:02 You guys talked about livability, great cities, in
22:26:05 order to keep Beach Park protected, and to not have
22:26:09 traffic going through to get to Publix, if there is a
22:26:12 Publix there.
22:26:13 We only see the only way of closing Ward.
22:26:20 Also, again, fire trucks come from station number 14
22:26:24 at Neptune and church.
22:26:26 They would access the neighborhood from Azeele.
22:26:28 They are not going to go from Kennedy to Ward to get
22:26:30 in.
22:26:30 That has no bearing whatsoever on this decision at
22:26:33 all.

22:26:35 Also, we are not a gated community.
22:26:38 There are many cities in the City of Tampa that have
22:26:42 only one way in or out.
22:26:43 We have seven, eight or nine.
22:26:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Your time is up.
22:26:45 >>> Thank you very much.
22:26:46 I hope that you support the vacating and this
22:26:49 development.
22:26:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
22:26:50 Is there anyone else who has not spoken you? Cannot
22:26:53 speak again, sir.
22:26:56 You did come up.
22:26:57 You had your chance.
22:26:58 Is there anyone who has not spoken on item 22 and 23?
22:27:01 If you are going to speak, please get up and come and
22:27:03 stand in the line to speak so we can get out of here.
22:27:08 >>> My name is Carol Richardson centrally, 4619 west
22:27:12 Woodmere in Beach Park.
22:27:17 I'm taking a slightly different view of this, in
22:27:21 addition to all the items that have been mentioned by
22:27:27 people opposing the Ward Street closing.
22:27:31 This particular vacation requested is not like a

22:27:36 typical vacation I have seen before.
22:27:40 This is not a plotted, never-used or rarely used
22:27:46 roadway, the closing of which would benefit economic
22:27:51 development.
22:27:51 The closing of which would put this property back on
22:27:53 the tax roll.
22:27:56 There's a good public benefit for that kind of
22:27:58 vacation.
22:28:01 But this is closing a clearly active, long-plotted
22:28:09 right-of-way that is used consistently for years by a
22:28:15 neighborhood, and it is really -- it's a perception
22:28:23 issue.
22:28:25 It appears, whether it actually does, it certainly
22:28:29 appears as though the prime beneficiary of this
22:28:33 closing will be a private developer.
22:28:35 I think a vacation really should primarily benefit the
22:28:40 public interest.
22:28:42 And if there's an incidental benefit to a private
22:28:44 developer or private individual but that's great, but
22:28:51 this is backward, at least it appears that way.
22:28:53 And I really think vacation is the wrong vehicle if
22:28:57 what you are really trying to do is traffic control.

22:29:00 And I would propose to the council on that basis deny
22:29:04 the closing.
22:29:07 Not vacation.
22:29:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
22:29:12 >> My name is -- 208 south O'Brien street and I don't
22:29:21 swear.
22:29:22 Bloop
22:29:22 I would like you all to reconsider it.
22:29:24 I think a grocery store, a lot of us are getting the
22:29:28 idea the grocery store as the carrot that's been
22:29:34 offered to Beach Park.
22:29:34 Closing Ward Street would take away the convenience of
22:29:37 this grocery store to us.
22:29:38 I think most of us will probably end up running to
22:29:41 Neptune to Publix.
22:29:44 I also think that council should possibly reconsider
22:29:50 the growth and a lot of the zoning that they do.
22:29:55 I believe the lady was right.
22:30:00 A lot of stuff gets built right up to the sidewalk
22:30:03 nowadays.
22:30:04 I heard a lot of good comments on both sides of this
22:30:07 issue tonight.

22:30:08 But I think that if they close Ward, and there's a
22:30:13 grocery store, people are going to take Cleveland or
22:30:16 Azeele to Hoover, and it's just going to increase.
22:30:20 Thank you.
22:30:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:30:27 >>> John Larkins.
22:30:29 I own property at 207 south O'Brien across the street.
22:30:32 I was here at the last meeting in September and at
22:30:34 that time I used the analogy of the Balkanization of
22:30:38 this neighborhood.
22:30:39 We have four open streets and they said, well, we'll
22:30:42 close this one.
22:30:42 No problem.
22:30:43 We have three remaining.
22:30:44 We had the same problems that you hope to have with
22:30:49 your children as well and they closed another street.
22:30:51 Increased the traffic on the remaining streets.
22:30:53 Now we are down to one street and everybody is cutting
22:30:55 through on Ward.
22:30:57 Surprise, surprise!
22:30:59 That was created by this City Council.
22:31:04 That's created the division in this neighborhood.

22:31:07 And Ms. Reynold may claim that communications goes
22:31:11 out, but --
22:31:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Sir, talk to us, not to them.
22:31:16 >>> I'm talking to him.
22:31:17 >> No, you talk to us.
22:31:19 >>> My point is that communications with the
22:31:22 association is not complete despite what Ms. Reynold
22:31:25 said and she knows it.
22:31:28 This is reverse eminent domain.
22:31:32 Reverse eminent domain.
22:31:36 And despite the fact that Margaret Vizzi followed me
22:31:40 and said the ambulance comes from over on Walrose,
22:31:42 the ambulance that came for me when my heart attack
22:31:47 came from Boy Scout an hour and a half before it got
22:31:53 there. By that time my neighbor drove me to Tampa
22:31:53 General. And when Ms. Vizzi comes up and gives you
22:31:56 all the street, whatever is accommodation to get by,
22:32:01 let's not rough up the waters, take this because it's
22:32:05 better than something else and we end up with the
22:32:07 consequence we have got here today. And we have a
22:32:09 deeply divided association that may not last through
22:32:11 this exercise.

22:32:13 I have spent my last money for the Beach Park
22:32:16 homeowners association with the current regime because
22:32:18 it's done me no good, it's done no good on O'Brien, no
22:32:22 good on Sherill, no good on Occident, anyplace else.
22:32:26 When you get east of Westshore, then we worry about
22:32:27 the property lot sizes, you can't do this, you can't
22:32:31 do that.
22:32:31 Thank you very much.
22:32:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:32:35 >>> I'm Monica -- I have never been to one of these
22:32:39 meetings before.
22:32:40 But I felt this was a very important issue so I took
22:32:42 the time to come.
22:32:43 I live in 17 West Spanish Main and I use Ward all the
22:32:48 time.
22:32:49 As you can see, our association is quite divided.
22:32:53 And they are divided because there's no vote.
22:32:55 We don't know what the majority is.
22:32:57 So people on both side of the aisle talking for and
22:33:00 against.
22:33:01 We have bylaws that say that we can take a vote on
22:33:04 such an important issue and there's no voting.

22:33:07 And in addition I want to pose a question to the City
22:33:09 Council.
22:33:10 I don't understand why you are giving away free, for
22:33:14 free, property on the south on Ward.
22:33:20 Is this the map up here?
22:33:30 So here is Ward.
22:33:33 South of Kennedy is going to be closed and given to
22:33:42 the developer for free.
22:33:43 The people that are concerned about safety for the
22:33:45 children should -- so the children can play.
22:33:52 So I'm opposed to having the closing of the street and
22:33:54 the development.
22:33:57 Thank you very much.
22:33:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:33:59 >>CHAIRMAN: Are you speaking?
22:34:05 Please come up.
22:34:08 >>> I live at 203 south O'Brien street.
22:34:13 And I have lived in that vicinity since 1976.
22:34:17 And I am opposed to vacating Ward.
22:34:21 I feel like if you want to go ahead and have the
22:34:25 development there, and then at some later time if you
22:34:29 find that it is really going to be impossible with

22:34:31 traffic, then we have that option as we did with all
22:34:34 the other streets that have closed.
22:34:36 And as far as directing the Beach Park homeowners
22:34:39 association, I happen to come to the September
22:34:43 27th meeting because somebody came to my home at
22:34:46 9:30 at night on the 26th and told me what was
22:34:49 happening.
22:34:50 I had just gotten back from a trip.
22:34:52 But I did not get the Beach Park newsletter until
22:34:56 October 3rd so everything was over and done with
22:34:58 by the time I even got to that newsletter.
22:35:00 So there is a communication problem.
22:35:02 And I have had many, many people call me in regard to
22:35:06 this saying that they didn't know what was going on,
22:35:09 they didn't know what was happening, they didn't know
22:35:11 the meaning of vacate, that it meant actually turning
22:35:15 the property over permanently, not just closing the
22:35:18 street like we did the others that could ultimately be
22:35:21 reopened if need be. They did not understand that.
22:35:25 And lots and lots of people down on Spanish Main and
22:35:29 Sandpiper and those areas have said that they did not
22:35:32 want that street closed.

22:35:33 But people that cannot come to these meetings and
22:35:38 express that, every single person on O'Brien street
22:35:42 with the exception of one, has said that they want to
22:35:45 keep Ward Street open.
22:35:46 But they can't come here.
22:35:48 They have small children.
22:35:50 One couple is disabled.
22:35:52 They are both in wheelchairs.
22:35:53 They would like to have come.
22:35:55 And they all have children.
22:35:56 We have two sets of twins on our street.
22:35:59 One of the men spoke here.
22:36:00 They want that street open.
22:36:02 Because of emergency vehicles, just for convenience
22:36:07 sake.
22:36:08 And if the traffic is all that horrible then we can
22:36:12 bring it black, believe me.
22:36:13 They close those streets up right and left.
22:36:15 And I think we can do it again if that happens if it
22:36:19 need be.
22:36:19 Thank you.
22:36:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, do you want to come up for

22:36:22 rebuttal?
22:36:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a reminder, if you wish with to
22:36:29 have any questions of staff or any other person --
22:36:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We'll do it before we close.
22:36:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I just want to give the petitioner an
22:36:36 opportunity.
22:36:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The opportunity is that I understand
22:36:40 we need to ask questions before --
22:36:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Close the public hearing.
22:36:44 >> No, questions before ---
22:36:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Who do you have questions of?
22:36:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll ask questions.
22:36:52 Is the legal department here?
22:36:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
22:37:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All five of them now.
22:37:04 >>CHAIRMAN: Come to the podium.
22:37:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: There is a difference, I believe,
22:37:08 between a vacation and a closing, am I correct?
22:37:11 >>> Yes.
22:37:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The last speaker talked about roads
22:37:16 or streets that were vacated but not closed.
22:37:19 Are you aware of that?

22:37:20 >>> Yes.
22:37:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And I'm sorry --
22:37:25 >>JULIA COLE: When you say closing, way understand you
22:37:27 to mean is the transportation department making a
22:37:29 decision to close down a roadway from getting from
22:37:34 point A to point B versus essentially the vacation of
22:37:37 the right-of-way under which the city no longer has an
22:37:40 interest in that property.
22:37:41 >> And I'll get back to that question.
22:37:42 But there was an interesting item that was brought up
22:37:45 and I won't mention the gentleman's name but I think
22:37:49 when you close, if you were to close Ward with a gate,
22:37:53 the problem is not the closing of that -- of the gate,
22:37:58 but what's on the other side of the gate legally.
22:38:01 >>> Do you mean if you were to close it and have a
22:38:06 gate set up and that there was some mechanism --
22:38:09 >> A right-of-way at the end of the gate.
22:38:11 >>> Right. If you were to say open or close a gate.
22:38:13 If there's a lot -- you are talking about something
22:38:17 that's remaining current, public right-of-way, we have
22:38:19 a process in our code for how you can request a gate
22:38:23 but it has to remain open for the public at all times,

22:38:28 but it's really more just the visual obstruction
22:38:30 versus actually keeping people out.
22:38:33 And if you are talking about vacating a right-of-way
22:38:35 and then putting a gate in that right-of-way which
22:38:39 maybe there's some kind of private easement for people
22:38:42 to utilize that property, that has another set of
22:38:45 legal ramifications.
22:38:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I'm hearing right, although it
22:38:49 sounds workable, it's really not?
22:38:54 >>JULIA COLE: It could be problematic.
22:38:55 It would really be something, depending on the
22:38:59 scenario you are talking about we would have to
22:39:00 research whether or not it would be snoop going back
22:39:05 to the first set of questions, from what I see in the
22:39:08 map, there's two other roads that have traffic signals
22:39:13 that lead into Kennedy presently.
22:39:18 And I forget the name of the roads.
22:39:22 And I know that they are both on the east side of
22:39:29 Ward.
22:39:33 >>> I'm being told by transportation, yes, two,
22:39:36 Gardenia and Occident.
22:39:40 >> At one time from what I gather, and I realize

22:39:41 without asking the questions --
22:39:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Ladies and gentlemen.
22:39:45 [Sounding gavel]
22:39:47 We are discussing with our staff.
22:39:49 >> I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the --
22:39:52 >>> I said there's a question related to not whether
22:39:54 or not -- there were streets that had actual
22:39:57 signalizations in an intersection.
22:40:00 >> Those streets are right now, you can't go from
22:40:03 Cleveland to Kennedy on those streets because they are
22:40:05 blocked.
22:40:05 >>> That's correct.
22:40:06 >> But they do have traffic signalization on Kennedy.
22:40:10 >>> That's correct.
22:40:11 >> All right.
22:40:14 My question to really myself is, there's no trade-off
22:40:19 here.
22:40:19 Does the city -- and I'm not only asking you but I'm
22:40:22 asking the transportation department at the same time,
22:40:24 I don't know this 1500.
22:40:28 I have heard that four or five times this evening.
22:40:30 It might be 958 from what I saw from the traffic count

22:40:33 but I may be wrong.
22:40:36 Does the city have any plans to improve the
22:40:38 transportation grid network of that area if this
22:40:44 street were to be closed?
22:40:46 A, I don't know the answer.
22:40:48 B, does the city have the right to reopen the vacation
22:40:54 of one of those two roads if not both of them?
22:40:57 And what would that do trafficwise in the
22:40:59 neighborhood?
22:41:03 I don't have the answer top that.
22:41:04 Those are just questions that I'm posing.
22:41:08 Does anybody want to answer?
22:41:09 >>JULIA COLE: The only thing -- I mean, I think you
22:41:13 need to hear from the transportation department.
22:41:14 >> Right.
22:41:15 >>>: The only question that I think is a legal
22:41:17 question is the authority of the transportation
22:41:21 department to reopen streets which are not vacated but
22:41:25 have been closed due to the need to have it safer for
22:41:31 neighborhood protection, with the traffic calming and
22:41:34 those issues.
22:41:35 The answer ton that question would be difficult

22:41:37 without going back.
22:41:39 I understand that some of that did occur as a result
22:41:41 of rezonings, which occurred --
22:41:44 >> In the '80s sometime.
22:41:46 >>> But I would need to research.
22:41:47 >> And the reason I'm asking, what's bothered me the
22:41:50 most is that I see friends against friends, neighbors
22:41:55 against neighbors, families against families.
22:41:58 And I want them to have an open dialogue.
22:42:00 It's not healthy to have 50% of some people on one
22:42:03 side and 50% of something on the inside and nothing in
22:42:06 the middle.
22:42:07 No one wins.
22:42:08 No one loses either.
22:42:09 They just don't talk to each other for awhile.
22:42:11 And I don't want that to happen in this neighborhood
22:42:13 or any other neighborhood.
22:42:14 I would imagine that in all the years I have been
22:42:16 here, this is the most e-mails, of course when I was
22:42:21 here earlier there was no e-mail.
22:42:24 They had the pony express.
22:42:25 But from what I'm saying is, there's a backup of about

22:42:29 two inches and I never did a count on it.
22:42:32 It's about 50-50.
22:42:33 And what's represented today was about 50-50 or close
22:42:36 to it.
22:42:37 And these are the things that are troubling to me.
22:42:40 And I said it earlier.
22:42:42 If you are going to get mad at someone, get mad at me
22:42:45 but not at each other.
22:42:46 And I mean that sincerely.
22:42:49 So I'm trying to figure a way to satisfy both sides.
22:42:51 Maybe there isn't a way to satisfy both sides.
22:42:54 But I'm trying to find out FHP there is, to salvage
22:42:58 the neighborhood from the neighborhood.
22:43:01 I've heard more conversation today regarding a
22:43:03 homeowners association than -- that's not here.
22:43:07 What's here is a closing of a street.
22:43:11 Not about bickering between a neighborhood
22:43:13 association, one way or the other.
22:43:14 Whether they are right or wrong I don't know.
22:43:18 But I want to be able to see if there's some common
22:43:22 ground to work on this item, and if the transportation
22:43:26 department is prepared to give some answers today one

22:43:29 way or the other, and I understand this is kind of
22:43:32 relatively short-lived time to make this presentation,
22:43:37 and I appreciate whatever efforts you can make to
22:43:41 answer those vacation and those streets that are
22:43:45 there.
22:43:46 I don't know if that would increase, or hammer anyone
22:43:50 else in the neighborhood to any degree.
22:43:52 But I just wondered what would happen.
22:43:58 Maybe we could do it.
22:44:05 >> City Transportation staff.
22:44:09 I just handed out some traffic movement counts,
22:44:13 studies that were performed by our division earlier,
22:44:17 one day, I believe it was a Tuesday, and if you look,
22:44:20 I have highlighted terms of the fourth page and
22:44:22 highlighted, the top of the page there.
22:44:25 Total count for the segment between Kennedy and
22:44:28 Cleveland was 1,461.
22:44:42 Closing Ward or vacating Ward and opening up one of
22:44:46 the other streets.
22:44:49 You can see the other streets that have been closed,
22:44:52 have been cul-de-sacked, they were not vacated.
22:44:59 However, I do believe that each of them were

22:45:02 conditions of the rezoning plan.
22:45:07 So I believe that may be a legal question as to if
22:45:11 they would be in violation of their PD if we were to
22:45:15 open one.
22:45:17 They are still right-of-way.
22:45:24 Not vacated.
22:45:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And the reason I come with these
22:45:30 problems, I guess, in the neighborhood that I live
22:45:32 there there's some days you can't leave your house at
22:45:34 all, anytime there's an event or a certain situation,
22:45:38 I don't want to name the situation but I guess we all
22:45:41 know where it's at, you can't leave for an hour and a
22:45:44 half before any event, or an hour and a half after the
22:45:48 event, you can't even walk the street because they run
22:45:50 you off over.
22:45:52 And I don't want to happen to the neighborhood.
22:45:56 So I just -- me, I'm caught between something that
22:46:00 looks like it can work and something with opposition
22:46:06 that looks like they are getting deprived of
22:46:08 something.
22:46:08 And I understand my position and my role here.
22:46:11 But I don't know if we do have a legal problem that we

22:46:15 do this in because it's based on zoning.
22:46:17 I don't know --
22:46:21 >>JULIA COLE: And I'm not saying that we can or can't.
22:46:24 And I will tell you, as a general matter of law, we
22:46:27 have the right, it our roadway, we hold it public
22:46:33 interest, we have the right to make those kind of
22:46:35 determinations.
22:46:35 My only caveat and the reason I'm reluctant to give
22:46:38 you a full answer today is I have been told that those
22:46:41 closings of those roads and cul-de-sacking of the
22:46:43 roads were associated with rezoning, without having
22:46:46 opportunities of research, what was in the zoning I'm
22:46:50 reluctant top say --
22:46:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And I understand very much and
22:46:53 appreciate what you just said.
22:46:55 However, I don't think I can live if I ask this
22:46:58 council not to vote today and postpone it for another
22:47:00 day, I'll have six people taking shots at me.
22:47:02 But Linda Saul-Sena just said true.
22:47:07 But what I'm saying is I certainly want to see the
22:47:15 project go through.
22:47:17 I'm not convinced there will even be a grocery store

22:47:20 because that was never mention in the planned
22:47:22 development it was mentioned there was something up
22:47:24 there, they couldn't say who it was.
22:47:26 It was like a mystery.
22:47:28 And so I can only tell you way saw in the plan, if
22:47:31 what I remember way saw.
22:47:33 But I don't know how to set this aside, to vote on
22:47:39 something, and then I don't want to give you a false
22:47:43 impression that I'm going to say whether I'm going to
22:47:46 vote to close Ward and I'm going to try to open one of
22:47:48 the other streets and then I find out I can't open the
22:47:51 other street.
22:47:51 So I'm just twixt and between, you know.
22:47:57 And there's where I'm at, my sentiment to the
22:48:00 neighborhood.
22:48:00 But please don't get mad at each other.
22:48:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The issue before us right now is
22:48:08 primarily issue 22 and 23, which is one, 22, is
22:48:13 vacating, 23 is rezoning.
22:48:15 I'm a firm believer that while the community may be
22:48:19 evenly divided, we have a legal responsibility to
22:48:22 consider the facts.

22:48:23 That's before us.
22:48:25 Not emotions.
22:48:26 The facts.
22:48:28 Not fights.
22:48:29 But facts.
22:48:32 What are the facts?
22:48:33 Fact one is that our staff, our professional staff,
22:48:35 has not recommended -- did not recommend at the
22:48:39 closing of Ward Street.
22:48:41 That's fact one.
22:48:43 Fact two, our legal counsel, as I understand it, and
22:48:50 Julie, you may want to come address this, when we
22:48:54 vacate, there has to be a public purpose of vacating a
22:48:59 public road.
22:49:02 That public purpose has not been established first
22:49:06 meeting nor this meeting.
22:49:07 Could you speak to that?
22:49:08 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
22:49:10 Again, I'm going to read from case law, because I have
22:49:15 heard that petitioner doesn't have to agree with the
22:49:19 sentiments that Mr. Scott has state, and other legal
22:49:25 counsel before me advised what the law has said but I

22:49:28 am actually going to read out of the memorandum that
22:49:30 you have received in the past from Rolando Santiago
22:49:34 and it says, is generally recognized into the law
22:49:38 applicable to sub rights-of-way, is that publicly
22:49:41 dedicated street or held in trust for the public by
22:49:44 the government on the part of the streets must
22:49:48 exercise for the public or general welfare with public
22:49:50 interest.
22:49:51 And that streets cannot be vacated of purely private
22:49:55 interest.
22:49:55 And so --
22:49:57 >> Now for the audience help, would you give that in
22:50:00 laymen terms?
22:50:01 >>> In laymen terms what that means is when you have
22:50:04 vacation in front of you, you are making a
22:50:06 determination as to whether or not it is in the --
22:50:09 >> In the public interest whether we vacate.
22:50:11 >>> And you weigh the facts.
22:50:13 You weigh -- and something that I actually read
22:50:16 earlier in the day, some of the things you looked at
22:50:18 is will it alleviate the public in maintaining a rite?
22:50:24 Is it a roadway that's no longer useful for use by

22:50:27 very few members of the public?
22:50:29 You can make this decision based upon whether or not a
22:50:33 redevelopment but it can't be solely just a private
22:50:36 developer.
22:50:38 Those are the interests you are weighing.
22:50:42 There will be evidence in the record and you make that
22:50:44 decision on that basis.
22:50:45 >> And you make the decision based on the facts,
22:50:47 because A if they end up in the court the courts is
22:50:50 going to look at what, case law and fact.
22:50:53 Thank you.
22:50:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Are we asking staff questions or
22:51:00 are we discussing this?
22:51:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Asking questions of staff.
22:51:02 >> I just wanted to know where we are.
22:51:11 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to you make it really
22:51:13 clear what Mr. Scott just said.
22:51:15 If we were to do this, it might be determined that
22:51:19 it's not in the public interest.
22:51:26 Are we liable possibly?
22:51:30 >>> Well, the law -- I think way hear the question is,
22:51:41 the decisions that you could potentially end up, and

22:51:43 whenever you make a decision there's always a
22:51:45 possibility you may receive a lawsuit as a basis for
22:51:48 that decision, and the question will be -- and the
22:51:50 question as I described is what would be revealed as
22:51:56 to whether or not that information has been shown, and
22:51:58 it's part of the record.
22:52:00 So can a court look at this and say, what these
22:52:04 facts -- and I want ton say it's a little different
22:52:07 than a general zoning, where it's a pure record
22:52:11 review, this is something that would go in front of
22:52:12 the court and they would have the opportunity to
22:52:14 reweigh this information.
22:52:16 So I want to make that clear, it would be what they --
22:52:22 I only say that to you because it isn't just what
22:52:24 happens today.
22:52:25 It's just what happens in the future.
22:52:26 But ultimately what a court would be reviewing is
22:52:31 these issues that I just raised, and it's what they
22:52:34 call -- fairly debatable standard you have a lot of
22:52:40 latitude.
22:52:41 It is within your discretion to weigh these issues,
22:52:43 but ultimately what a court looks at is whether or not

22:52:46 these factors as I described have been met, and that's
22:52:49 the court's decision will be, but to say there's
22:52:52 liability, no, I don't believe that there would be any
22:52:56 kind of monitor liability for this kind of issue.
22:52:59 You may have a lawyer in the audience that could
22:53:02 positive attentionly -- potentially disagree with me
22:53:06 but that's not my sense of it.
22:53:08 But could a court overturn based on way described in
22:53:10 this instance, they would be weighing this evidence
22:53:12 like you are weighing this evidence and make that
22:53:15 decision.
22:53:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm ready to close the public
22:53:18 hearing.
22:53:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, do you want rebuttal?
22:53:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You have 12 seconds.
22:53:25 [ Laughter ]
22:53:26 >>> Thank you very much.
22:53:31 I was expecting that.
22:53:32 That's why I didn't do any introductions.
22:53:35 I saved all my time for the end.
22:53:38 What was handed out to council is the little graphic
22:53:40 and I'll get to it in a second.

22:53:42 But I think, yes, this is a decision that the council
22:53:45 has gone back and forth on.
22:53:46 I think to get to councilman Scott, I keep on trying
22:53:50 to call you Commissioner Scott, it's just habit, I'm
22:53:52 sorry.
22:53:53 But the benefit we see here is from the community
22:53:57 relative to safety from the cut-through traffic.
22:54:01 It's not this overrunning public benefit for the
22:54:05 greater good and the redevelopment. World or economic
22:54:07 development somewhere.
22:54:08 It's talking about the benefit to eliminating
22:54:11 cut-through traffic.
22:54:12 What this developer has done is he's done -- and again
22:54:17 from the March 1st hearing, has done what you want
22:54:20 every developer to do. He has looked at a site, met
22:54:24 with the community association, heard what they had to
22:54:27 say, worked with them on conditions, developed the
22:54:30 site that's sensitive to the adjacent neighbors, and
22:54:33 walked into a fire storm on a vacation award.
22:54:37 And it is simply a question of convenience or
22:54:40 inconvenience and it's in the eye of the beholder.
22:54:44 What I'll put up in this graphic, a representation, an

22:54:53 accurate one, of all the petitions that have been
22:54:55 filed, pro and con, by household, not individuals, and
22:55:00 the e-mails that we have been able to get copies of
22:55:02 from the in-box for public information.
22:55:05 And what is clear on this, and we won't claim that
22:55:08 everybody here tonight has a linchpin here. What is
22:55:13 clear, the people that don't want Ward closed are the
22:55:18 least affected by Ward, and they use it as a
22:55:21 convenience to get to the Wachovia bank ar to cut
22:55:25 through to get to the Gardenia light because you
22:55:27 cannot make a left turn out of Ward.
22:55:29 It's a left-in only.
22:55:31 Right in, right out, left turn in.
22:55:33 So you can't go to the airport.
22:55:35 Can't go across to Clearwater, from this direction.
22:55:38 You have to go to a light.
22:55:43 One of the lights that councilman Miranda has been
22:55:47 pointing to.
22:55:48 We have a cluster of people that are affected by the
22:55:50 cut-through traffic today. And what the developer is
22:55:52 telling you is that the CG zoning, we heard a lot of
22:55:56 people say, gee, the developer is getting this land,

22:55:58 and maximizing this site, and putting all the density
22:56:02 on here, and the old carrot and the stick.
22:56:06 What the developer is telling you is that the CG
22:56:08 zoning on the west side of Ward today can be developed
22:56:13 for the square footage, that he's proposing in the PD.
22:56:18 What he's saying is that in listening to the community
22:56:21 concerns, we have developed a plan that increases
22:56:24 buffers, protects grand trees, provides screening,
22:56:28 provides landscaping, to buffer the community from
22:56:32 those noises and those impacts of commercial
22:56:35 development which these sites are rezoned for,
22:56:40 protecting as neighbors.
22:56:42 So when you look at all the comments about safety, the
22:56:48 fire department has already said there is not an issue
22:56:50 with you response times, with the closure of the
22:56:52 street.
22:56:53 The police department has indicated there's no problem
22:56:55 with public safety response with the closing of the
22:56:57 street.
22:56:59 Your staff has basically approached this from, I don't
22:57:02 think staff has recommended for the vacation of any
22:57:04 street, because their business is building roads, not

22:57:07 closing roads.
22:57:08 But the fact is out here that we have a cut-through
22:57:12 traffic situation, because people do come down on
22:57:15 Kennedy, and it is congested, and they cut through the
22:57:17 neighborhood to get through Azeele and head down
22:57:19 Westshore or run through the neighborhood.
22:57:22 The developer recognizes that in developing this site,
22:57:26 if Ward is not closed, there will be more traffic on
22:57:29 Ward.
22:57:31 It's more convenient for people to come through the
22:57:34 neighborhood and come upward than to go to the light
22:57:37 on Gardenia and turn in to the shopping center, or
22:57:42 come in and make a left turn only.
22:57:44 Also it should be noted that it's an unprotected
22:57:47 intersection.
22:57:50 The most dangerous movement you can have for people to
22:57:52 use what they consider as a primary access.
22:57:54 Several people indicated that there's no other way to
22:57:58 get to the airport and to get to Clearwater.
22:58:02 You can't get there on Ward now.
22:58:04 You have to go right, go to Westshore, or go to the
22:58:08 Gardenia light, make a U-turn and head back west.

22:58:11 Hoover will get through because it has a light to get
22:58:14 to you another light and you can go north to the
22:58:16 airport, or straight through to the mall for that
22:58:19 matter.
22:58:23 But I believe sincerely the developer has done a lot
22:58:26 on the site plan.
22:58:27 He has done much with the neighborhood.
22:58:31 And it's unfortunate there is a division of opinion.
22:58:34 But I think those that were probably on council, or
22:58:37 saw it when the other streets were closed, there was
22:58:41 still the split.
22:58:42 But those roads were closed in recognition of the
22:58:44 community impact.
22:58:46 There is a public benefit here.
22:58:48 The developer has done what you would expect him to
22:58:51 do. We don't want to send the wrong message to
22:58:53 developers that are trying to do the right thing.
22:58:55 Is it a grocery store?
22:58:57 Yes.
22:58:57 Is it a Publix?
22:58:58 Yes.
22:59:01 It is on the site plan.

22:59:04 We can't put grocery store on the site plan.
22:59:08 That's what it is.
22:59:09 Eights grocery store use.
22:59:10 But this is the real deal.
22:59:12 This isn't something we are just trying to look to
22:59:15 develop.
22:59:16 I would be happy to answer any questions.
22:59:18 I hope you maintain your support for the project.
22:59:20 Be glad to answer any questions.
22:59:23 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
22:59:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
22:59:27 >> Second.
22:59:28 (Motion carried)
22:59:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we have an ordinance?
22:59:33 For the closing?
22:59:34 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
22:59:43 The ordinance that you have.
22:59:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Will you bring it?
22:59:47 Give to the Mr. Caetano.
22:59:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would you tell the council when you
22:59:51 get a chance, let them know the what the basis of the
22:59:55 substitution is?

22:59:56 >>> There are a couple of changes and additions.
23:00:10 Manhole.
23:00:12 Requirement.
23:00:14 That's the basis of the changes for the ordinance.
23:00:18 It's not a substantial change.
23:00:20 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: An ordinance vacating, closing,
23:00:21 discontinuing, and abandoning a certain right-of-way,
23:00:26 all that certain portion of southward street from
23:00:29 Kennedy Boulevard to north of Cleveland street, in
23:00:37 Hesperides subdivision, a subdivision in the City of
23:00:40 Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida, the same being
23:00:43 more fully described in section 2 hereof, providing an
23:00:46 effective date.
23:00:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Second?
23:00:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
23:00:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
23:00:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just have a couple of comments to
23:00:57 everybody who has come in here tonight till 11:00.
23:01:01 First I want to compliment everybody for their
23:01:04 participation.
23:01:06 They have been extremely articulate, intelligent
23:01:08 crowd, and on the whole very civil.

23:01:10 And we appreciate that.
23:01:12 As you watched all evening long, we always have tough
23:01:16 decisions to make.
23:01:17 And I said a lot of times this is one of the toughest.
23:01:20 Charlie mentioned, it's amazing how evenly split this
23:01:24 is.
23:01:24 You saw them lined up on one wall, lined up on the
23:01:27 other wall, it's virtually down the middle.
23:01:31 You know, the e-mails we received, the phone calls we
23:01:33 received is down the middle.
23:01:36 It's extremely tough.
23:01:37 I also wanted to make clear that my vote is not based
23:01:40 upon what the Beach Park neighborhood association
23:01:44 wants, okay?
23:01:47 I vote with them sometimes.
23:01:48 I vote against them sometimes.
23:01:50 I vote with Mariner sometimes.
23:01:52 I vote against Mariner sometimes.
23:01:54 I just vote based upon the best decisions for that
23:01:56 particular case.
23:01:57 Okay.
23:01:58 On a case-by-case basis.

23:02:00 For those of you who are angry at the association, I
23:02:02 would urge you not to be.
23:02:04 They are all volunteers doing the best they can.
23:02:06 And I don't believe anybody's vote up here is just
23:02:10 based upon the fact that it's the neighborhood
23:02:14 association.
23:02:14 I think we all think more objectively than that.
23:02:17 My vote is based on one question that I asked Mr.
23:02:21 Straley, who was the first person to speak tonight.
23:02:23 I said, Mr. Straley, coming from your house, over by
23:02:27 Woodmere, on the back over there on Beach Park, right
23:02:31 next to the bayou, I said how would you get to this
23:02:34 grocery store?
23:02:35 Okay?
23:02:36 And he was very frank and honest as he always is, and
23:02:38 he said, I would take right up through there, come up
23:02:42 Cleveland, to Azeele, and over to Ward.
23:02:45 And that's my huge concern.
23:02:48 That's it.
23:02:50 This is going to be an attracter.
23:02:53 We are going to go from 1400, 1500 cars per today up
23:02:58 to who knows what?

23:03:00 3,000, 4,000, 5,000 trips per day is very, very
23:03:04 realistic, okay?
23:03:05 And don't fool yourself.
23:03:08 It's going to be Beach Park and Sunset Park who are
23:03:11 going to use this grocery store.
23:03:12 And they are all going to come right through Azeele
23:03:16 and Cleveland and Ward, if Ward Street is not closed.
23:03:21 Okay.
23:03:22 It's an inconvenience.
23:03:23 Yes.
23:03:24 It's an inconvenience to my father who lives right in
23:03:32 your neighborhood.
23:03:33 Fine.
23:03:34 It's an inconvenience and I'm sorry.
23:03:35 But for those people on this map, right hear with the
23:03:39 green pins, it's more than an inconvenience.
23:03:42 It's about safety.
23:03:43 And that's where my vote is.
23:03:44 And I'm sorry for those of who aren't happy with me on
23:03:49 that vote.
23:03:50 But I seconded the motion.
23:03:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'll reiterate.

23:03:56 You all have the patience of saints and this is a
23:03:58 very, very tough vote.
23:03:59 I have to take responsibility the years before when I
23:04:02 was on council, I voted to close many of these
23:04:05 streets.
23:04:05 I thought it was a great solution because it would
23:04:08 protect the neighborhood from the Kennedy traffic.
23:04:11 And there's a tipping point.
23:04:13 And I think Ward is the tipping point where you just
23:04:16 can't close another street.
23:04:17 You have made very articulate compelling arguments on
23:04:20 both sides, it's a very tough vote that I do not feel
23:04:24 comfortable closing Ward.
23:04:25 I feel like it's sort of the pop-off valve with all
23:04:29 the other streets closed.
23:04:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Weaver a motion and second.
23:04:33 Ms. Mulhern?
23:04:34 >>MARY MULHERN: I can't believe all you people were
23:04:38 here and you're not getting paid either.
23:04:41 It's just amazing how involved and how much work the
23:04:46 neighborhoods do.
23:04:51 Charlie, if you don't mind.

23:04:54 And to spend your evenings here.
23:04:56 And I really appreciate it.
23:04:57 And I know, this is really tough, because it's not
23:05:02 going to be a great thing for anyone.
23:05:04 And I think it's kind of sad that this is -- this
23:05:10 wonderful proposal is dividing this neighborhood.
23:05:13 And I hate to say it but I'm not sure that the
23:05:16 developer managed to really get buy-in, because we
23:05:22 have such a division.
23:05:24 And I think as self people said, we have problems with
23:05:28 our land use and zoning regulations so that we have
23:05:31 got to make these tough decisions like this, because
23:05:35 anything goes.
23:05:36 And we have to try to figure out how to do it.
23:05:39 So I just want everyone to know that I do have empathy
23:05:45 for you trying to get in and out of those
23:05:47 neighborhoods.
23:05:47 But I feel like our advice from legal counsel really
23:05:52 made it clear, the public benefit -- the public roads
23:05:56 are for the public.
23:05:57 They are not just for a few people who live around
23:06:00 them.

23:06:00 And I just feel like we can't, even though it may
23:06:06 inconvenience the people closest to it, the rest of
23:06:10 the people of the city have the right to use that
23:06:12 road.
23:06:13 And as Ms. Saul-Sena said, with all those other roads
23:06:17 closed, we can't just keep doing this or we are all
23:06:20 going to be trapped in our neighborhoods eventually.
23:06:23 So I know we do have that responsibility to try to
23:06:27 figure out some of these zoning things so we don't
23:06:29 have people feeling like they don't want to live in
23:06:33 their neighborhood anymore.
23:06:34 So I just hope there won't be ill will, and I
23:06:43 understand the frustration, but I don't feel like
23:06:46 anyone, any of you is being selfish or did anything
23:06:52 wrong or weren't considering people.
23:06:55 I know you all worked really hard to work together and
23:06:57 come together as a neighborhood.
23:06:58 And I hope you will continue to do that.
23:07:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
23:07:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Madam Chair, just for the record, I
23:07:05 have never in all my times here ever interrupted a
23:07:09 council member who was speaking.

23:07:10 I take some offense when I'm asking the chair to
23:07:14 recognize me as the next speaker and some council
23:07:16 members tells me, "Charlie."
23:07:19 I'm not in kindergarten and I don't play around too
23:07:21 much.
23:07:22 Now, that being said, this is a very difficult one, as
23:07:28 I said earlier.
23:07:29 My own daughter -- and I won't tell you her name --
23:07:33 the other day stopped me, said, You can't close Ward.
23:07:37 I said, Why not?
23:07:38 She said, Because I use it.
23:07:40 And I answer, You live a mile and a half south of
23:07:42 there.
23:07:42 So she herself uses that road and confessed to me that
23:07:46 she does a cut-through because it's easier.
23:07:50 I'm not saying it's not easier.
23:07:52 But the ramifications of an increased traffic as was
23:07:56 stated earlier, maybe 3, 4, 5,000 cars, would be a lot
23:08:01 harder if this road is left open.
23:08:07 If someone sports the motion made by Mr. Caetano
23:08:10 seconded by Mr. Dingfelder, not because I'm 100% for
23:08:14 it but I feel the alternatives are very little and

23:08:16 very small.
23:08:17 The only thing I want to say on the record again is
23:08:19 that I will try to continue on my own to talk to the
23:08:25 legal department and to the transportation department
23:08:28 to give some analogy of one of those two roads being
23:08:32 open, not because I want to do that and create more
23:08:34 traffic to the neighborhood, because I know a lot of
23:08:39 you use it without even thinking about it,
23:08:41 subconsciously, that neighborhood south uses it, and
23:08:44 all the roads along, not just to myself where I live
23:08:49 at or anyone else.
23:08:51 Thank you.
23:08:51 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and second.
23:08:54 Vote and record.
23:08:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The motion is to --
23:08:57 >>GWEN MILLER: To approve the closure.
23:09:02 Reset it again.
23:09:15 Did it take?
23:09:15 >> It didn't take.
23:09:18 >> Yes, it did.
23:09:19 I see it up there.
23:09:20 >> Would you put it on our screen?

23:09:22 >>THE CLERK: The motion did not carry, with --
23:09:31 >> I pushed yes.
23:09:32 >> I saw that.
23:09:32 >> Do it again.
23:09:34 Clear it and do it again.
23:09:36 >>CHAIRMAN: Vote and record.
23:09:49 Don't take too long.
23:09:52 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern, Saul-Sena,
23:10:00 and Scott voting no.
23:10:04 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dingfelder, would you read it?
23:10:08 Wait.
23:10:09 Wait just a moment.
23:10:12 >> An ordinance rezoning property in the general
23:10:14 vicinity of 4950, 5002 and 3010 West Kennedy Boulevard
23:10:24 in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
23:10:27 described in section 1 from zoning district
23:10:29 classifications PD planned development, retail,
23:10:31 office, drive-in, bank, college, CN, commercial
23:10:35 neighborhood, providing an effective date.
23:10:37 >> I am one of Publix's best customers.
23:10:40 I think I am there about every day.
23:10:42 But I drive past this location a lot and the traffic

23:10:45 is already impossible and I think this proposal is
23:10:47 just too much of an imposition on the surrounding land
23:10:52 use and I will not be supporting it.
23:11:02 >>CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and second.
23:11:04 Vote and record.
23:11:12 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern and Saul-Sena
23:11:14 voting no.
23:11:16 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to receive and file.
23:11:17 >> So moved.
23:11:18 >> Second.
23:11:18 (Motion carried)
23:11:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else to come before council?
23:11:23 We stand adjourned.
23:11:24
(Important: ADD TWO HOURS TO TIME CODES)
DISCLAIMER:
The preceding represents an unedited version of a
realtime captioning file which should neither be
relied upon for complete accuracy nor used as a
verbatim transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.