Help & information    View the list of Transcripts



TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, September 11, 2008
5:30 p.m. session

DISCLAIMER:
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this 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.

17:32:16 [Sounding gavel]
17:32:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council will now come to
17:32:19 order.
17:32:20 Roll call.
17:32:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
17:32:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
17:32:27 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
17:32:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
17:32:32 Okay, I am going to ask Mrs.
17:32:38 >>JULIA COLE: For the continuances tonight.
17:32:42 I believe we are going to continue all of them.
17:32:45 Do we need to open the public hearing?
17:32:47 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, before we start the
17:32:49 meeting, I would like to say we got to remember seven
17:32:51 years ago today we were terrorized, and everybody is
17:32:59 feeling the effects of it.
17:33:00 And it's a tough thing to remember about that but we
17:33:04 have to remember it and be aware.
17:33:10 Thank you.
17:33:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
17:33:12 And he's referring to September 11, Twain, and of
17:33:15 course we did have a reflection during the prayer this
17:33:25 morning.
17:33:25 So pray that that will never happen again.
17:33:29 Thank you for bringing that item to our attention
17:33:32 tonight.
17:33:32 Okay.
17:33:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to open items 1, 2 and 3.
17:33:37 >> Second.
17:33:37 (Motion carried).
17:33:38 >>JULIA COLE: I would also ask that you include item
17:33:43 number 4 as well.
17:33:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Open item 4, too.
17:33:46 >> Second.
17:33:47 (Motion carried).
17:33:48 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
17:33:52 I sent City Council a memorandum earlier today that
17:33:55 item number 1, 2, 3 and 4 which are revisions to
17:33:59 chapter 27 and also a revision to chapter 27.5 be
17:34:03 continued for two weeks until your September 25th,
17:34:06 2008 agenda.
17:34:08 I would ask for 6:00.
17:34:10 We typically hold our amendment hearings at 5:30 so we
17:34:14 can do either time, depending on what your pleasure
17:34:17 is.
17:34:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I don't think we have a very long
17:34:23 agenda that evening.
17:34:23 >>> We don't snoop so 6:00 would be fine.
17:34:26 >>JULIA COLE: I would ask you to make that motion.
17:34:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's go to the public.
17:34:31 Anyone here to address council on the continuance of
17:34:34 chapter 27?
17:34:35 Okay.
17:34:36 All right.

17:34:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to continue until September
17:34:41 25th at 6 p.m.
17:34:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
17:34:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.
17:34:47 Opposes?
17:34:48 Okay.
17:34:48 >>JULIA COLE: Addition I had requested of the chair
17:34:51 and the clerk to walk on a resolution to set a public
17:34:54 hearing on an additional chapter 27 amendment that was
17:34:56 part of the realm but did not have the resolution to
17:35:01 set that as a public hearing so I ask that you set
17:35:05 that.
17:35:05 It did have a 5:30 time frame, but given the motion
17:35:09 you set the other ones at 6:00 I am going to go ahead
17:35:11 and substitute a resolution indicating that this would
17:35:13 be set at 6:00.
17:35:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
17:35:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
17:35:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Second.
17:35:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we need to read the resolution?
17:35:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: No.
17:35:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded that we

17:35:23 set the hearing for 6:00.
17:35:26 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
17:35:28 Opposes?
17:35:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Chairman, I received a phone
17:35:33 call from Margaret Vizzi who is very interested in
17:35:37 discussing this prior to the meeting that we have set
17:35:41 in two weeks.
17:35:42 If you could speak with her, that would be really
17:35:45 helpful.
17:35:46 >>> That would be fine.
17:35:48 Thank you.
17:35:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anything else?
17:35:49 Then we'll stand in recess until 6:00.
17:35:52 Okay.
17:35:53 (City Council recess)








18:02:29 Tampa City Council reconvened
18:02:35 [Sounding gavel]
18:03:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council will now come to
18:03:41 order.
18:03:43 And a few items that we need to -- I'm sorry, roll
18:03:47 call.
18:03:48 Thank you.
18:03:48 Roll call.
18:03:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
18:03:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
18:03:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
18:03:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
18:03:57 There are two items that we need, Finance Committee
18:04:03 and zoning committee, item 21 and 22 that we need to
18:04:06 deal with.
18:04:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, it would be my
18:04:13 suggestion that the chair open the floor for public
18:04:17 comment, just on 21 and 22 and then just take a motion
18:04:21 to move item 21 and 22 and then you can move on from
18:04:24 there.
18:04:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion to open?
18:04:26 >> So moved.

18:04:27 >> Second.
18:04:27 (Motion carried).
18:04:28 >> We have item 21 and 22.
18:04:31 Anyone want ton address item 21 and 22?
18:04:34 That's Finance Committee and the building and zoning
18:04:37 committee.
18:04:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Move item 21 and 22.
18:04:42 >> Second.
18:04:43 (Motion carried).
18:04:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
18:04:47 Thank you.
18:04:47 So moved.
18:04:48 That's item 21 and 22, moved by Councilwoman Miller,
18:04:52 seconded by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
18:05:02 If you are going to address council tonight, you need
18:05:04 to stand and be sworn.
18:05:05 Anyone speaking before council tonight on any agenda
18:05:08 on the -- item on the agenda please stand and be
18:05:10 sworn.
18:05:10 If you are going to speak and address council, you
18:05:12 have to be sworn tonight.
18:05:15 (Oath administered by Clerk).

18:05:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Now we need to kind of clean up this
18:05:21 agenda.
18:05:21 We have a long evening.
18:05:22 And so we kind of need to clean a few things up here.
18:05:27 Yes, ma'am.
18:05:29 >>> Good evening, Mr. Chairman, council members.
18:05:31 LaChone Dock, Land Development Coordination.
18:05:33 On the agenda that I passed out, there are a couple of
18:05:36 items we need to go over.
18:05:38 Item number 9, if we can remove this item from the
18:05:43 agenda.
18:05:47 October 23rd.
18:05:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
18:05:51 Opposes?
18:05:51 (Motion carried).
18:05:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Excuse me, did that motion include
18:05:55 the setting of it at that particular date?
18:05:59 >>LaCHONE DOCK: It can just be removed.
18:06:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To remove it.
18:06:02 That's fine, thank you.
18:06:03 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Item number 14, the petitioner in
18:06:07 coordination with the staff requests a continuance to

18:06:09 September 25th at 6 p.m.
18:06:11 >> So moved.
18:06:12 >> Second.
18:06:14 (Motion carried).
18:06:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone wants to address council on the
18:06:17 continuance of this item it's being moved to September
18:06:19 25th.
18:06:20 That's item number 14.
18:06:21 Item 14.
18:06:22 Z08-54.
18:06:30 >> Move to continue to September 25th at 6 p.m.
18:06:34 >> Second.
18:06:35 (Motion carried)
18:06:36 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Item number 20 requesting a
18:06:39 continuance to September 25th.
18:06:40 >> Second.
18:06:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Excuse me, the motion would be to
18:06:43 open the public hearing?
18:06:44 >> Yes.
18:06:45 Open the public hearing.
18:06:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That was the motion?
18:06:47 >> Yes.

18:06:48 And they are requesting a continuance to September
18:06:51 25th, 2008, at 6 p.m.
18:06:53 Is that right?
18:06:54 Anyone wish to address council on this item, this item
18:06:57 number 20, Z-08-47.
18:07:03 Anyone wishing to address council on the continuance?
18:07:05 >> Move to continue to September 25th at 6 p.m.
18:07:08 >>
18:07:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
18:07:12 (Motion carried).
18:07:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else wish to continue an item
18:07:22 tonight to September 25th?
18:07:23 It is my understanding we only have now about three
18:07:26 items.
18:07:26 Is that right?
18:07:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Earlier this evening at 5:30 there
18:07:30 were four items that were moved to the evening of the
18:07:33 25th of September.
18:07:35 Those were this three chapter 27 amendments, one a
18:07:38 chapter 17.5 amendment.
18:07:41 Tonight, you just took action to add two more
18:07:44 rezonings to the already existing one that is

18:07:48 presently scheduled to go.
18:07:51 One will go so that is a total of seven items that are
18:07:55 set for the evening of September 26th.
18:07:59 So I believe -- I'm sorry, September 25th.
18:08:04 If there is anyone who is especially towards the end
18:08:07 of the agenda, seeing how lengthy the agenda is
18:08:11 tonight, wishes to have their public hearing opened
18:08:15 tonight and then continued and heard on the 25th
18:08:19 of September, if there's a petitioner who wishes to
18:08:21 make that application to council, council would
18:08:22 entertain that.
18:08:24 Otherwise, all the rest of the remaining hearings
18:08:26 would be heard tonight, irrespective of how long it
18:08:29 takes.
18:08:30 So if anyone wishes, if there's any petitioner who is
18:08:33 scheduled to be heard tonight who instead wishes to
18:08:35 have their case heard on September 25th, would you
18:08:37 please come forward and make that request?
18:08:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to open item number 5.
18:08:46 >> Second.
18:08:52 >> Just a couple of preliminary matters if I may.
18:08:54 I just wanted to bring to council's attention just a

18:08:58 reminder if there's been any ex parte communication
18:09:01 was any petitioner, his or her representative or any
18:09:04 member of the public in regard to any of tonight's
18:09:06 hearings, please, before you vote, please disclose the
18:09:08 sum and substance of that conversation and with whom
18:09:11 you had it.
18:09:13 Secondly, I believe there are items to receive and
18:09:16 file that have been available for public inspection in
18:09:18 council's office.
18:09:19 I'd like those to be accepted before the hearings
18:09:21 begin by motion, please.
18:09:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to receive and file.
18:09:25 >> Second.
18:09:25 (Motion carried).
18:09:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And before you also begin, would be
18:09:29 you read also council's rule on videos and PowerPoints
18:09:34 and all that so everybody will be clear on that?
18:09:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I am going to direct the public's
18:09:38 attention, this appears in every agenda.
18:09:42 On page 8 of tonight's agenda, for instance, it does
18:09:44 say electronic media presentations before City Council
18:09:48 pursuant to rule 7-I of council's rules of procedures,

18:09:55 persons requesting to use electronic media for
18:09:57 presentation to City Council are required to notify
18:10:00 the chair, the city clerk's office and the City of
18:10:03 Tampa cable communication department, CTTV, at least
18:10:08 48 hours in advance.
18:10:10 Electronic media must be delivered to CTTV at least 48
18:10:14 hours prior to broadcast.
18:10:17 That is council's rule.
18:10:19 And last week, council, you do have a custom regarding
18:10:24 general public comment at regular meetings, where the
18:10:28 public has an opportunity to speak for three minutes.
18:10:30 Council's general rule is they do not entertain
18:10:33 electronic media at that time.
18:10:36 People can speak, or if they wish to bring pictures
18:10:39 they have the overhead.
18:10:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thanks very much.
18:10:41 We'll proceed now with item number 5.
18:10:46 >>> The first item on tonight's agenda is petition
18:10:48 Z-08-48 for the property located at 6824 south
18:10:52 Manhattan Avenue.
18:10:54 The petitioner is requesting to rezone the property
18:10:56 from IG industrial general to RM-18 residential

18:11:00 multifamily to 7.63-acre site is surrounded with a
18:11:04 vacant parcel to the north, commercial to the east and
18:11:07 south and residential uses to the west.
18:11:09 This is Euclidean rezoning request and therefore must
18:11:12 be comply with all regulations set forth under the
18:11:15 zoning district, and they may not request any waivers.
18:11:23 I have an aerial of the site.
18:11:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Use the microphone, please.
18:11:37 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Okay 89 just speak and it will come
18:11:39 on.
18:11:39 >>> This site located here on Manhattan, Interbay
18:11:43 south of the site, and this is Lois here, east of the
18:11:46 site.
18:11:48 We have PD located to the west, multifamily,
18:11:52 single-family with single-family running along
18:11:55 Manhattan.
18:12:01 This is an aerial of the site.
18:12:05 And this is the site located on Manhattan.
18:12:16 Another view of the site.
18:12:18 This is the southern portion of the site.
18:12:25 That's the view looking south on Manhattan.
18:12:35 This is the commercial use south of the site.

18:12:42 Manhattan.
18:12:42 This is that PD development on the corner of Interbay,
18:12:45 west of the site.
18:12:47 Another view west of the site.
18:12:50 And further west.
18:12:55 This is located northwest of the site.
18:13:02 The development committee has reviewed the committee
18:13:04 and finds it consistent with City of Tampa Land
18:13:07 Development Code.
18:13:08 I did want ton note to you on page 2 of the staff
18:13:11 report, the landscape specialist had a comment
18:13:15 regarding the particular trees that are located on the
18:13:18 perimeter of the property.
18:13:20 Those trees are located there but it should be easy to
18:13:24 develop there and still preserve those trees.
18:13:27 So that was the comment she made within the staff
18:13:29 report.
18:13:29 That concludes staff presentation, if you have any
18:13:32 questions.
18:13:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
18:13:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My question about the trees is,
18:13:36 since this is Euclidean and they can't ask for any

18:13:39 waivers, does the property owner have to submit a tree
18:13:45 survey as part of their documents when they apply to
18:13:48 build whatever they are planning to build?
18:13:51 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Yes, ma'am, that is correct.
18:13:53 Part of their permitting process they would have to
18:13:55 submit that.
18:13:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My concern is they are going to be
18:14:00 demolishing the existing, if they get the zoning, the
18:14:03 existing warehouse do. They have to submit the tree
18:14:05 survey prior to demolishing the warehouse so that they
18:14:09 by accident don't demolish the trees with the
18:14:11 warehouse?
18:14:17 >>LaCHONE DOCK: I believe when they submit the permit,
18:14:20 it would have to show the site as they propose the
18:14:24 development to exist and show all trees within the
18:14:26 radius of the site.
18:14:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Julia?
18:14:30 Excuse me, but this particular site has some great
18:14:34 trees.
18:14:36 It would be easy to protect them but it would also be
18:14:38 easy to get rid of them and I would rather they be
18:14:41 protected.

18:14:42 My question is when the person applies for a
18:14:44 demolition permit to demolish the existing warehouse,
18:14:46 do they have to, as part of the demolition
18:14:48 application, show that they are -- show us a tree
18:14:52 survey and show that they are not going to hurt those
18:14:57 trees?
18:14:57 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
18:14:59 As part of the demolition permit, no, you don't need
18:15:03 to give a tree survey.
18:15:06 However, they would be obligated to still have a
18:15:08 protective radius from when they are doing any kind of
18:15:10 work.
18:15:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Then how would our staff know that
18:15:15 they are knocking things down if there isn't a survey?
18:15:18 >>> Well it's not currently required --
18:15:22 >> Do we make that change in 27?
18:15:24 >>> I'm not sure where the demolition permit standards
18:15:27 are.
18:15:28 They may be located in chapter 5.
18:15:29 >> At the end of tonight let's have this conversation.
18:15:32 Thank you.
18:15:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Planning Commission?

18:15:39 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff.
18:15:43 I have been sworn in.
18:15:45 And I'm trying to fill in the boots of Tony Garcia
18:15:48 tonight.
18:15:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Better looking than Mr. Garcia.
18:15:55 >>> Thank you, Mr. Miranda.
18:15:57 Staff has submitted a staff report to the City Council
18:16:02 with a finding of consistency.
18:16:04 I would like to address the finding through a big
18:16:07 picture on the overhead.
18:16:12 You can see from this overhead that there are -- the
18:16:15 bigger picture is that residential is the trend, it's
18:16:18 the development focus, and the planned category in
18:16:22 which this rezoning is occurring is transitional use
18:16:26 24, which unfortunately is a grab bag for the plan.
18:16:30 It says wherever the trend is that's where the GU
18:16:34 allows for that trend to occur over some time.
18:16:37 As you can see, and LaShon just told you, the trend is
18:16:43 towards residential.
18:16:45 City Council has been supportive of plan amendments in
18:16:48 the area to the south, out of industrial into
18:16:52 multifamily uses, and that is the trend.

18:16:56 That's why the Planning Commission has submitted a
18:16:59 finding of consistency and comprehensive plan
18:17:03 policies.
18:17:04 Speaking to mitigation and creation of like uses
18:17:09 within the area.
18:17:12 For those reasons Planning Commission staff is
18:17:14 recommending consistency to the City Council.
18:17:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions by council?
18:17:19 Petitioner?
18:17:20 State your name and address for the record, please.
18:17:28 >> Michael Horner, 14502 North Dale Mabry highway
18:17:33 suite 200 Tampa, Florida 33618 representing Mr. George
18:17:37 Peterson, the owner and applicant of this request.
18:17:41 I have been sworn.
18:17:43 Council, I'll be brief.
18:17:44 I also have Mr. Peterson in the audience this evening
18:17:47 who would like to briefly testify as well.
18:17:49 I think Michelle and LaShon had a pretty good history
18:17:53 perspective on this, and I think clearly as a
18:17:55 transitional use 24 plan sector, we're there.
18:17:59 It's in place.
18:17:59 It's happening.

18:18:01 My client has had master packing there for almost 30,
18:18:05 35, 40 years, and it's been a fixture in that
18:18:09 neighborhood ongoing, no interruption, has not closed
18:18:14 down.
18:18:14 They had three shifts, 24/7.
18:18:18 Those trucks go in and out daily.
18:18:20 And that is going to change in the future.
18:18:22 Now, I'm also going to tell you there are no immediate
18:18:26 plans or contracts, there are no end users in play
18:18:30 here.
18:18:30 It's just that the investors and my client have gotten
18:18:33 together and said, what is the future of master
18:18:35 packing five and ten years?
18:18:37 They have a five-year lease agreement.
18:18:39 We have seen those changes to the east, the
18:18:41 multifamily, the PD, the RM-24, phase, schooner cove,
18:18:48 numerous mother multifamily family developments in
18:18:50 that immediate area toward Lois.
18:18:52 I would agree that west of man hat han, I think that
18:18:55 character changes somewhat.
18:18:56 In fact, if you go a short drive down Interbay you
18:19:01 will see some nice in-fill single-family houses.

18:19:04 Ballast Point has done an incredible job,
18:19:06 rejuvenation, renovation of those smaller lots.
18:19:09 East of Manhattan, I don't see that changing anytime
18:19:12 to single-family detached soon.
18:19:14 I think that has been out the bag for quite some time.
18:19:18 Those are gated communities.
18:19:20 There's some single-family attached unit projects as
18:19:22 well, council.
18:19:26 I have just taken a close review, shot some videotape,
18:19:30 went back to the city and I think that's a trend they
18:19:33 don't see stopping anytime soon.
18:19:35 Ms. Saul-Sena, there are some nice oak trees on the
18:19:37 site. In fact my client will tell you he's planted
18:19:39 some of those himself, has no interest in taking those
18:19:41 down.
18:19:41 We have talked to the planning staff, and clearly we
18:19:44 have surveys.
18:19:45 If you want a tree survey to reflect those existing
18:19:48 trees, short of amending chapter 27, my client would
18:19:52 agree to do so to ensure that staff has a baseline,
18:19:56 and that index of removal and preservation.
18:19:59 It would be foolish in anyone's mind to take down

18:20:02 those large oak trees.
18:20:03 Brazilian peppers have been there for a number of
18:20:06 years.
18:20:06 They need to go, straining out the other good species
18:20:10 and live oaks.
18:20:10 But I think we are here tonight to look at what is the
18:20:13 long range plan of the City of Tampa.
18:20:16 It's a 24-acre project.
18:20:18 My client said, look, do we do 24 units per ache
18:20:20 theory would be marketable?
18:20:22 It requires detailed site plan specific district.
18:20:27 We don't have that in play at this time.
18:20:29 We drop down to RM-18, it was reasonable.
18:20:33 Plan policies, we walk in that permitting door in five
18:20:36 or ten years, we know that CSE is going to take
18:20:39 control of landscaping, stormwater, driveway, SWFWMD,
18:20:43 driveway access management, tree preservation,
18:20:46 et cetera, and we are willing to accept that.
18:20:47 The RM-18 district has no waivers and in fact we agree
18:20:51 to that.
18:20:52 So with that, council, we think it's a fair request.
18:20:54 We think it's indicative of the change and the

18:20:58 transition in that neighborhood.
18:21:00 My client was born and raised, knows this area well,
18:21:05 on this property late nights.
18:21:07 I think he see it is writing on the wall in the not
18:21:10 too distant near future, five, six years, it not going
18:21:13 to be an industrial area.
18:21:14 Neighbors they've spoken with everybody most kind.
18:21:16 Some have said we don't want government section 8
18:21:18 housing.
18:21:19 My client doesn't want that either.
18:21:21 His name is going to be part of that sale transaction
18:21:24 as well.
18:21:25 We have had some single-family attached town home
18:21:27 developers contacting me and indicating, gosh, we
18:21:30 would love to see master packing go, because we have a
18:21:33 long-term commitment, we are trying to jump start this
18:21:36 market, it's underway, the market suffered in the last
18:21:39 few years, but we think it will be a step in the right
18:21:43 direction, to remove Euclidean IG district with no
18:21:46 restrictions and come up with something that has to
18:21:48 meet all current standards including stormwater,
18:21:50 landscaping, tree preservation, so forth.

18:21:54 That's all I have for you.
18:21:55 I have a number of exhibits and graphics but I think
18:21:58 they only compete with what the commission submitted
18:22:02 to you.
18:22:02 At this time I would like to have Mr. Peterson speak
18:22:04 for just a few minutes.
18:22:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Peterson?
18:22:08 State your name and address for the record.
18:22:17 >>> George Peterson, 5020 Riviera, and I have been
18:22:21 sworn in.
18:22:23 I actually have a lease on that property for those
18:22:26 seven years with master packaging and they have
18:22:29 indicated any reason to move.
18:22:30 I am just trying to protect something for the future
18:22:32 down the road, for myself and my children.
18:22:34 And that's the only reason we are trying to do this
18:22:36 now.
18:22:37 I have no intention of selling it or doing anything to
18:22:39 the property.
18:22:40 Again we have seven years and will try to renew a
18:22:46 lease with them.
18:22:48 I don't know if you have any questions for me.

18:22:54 >>MARY MULHERN: When is your current lease up?
18:22:55 >>> Seven years from now.
18:22:57 >> Seven years from now?
18:22:58 >>> Yes.
18:22:59 >> So why are you asking for the rezoning now if you
18:23:01 have no plans?
18:23:02 >>> I just want to try to lock everything in right
18:23:04 now.
18:23:06 There's no particular reason for right now.
18:23:12 >>MARY MULHERN: So in this zoning you are the current
18:23:14 occupant can continue their business under residential
18:23:17 mixed use?
18:23:25 Julia?
18:23:29 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
18:23:30 I got to check to see whether or not under the RM-18
18:23:34 they can continue with what I understand is an
18:23:38 industrial use.
18:23:38 They would at a minimum be a nonconforming use if
18:23:46 that's their decision and City Council believes the
18:23:49 classification is correct.
18:23:50 But give me a moment to --
18:23:52 >>MARY MULHERN: So if we approve rezoning they could

18:23:55 still continue to operate?
18:23:57 >>> It would be considered a legal nonconform use.
18:24:01 At a minimum.
18:24:01 But I need to look.
18:24:04 >>MARY MULHERN: Can I ask you another question before
18:24:06 you sit down?
18:24:08 There is a question from the neighborhood association
18:24:10 about not being contacted.
18:24:13 Or not being part of the process, request to rezone.
18:24:21 When you are doing this kind of Euclidean rezoning, do
18:24:24 you notify the neighborhood association?
18:24:26 >>> They are required to send a notification to the
18:24:29 president of the neighborhood association within 250
18:24:33 feet, and whoever we have on file as being that
18:24:36 president.
18:24:40 It's the same type -- not withstanding whether it's a
18:24:42 PD or Euclidean zoning.
18:24:44 >> So I guess the question is if the neighborhood is
18:24:51 within a hundred -- 250 feet?
18:24:53 And if they were noticed.
18:24:54 >>> Without having more information to determine
18:24:56 whether who had indicated that they had not received

18:24:59 notice, I would have to look at that and determine
18:25:02 whether or not they were on the notice.
18:25:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I have the letter here.
18:25:09 >>JULIA COLE: If you don't mind me coming up there.
18:25:11 >> May I just add a comment to that, Mr. Chairman?
18:25:15 It's unique, Ms. Mulhern, we are the sun bay
18:25:21 association, sun bay south, advised Al Steenson, sent
18:25:24 a letter and he advised me that technically kind of in
18:25:28 the backyard of Ballast Point which I recognized so I
18:25:31 immediately contacted Tom Vinceo, also had ongoing
18:25:36 discussion was Mr. Steenson the past couple months so
18:25:39 we made absolutely sure both parties were aware of our
18:25:42 request.
18:25:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Where does Ballast Point -- can you
18:25:45 show me on the overhead where Ballast Point
18:25:48 neighborhood is?
18:25:53 >> This is Interbay.
18:26:00 This is Manhattan.
18:26:01 I believe the line gerrymanders.
18:26:05 In fact, this portion to the sun bay south that
18:26:10 excludes Ballast Point.
18:26:11 Technically right next to Ballast Point.

18:26:13 It makes no sense, if that was not require the
18:26:18 association.
18:26:19 >> So did you contact everyone?
18:26:20 >> Well, by phone and by e-mail, yes.
18:26:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, thank you.
18:26:30 >>> Thank you very much.
18:26:31 Anyone here want to address council in support or you
18:26:37 are in opposition -- here in support or opposition?
18:26:41 Mr. Steenson?
18:26:44 So just one person speaking tonight?
18:26:47 Okay, go ahead.
18:26:50 >>> Al Steenson representing Gandy sun bay south.
18:26:53 I have been sworn.
18:26:56 The association did not meet in August.
18:27:00 We took a little vacation.
18:27:01 And therefore this hearing was originally scheduled
18:27:03 for the 28th but was canceled because of lack of a
18:27:07 quorum.
18:27:07 I took it upon myself to e-mail all of the members in
18:27:11 my address book.
18:27:13 And for the record, I have 30 responses from my
18:27:20 members.

18:27:20 Now, the count is 28 opposed, one undecided, and one
18:27:28 in support.
18:27:29 I'll be willing to put these into the record.
18:27:34 Since it was rescheduled, we were able to discuss it
18:27:37 last Monday night at our normal September meeting. A
18:27:39 vote was taken to oppose it.
18:27:41 Now, we are not just going to oppose it just to oppose
18:27:44 it.
18:27:45 I would like you to know why.
18:27:47 Number one, Mr. Horner states in his e-mail -- and let
18:27:53 me clear something up.
18:27:54 Did he try to notify our association.
18:27:55 He was given improper information as to our mailing
18:27:57 address.
18:27:59 We haven't received mail at 4207 west Oklahoma in ten
18:28:02 years.
18:28:03 Now where they got that I have no clue.
18:28:06 Officially on the neighborhood registry, which, states
18:28:11 our property address, mailing address, e-mails, web
18:28:14 site is on there. But Mr. Horner did e-mail me, so as
18:28:19 far as I'm concerned, that's notification.
18:28:23 But in the e-mail, he stated -- and Mr. Peterson is

18:28:28 concerned about the viability of his business,
18:28:33 economics, restrictions may be coming down the road.
18:28:35 Well, ladies and gentlemen, we are all concerned about
18:28:37 economics.
18:28:38 But we are not down here trying to rezone our
18:28:40 property.
18:28:42 Okay.
18:28:44 Our association has continually opposed multifamily.
18:28:48 You all know that.
18:28:50 Mr. Dingfelder, now that.
18:28:52 But more importantly, this is a standard Euclidean
18:28:58 petition, and therefore there's no site plan.
18:29:02 Without one, we have no opportunity for any input
18:29:05 whatsoever.
18:29:09 We don't have -- there's no footprint.
18:29:14 Just like a PDA but there's no pretty pictures and no
18:29:19 footprint.
18:29:20 In the future if Mr. Peterson wants to develop his
18:29:22 property, then come up with a site plan for review and
18:29:27 discussion.
18:29:27 There's no guarantee that we'll support him then, but
18:29:30 I can tell you tonight the association will not

18:29:32 support what is before us tonight.
18:29:38 So I ask you, council, to deny this petition.
18:29:40 In addition, I hope you have received this letter.
18:29:44 Tom Vento was not able to be here tonight, sew so I
18:29:48 told him that if you have not received it that I would
18:29:50 ask that it be put in the record, and this is the Port
18:29:55 Tampa civic association, they are opposing this
18:29:58 rezoning because, as they put it, because of the
18:30:02 uncertainty.
18:30:03 So we ask that -- I have a copy.
18:30:08 Do you all have one?
18:30:09 I'll put this copy in the record.
18:30:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Was that the buzzer?
18:30:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No, forklift.
18:30:20 >>> And with that, Mr. Chairman, we respectfully ask
18:30:22 that this petition be denied, but if sometime later
18:30:26 down the road they want to put in something that we
18:30:29 can put our teeth in, we may or may not support that.
18:30:31 So thank you very much.
18:30:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
18:30:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
18:30:37 Anyone else?

18:30:38 Okay.
18:30:43 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
18:30:45 If I can just respond to some of the questions that
18:30:47 Ms. Mulhern had asked, I was able to find out some
18:30:51 additional information.
18:30:52 As it relates to the existing use of the property from
18:30:54 industrial use, that would be considered a legal
18:30:56 nonconforming use, if you were to in fact rezone this
18:31:00 to an RM-18 meaning they can continue to operate, but
18:31:03 they would not have the ability to expand past 150
18:31:06 feet.
18:31:06 In addition, in looking at the letter which was sent
18:31:10 from the civic association of Port Tampa city and
18:31:12 looking at the required notice, they are within the
18:31:17 250 feet of the neighborhood association and they were
18:31:22 shown as being noticed.
18:31:23 I understand what Mr. Steenson said relating to the
18:31:26 proper address.
18:31:28 Staff indicated to me they are going off the address
18:31:31 they are pulling up from the neighborhood web site, so
18:31:34 we need to go and figure out where the disconnect is,
18:31:37 and we can go ahead and do that between first and

18:31:39 second reading.
18:31:45 >> (off microphone)
18:31:48 >>> They were not obligated legally to --
18:31:53 >> Turn your mike on.
18:31:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh.
18:31:56 Talking to myself.
18:31:56 I'm sorry.
18:31:57 You heard my question, right?
18:31:59 Okay.
18:31:59 So we know that they were noticed.
18:32:01 Is that in our records?
18:32:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chair, I have had an opportunity
18:32:08 top review the file briefly.
18:32:09 It appears the only notice that is there is the notice
18:32:12 to sun bay south on Oklahoma as Mr. Steenson said.
18:32:16 You heard representations from Mr. Horner who had the
18:32:18 opportunity to address you.
18:32:21 But he gave sworn testimony that I believe he said he
18:32:24 called or e-mailed but there's nothing in the clerk's
18:32:27 file with relation to that.
18:32:28 >>JULIA COLE: And they wouldn't be legally obligated
18:32:32 so therefore you don't have a notice violation.

18:32:34 It's just a question of making the effort to have
18:32:38 other neighborhood associations, but legally they
18:32:43 noticed the correct one.
18:32:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The fact that Tom Vento from Port
18:32:50 Tampa responded and he's the current president, I
18:32:53 would say that we shouldn't get too wrapped up in that
18:32:57 particular one, as related to this particular case.
18:32:59 It does concern me a little bit because I thought
18:33:02 Ballast Point is just catter-corner from this all the
18:33:07 way down to the same intersection of Interbay and
18:33:10 Manhattan so I'm sort of surprised that it's not
18:33:13 within 250 feet.
18:33:14 But, anyway, it's sort of neither here nor there
18:33:17 because they obviously got notice.
18:33:22 The transportation question, I saw Melanie was around.
18:33:27 There she is.
18:33:30 As you are coming up, I'll ask the question.
18:33:35 This is going from an industrial general use of a
18:33:38 certain square footage to an RM-18 as related, I
18:33:43 guess, to the acreage, and that would translate to X
18:33:48 number of units.
18:33:49 Has anybody looked at that to see what sort of

18:33:51 potential transportation impact this would be if it
18:33:53 was built out to its maximum?
18:34:00 >>> Melanie Calloway, transportation.
18:34:02 Because of Euclidean and zoning, we haven't looked at
18:34:05 the traffic impact of this.
18:34:09 >> Could you extrapolate.
18:34:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, because it's seven acres gross
18:34:15 --
18:34:17 >> How many?
18:34:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 18.
18:34:20 I think we can give it some thought, because, I mean,
18:34:26 it is Euclidean so I think we just have to assume they
18:34:28 build out to the max.
18:34:29 >> But you also have to look to the fact that it could
18:34:32 be an IG which is all those IGs that it could possibly
18:34:35 be currently.
18:34:36 It's IG, right?
18:34:37 >>> It has a real use, though.
18:34:41 >> The IG allows a lot of other uses to be placed on
18:34:44 the property, warehouses, and other things can be
18:34:49 placed on that property.
18:34:50 Now, as far as trip generation, you are you are

18:34:53 looking at about six trips per unit, 18 units per
18:34:55 acre.
18:34:56 But you are comparing that to the warehouse that could
18:34:58 possibly be there --
18:35:00 >> There is a warehouse there existing and operating
18:35:03 for many years.
18:35:04 So what I am trying to figure out is, I don't want to
18:35:08 guess, now, what type of IG uses could be there,
18:35:10 because they have an existing IG use.
18:35:13 What I am trying to say is, and maybe you can take a
18:35:15 minute to look at it, based on the square footage of
18:35:18 IG they have there today or the number of bays, I
18:35:21 don't know how you figure it out, I would be curious
18:35:23 of how that relates to the potential on the 18 units
18:35:27 per acre.
18:35:28 And I'm not asking you to do that calculation while
18:35:30 you are standing there, but I think it might be
18:35:32 relevant to our discussion.
18:35:33 >>> And you want me to compare that to the current
18:35:37 existing use warehouse but not the other use that is
18:35:39 could possibly go on that IG.
18:35:41 Co-redevelop that property in many other uses under

18:35:43 the IG zoning.
18:35:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Right.
18:35:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Which is a valid point.
18:35:55 I don't know whether the association had a chance to
18:35:56 talk about that.
18:36:01 Anyway, Mr. Peterson?
18:36:07 I'm sorry, Mr. Michael Horner.
18:36:12 You have five minutes rebuttal.
18:36:13 >>> Thank you.
18:36:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let me throw out a few other things
18:36:19 before Mike goes into rebuttal so that way he could
18:36:22 rebut me, if I could.
18:36:24 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask
18:36:26 a question before the rebuttal.
18:36:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay then.
18:36:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Whichever you wish.
18:36:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You're up next, and then Caetano, then
18:36:36 Mulhern.
18:36:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Michael, I do have concerns.
18:36:41 I didn't see the letter that you sent necessarily to
18:36:44 the associations, but they both mention something
18:36:50 about avoiding future regulations or that sort of

18:36:53 thing.
18:36:54 I'm a little concerned about the speculative nature of
18:36:57 this.
18:36:57 I mean, it's sort of a weird situation, if there was
18:37:01 an abandoned warehouse that wasn't being used, like
18:37:06 the one we did on Westshore a couple months ago, then
18:37:08 people don't talk about, you know, the active use, and
18:37:12 maybe they are going to get it torn down.
18:37:14 This one has an active use, and your client indicates
18:37:17 that he's going to continue that active use, so it
18:37:20 sort of makes this a little speculative nature.
18:37:26 Six, seven years down the road, now, that something
18:37:29 might actually happen.
18:37:30 So that's a concern.
18:37:33 I've heard other council members say it might be a
18:37:35 concern of theirs as well.
18:37:36 And I'd like you to speak to that.
18:37:41 Those are the two issues that I would like to you
18:37:45 respond to, and --
18:37:47 >>> The issue being --
18:37:49 >> Have you looked at the transportation, the traffic
18:37:50 potential for this 18 units per acre, search acres as

18:37:57 compared to your current traffic?
18:37:58 I can't guess you all have much current traffic.
18:38:00 >>> We have substantial traffic, Mr. Dingfelder.
18:38:03 I was surprised to hear a comment that this would be a
18:38:07 less expensive use.
18:38:09 Quite honestly, there are 20 days -- I put an overhead
18:38:13 photo on your screen.
18:38:14 Hopefully it will pop up.
18:38:17 Those are three shift days, probably each day as a
18:38:21 turnover of two to three trucks a shift, well, a day.
18:38:25 And you are looking at 40 to 60 truck movements.
18:38:29 So in addition to just the employees, and that traffic
18:38:32 in and out during the peak hours, the non-stop,
18:38:36 18-wheel traffic trailer loads in and out, offload,
18:38:39 Irv there four or five times.
18:38:41 I should have brought a video so that you could
18:38:43 actually see how disrupt Manhattan, queue up and then
18:38:50 pull out.
18:38:50 It is seven and a half acres, about 70,000 square feet
18:38:53 which is a low ratio on the IG.
18:38:57 If it was rebuilt that floor area ratio would allow
18:39:00 more significant square footage than 70,000. If you

18:39:03 looked at a 70,000 square foot manufacturing facility,
18:39:08 or commercial facility, you don't need a special use
18:39:11 for retail.
18:39:12 The traffic would be at least two to three times what
18:39:15 it is now.
18:39:16 At 18 units per acre, again not the 24 maximum but the
18:39:20 18 per acre, about 130 units.
18:39:26 130 unit at six, several hundred trips.
18:39:32 Certainly a lot of trips.
18:39:33 But all the other multifamily development in the area,
18:39:36 the 20 to 24 units per acre, we have chosen the
18:39:40 density that we think is reasonable for that very
18:39:43 issue, in terms of the relative restrictions in the
18:39:46 future.
18:39:48 Mr. Peterson is a businessman.
18:39:50 He also knows that things usually don't get easier as
18:39:53 time goes by.
18:39:54 That transition to multifamily is taking place in the
18:39:57 last few years, and we think that's not going to stop
18:40:00 in the next five years.
18:40:01 So he approached me some months ago and said, do you
18:40:05 think?

18:40:05 I sat down with Tony Garcia, talked to the staff, went
18:40:08 by the site, I said, George, I think that's the
18:40:10 direction it's going.
18:40:11 You can't file for any waivers.
18:40:12 We have to meet every single regulation standards.
18:40:15 We can't ask for any height variances.
18:40:17 We can't ask for any waivers on preservation of oak
18:40:21 trees, and we think it's a reasonable use and a
18:40:23 reasonable location.
18:40:26 I did speak with Mr. Vento many times in fact why we
18:40:31 were not required not to notice him I don't know, and
18:40:34 I picked up the phone and said, Tom, this makes no
18:40:36 sense, I don't know why you are not notified.
18:40:38 Our last conversation was -- it was my 23rd
18:40:41 anniversary at Disney this weekend and I took an hour
18:40:43 after dinner and I strolled and said, Tom, I reached
18:40:47 him on the cell phone, did he not mention he was not
18:40:49 going to be able to be here but we did talk about the
18:40:51 uses, we did talk about the IG, and he did say, gosh,
18:40:58 do we have a site plan?
18:41:00 I advised him we do not have a site plan.
18:41:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

18:41:06 Councilman Caetano.
18:41:08 Then Councilwoman Mulhern.
18:41:11 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Peterson, do you own the
18:41:14 building, and you have a lease?
18:41:15 >>> Yes, sir.
18:41:16 >> You don't run the business coming out of that
18:41:19 business.
18:41:19 >>> No, sir.
18:41:20 >> So you have the probability that you could increase
18:41:24 what's therein now by putting up more buildings,
18:41:27 correct?
18:41:27 >>> I do --
18:41:30 >> How many in that building?
18:41:31 >>> 80,000.
18:41:33 >> So it looks like you have enough room to add
18:41:35 another 80,000 square feet with some more trucks
18:41:38 coming in and out.
18:41:39 >>> Yes, sir.
18:41:39 >> You have that ability.
18:41:40 >>> Three acres in the back, yes, sir.
18:41:43 >> Three acres.
18:41:44 And the local homeowners don't want so-called public

18:41:49 housing, they would be 130 units there.
18:41:53 Is that what they are proposing?
18:41:55 >>> Yes, sir, that's the number.
18:42:00 >> Okay, thank you.
18:42:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I don't think it's public housing.
18:42:04 >>> No, housing project.
18:42:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.
18:42:07 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to -- it looked like Mr.
18:42:11 Steenson wanted to respond to Mr. Dingfelder's
18:42:14 question about whether your association had a
18:42:18 discussion about the intensity, the traffic?
18:42:25 >>> Al Steenson again.
18:42:27 Mr. Dingfelder, I know you didn't see -- I didn't put
18:42:30 these in the record.
18:42:31 I would be more than happy to.
18:42:32 But the area in blue on this e-mail that I sent to my
18:42:35 members is a cut and paste of what Mr. Horner sent to
18:42:38 us.
18:42:39 If I may, it says, you may be aware of our client's
18:42:41 request for RM-18 for the existing manufacturing
18:42:45 business parcel on south Manhattan just north of
18:42:48 Interbay.

18:42:48 We have no immediate plans for development, but it is
18:42:53 concerned about the long-term restrictions and current
18:42:55 difficulties in the manufacturing business
18:42:59 competition, and the survival of the package business.
18:43:03 Let me know your thoughts, and this is a standard
18:43:09 Euclidean and no site plan is required.
18:43:11 So I will put this in the record.
18:43:12 This is a response from one of our members.
18:43:15 As a matter of fact, I put all 30 of them in the
18:43:18 record.
18:43:20 All it is is the copy of the e-mail I sent to them,
18:43:23 because we weren't going to meet on the 28th.
18:43:25 We didn't meet in August.
18:43:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Steenson.
18:43:30 Thank you.
18:43:38 Mrs. Saul-Sena.
18:43:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'll wait.
18:43:41 >>> Melanie Calloway, transportation.
18:43:42 I did look at it on average, it's six trips per
18:43:45 apartment per unit.
18:43:47 It's RM-18.
18:43:48 18 units per acre. 7 acres.

18:43:52 756 trips.
18:43:53 We also looked at the potential of this property and
18:43:56 what an office could go there, and if the F.A.R. is
18:44:00 .75 and I calculated trips of about 11 trips per
18:44:03 thousand square feet.
18:44:04 So that would be 2,515 trips you could put on right
18:44:08 now with an IG zoning with an office there.
18:44:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And my question was not that.
18:44:14 >>> Just a comparison.
18:44:15 >> My question was, based upon the existing building,
18:44:20 IG, is there a current trip calculation?
18:44:25 >>> Unfortunately, I don't have it for warehouse.
18:44:27 I only had an office comparable and I do have those
18:44:30 trip rates with me.
18:44:32 >> So the 25-15 relates to --
18:44:35 >>> They could build an office at 228,000 square feet
18:44:38 approximately on this property right now.
18:44:40 In the IG zoning would be 2500 trips.
18:44:42 >> Okay.
18:44:43 But the existing building is 80,000 square feet.
18:44:47 >>> 80,000 square foot warehouse which I don't have a
18:44:51 trip rate for that.

18:44:52 >> So if they converted the 80,000 to the office
18:44:55 described, that would be about a third of what you
18:44:57 said.
18:44:58 >>> It's 11 trips per thousand square feet so that
18:45:01 would be 880, which is still more than 756 which would
18:45:05 be for the 18 units per acre.
18:45:07 >> And that's office, not warehouse.
18:45:09 >>> That's correct.
18:45:10 That's correct.
18:45:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
18:45:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for staff.
18:45:19 And that is, is the proposed rezoning within the fly
18:45:26 zone that MacDill is concerned about putting
18:45:27 residential near?
18:45:31 >>> No, Councilwoman Saul-Sena, it is not.
18:45:34 It's actually west of that.
18:45:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for the clarification.
18:45:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Horner?
18:45:41 Five minutes.
18:45:46 >>> I'll be brief, Mr. Chairman.
18:45:47 I think all of you know why we are here, to sit down
18:45:50 and compare and look at the expansion of the

18:45:53 additional three acres for a floor area ratio of .75,
18:45:57 clearly, multiple of 2 and 3 and traffic with the
18:46:02 intensity of the floor area ratio, impervious surface
18:46:06 and stormwater, tree preservation.
18:46:08 My client simply followed the visions of future land
18:46:11 use plan, sat down with the staff, he is not looking
18:46:15 to do a 220,000 square feet but it's nice knowing he
18:46:18 has that opportunity, and with a seven-year lease, you
18:46:21 know, that leads more into that so that opportunity
18:46:26 always exists and certainly contributes to value.
18:46:28 I'm a little disappointed that Mr. Steenson didn't
18:46:31 invite me to the meeting.
18:46:32 I would love to down go down there and present our
18:46:35 client and answer some questions but we weren't made
18:46:37 aware of that meeting.
18:46:38 But in any event, we have been in this process for
18:46:41 about five months.
18:46:42 I even talked to -- I had a couple people call and
18:46:48 say, are you doing government housing? I said, well,
18:46:50 no.
18:46:50 And if you would like us to go to a PD we can try to
18:46:54 have a restriction saying no government housing but we

18:46:57 don't know what to put down for the footprints and
18:46:59 after talking with LaShon and Tony Garcia, it was not
18:47:03 the proper floor area for those restrictions so
18:47:08 density, those trucks are non-stop 24/7 on this
18:47:13 facility.
18:47:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to make sure he's finished.
18:47:19 >>> I am, thank you.
18:47:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder, then
18:47:23 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
18:47:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Horner, I think you took the
18:47:30 thought right out of my head, is I really think that
18:47:32 you need to go to meet with both of those neighborhood
18:47:37 associations.
18:47:37 You know, as you know, there's a lot of new
18:47:39 residential down there.
18:47:40 You mentioned it.
18:47:41 You listed them off yourself.
18:47:43 Some of them are built.
18:47:44 Some of them are halfway built.
18:47:45 Some of them are gonna be built.
18:47:48 I think if you went down there armed with some of the
18:47:51 things and some of the facts and statistics that we

18:47:53 heard tonight that perhaps you might be more
18:47:55 persuasive.
18:47:56 But up until now, you have got two neighborhood
18:47:58 associations that are immediately adjacent and
18:48:00 severely impacted that aren't too thrilled with this
18:48:03 project.
18:48:05 Since there doesn't seem to be a lot of urgency on
18:48:08 this case, as admitted by you and your very forthright
18:48:13 client, I think it would be fair to everybody involved
18:48:15 if you all went down there over the next month and met
18:48:18 with the -- both neighborhood associations.
18:48:21 I'm not saying that that's going to make or break or
18:48:24 anything, but you are a persuasive person, and you
18:48:29 might be able to convince them otherwise of where they
18:48:31 are, and that could very well help us in our decision.
18:48:35 So with that, and with your consent, I would move for
18:48:40 a 60-day continuance ton allow to you do that.
18:48:44 >> Second.
18:48:45 >>> We offered that on many opportunities months ago.
18:48:49 I was hoping they would take me up on that.
18:48:51 >> I understand but --
18:48:53 >>> Allow me just 30 seconds?

18:48:56 My client says he has no objection to that.
18:49:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think it would be in the best
18:49:03 interest of the community.
18:49:04 >>> Certainly can't hurt.
18:49:05 I agree.
18:49:06 >> And when we come back there won't be very time
18:49:10 concerning because we have heard it all.
18:49:12 That's my motion, Mr. Chairman.
18:49:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I was going to suggest that if you
18:49:17 didn't, Mr. Dingfelder.
18:49:18 In the letters from the neighborhood association, they
18:49:21 are not objecting to residential development.
18:49:25 I think the scale, they may feel insecure about what
18:49:28 it is, you know, perhaps if you were able to develop
18:49:34 some kind of plans for a PD, it would give them the
18:49:37 reassurance that they need.
18:49:41 It would give me the reassurance.
18:49:43 So I think that's something that you should consider.
18:49:47 As a planner looking at this you can see it moving
18:49:53 from residential and manufacturing to residential
18:49:55 uses.
18:49:55 I see it as the intensity of the residential they are

18:49:59 requesting.
18:50:00 >>> I understand and we would take the comments to
18:50:02 heart, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
18:50:03 I would only say to the extent that your PD ordinance
18:50:05 if we ever achieve that compromise in the future
18:50:08 meetings that we'll have allows that flexibility that
18:50:11 might very well be an option, but we'll leave that
18:50:13 determination to our meeting, and then obviously to
18:50:15 you ultimately.
18:50:17 We thank you for your assistance.
18:50:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
18:50:20 There's a motion on the floor.
18:50:21 But let me just say to Mr. Steenson, to the
18:50:24 neighborhood association, I don't live there, but if I
18:50:28 did, I would much rather have residential than very
18:50:31 aware house with tractor trailer, 18 wheel tractor
18:50:34 trailers coming in and out any day, and the potential
18:50:37 IG, which was already pointed out, you can build an
18:50:42 office there, and you are talking 2,000 trips,
18:50:45 something like that?
18:50:49 It's pretty clear from what is going on down there, a
18:50:51 lot of development you S going to change.

18:50:55 That's only, what, seven years?
18:50:57 All right.
18:50:57 There's a motion on the floor.
18:51:07 Councilman Dingfelder is requesting it be placed first
18:51:10 on the agenda on the 13th.
18:51:11 Okay.
18:51:14 >>> 6 p.m.?
18:51:16 >> 6 p.m.
18:51:17 All in favor?
18:51:18 Opposes?
18:51:19 >>> Thank you, council.
18:51:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to open item number 6.
18:51:35 >> Second.
18:51:36 (Motion carried)
18:52:24 >>LaCHONE DOCK: The next item is petition Z 08-50 for
18:52:27 the property located at 3030 west Dr. Martin Luther
18:52:35 King Boulevard and 4220 north Gomez Avenue, to T
18:52:39 request to zone from PD to PD planned development.
18:52:42 The petitioner is requesting to rezone the property
18:52:44 from PD to PD which would allow for the expansion of
18:52:48 the neonatal hospital facility.
18:52:49 The site contains 8.43 acres.

18:52:53 The plan proposes to demolish the existing 28,600
18:52:57 square foot, two-story building located on the
18:52:59 northern portion of the site.
18:53:02 And construct a 5-story building containing 12 21
18:53:07 square feet with a proposed pedestrian sky bridge
18:53:10 connecting to the main St. Joseph's hospital.
18:53:13 This site was previously approved as a PD in 2006.
18:53:17 The previous approval was to add 86,000 square foot
18:53:23 three-story building which was not constructed.
18:53:26 The current request proposing an additional 38,344
18:53:30 square feet over the previous approval in order to
18:53:32 meet state regulations.
18:53:36 And I have an aerial of the site.
18:53:41 This is the site located in green, of course.
18:53:52 This is MLK to the north.
18:53:54 MacDill west of the site.
18:54:00 St. Isabel and Gomez along the east.
18:54:04 This is an aerial, MLK north, MacDill west of the
18:54:11 site.
18:54:13 And this area here is the portion where the addition
18:54:18 will occur.
18:54:20 And pictures of the site.

18:54:27 This is the northern portion. Site and the location.
18:54:36 This is a view of the site from MacDill.
18:54:41 This is the side entrance on MacDill.
18:54:49 For the south, the site on MacDill.
18:54:54 The southern portion of the site.
18:54:59 Eastern portion of the site.
18:55:04 This is a view of Virginia looking west of the site.
18:55:14 That's north of the site.
18:55:23 North of the site also.
18:55:28 That's commercial development northwest of the site.
18:55:35 This is located west of the site, the Bucs training
18:55:38 camp.
18:55:39 And this is south of the site.
18:55:42 Another view south of the site.
18:55:48 San Isabel.
18:55:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Excuse me, is this a recent aerial?
18:55:55 >>LaCHONE DOCK: The aerial is from 2006, so it's not.
18:55:58 >> It's mostly of the bidding.
18:56:06 >>> Yes, it is.
18:56:08 >> The big piece.
18:56:09 70,000 square foot piece.
18:56:12 38,000 square foot piece.

18:56:14 Thank you very much.
18:56:17 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Okay.
18:56:19 The development review committee has reviewed the
18:56:21 petition, find it inconsistent with City of Tampa Land
18:56:24 Development Code.
18:56:26 However, if the applicant revise it is site plan with
18:56:28 the required notes and revisions between first and
18:56:32 second reading, the DRC will amend its determination
18:56:35 and find the petition consistent.
18:56:38 There are a couple of things I wanted to point out on
18:56:40 the staff report, on page 2, the landscape specialist,
18:56:44 a finding of inconsistent.
18:56:47 And I just wanted to go over the portion that is in
18:56:50 bold on the report, the expansion, considering the
18:56:54 number of trees at the starting point of the
18:56:56 development, how the site has been developed to date.
18:56:59 It appears that over 50% of the on-site trees have
18:57:02 been removed from the site compared to what was shown
18:57:05 in the original PD in 2001.
18:57:07 The petitioner is not required to list as a waiver.
18:57:11 However, in relation to this application, staff is
18:57:13 considering all the existing trees, required

18:57:17 replacement trees, and requesting inch for inch
18:57:20 replacement which petitioner has agreed to.
18:57:23 The table of tree debits and credits must be
18:57:27 corrected.
18:57:27 We ask notes on the plans that the parking garage will
18:57:31 meet 80% of capacity requirements, with either
18:57:33 landscaping or ornamental screening.
18:57:36 And revise landscape note number 2, the requirement
18:57:39 for native trees at 60%, not 50%.
18:57:43 Solid waste had a finding of inconsistency.
18:57:46 They are requesting that the 588 spaces shown within
18:57:49 the mechanical support area be removed both on the
18:57:52 revised plan and on-site.
18:57:56 And have the actual compacter unit relocated on-site.
18:58:08 And that concludes staff's presentation, if you have
18:58:10 any questions.
18:58:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Council, any questions?
18:58:15 Planning Commission?
18:58:23 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff.
18:58:24 I have been sworn in.
18:58:27 As LaShon has described to you, the details, the
18:58:30 comprehensive plan does direct -- has direct policy,

18:58:36 referring to St. Joseph's hospital and hospitals in
18:58:39 general.
18:58:40 As council is quite aware, hospitals provide good
18:58:43 jobs, and they also provide security for our health.
18:58:49 The Planning Commission viewed the request from the
18:58:54 petition to be consistent with the comprehensive plan
18:58:57 based on these policies.
18:59:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions by council?
18:59:04 Petitioner?
18:59:09 You have 15 minutes, five minutes rebuttal.
18:59:12 You don't have to use all.
18:59:13 >>> We'll try not to.
18:59:15 Jim Porter, Ruden McClosky representing the affidavit.
18:59:20 Part. Applicant's team is Kimberly guide, John lap
18:59:24 rock a, and our traffic engineer.
18:59:27 I would like to introduce into the record.
18:59:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
18:59:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you have a copy for each council
18:59:33 member?
18:59:35 Just for the clerk?
18:59:40 Do you have copies for the council members?
18:59:47 >>> Council members, this is ab very narrow request on

18:59:52 behalf of St. Joseph's women's hospital to amend a
18:59:55 planned development, that this council originally
18:59:57 approved unanimously in 2006, for expansion of the
19:00:00 hospital at that time, specifically the neonatal
19:00:04 intensive care unit.
19:00:05 At this time we are seeking no new beds.
19:00:07 We are seeking a slight increase in square footage,
19:00:10 and a modification of the footprint that this council
19:00:14 approved in 2006 in order to comply with state
19:00:16 regulations that require each hospital room to have
19:00:20 natural light and window.
19:00:22 To reconfigure the footprint that was approved by this
19:00:26 council in 2006, in order to provide a better
19:00:28 demolition and construction schedule that won't
19:00:30 interfere with the operations of the hospital, and
19:00:34 that are really the infants and neonatal babies.
19:00:43 Again this sentence in response to state regulation
19:00:45 that requires that we have to meet.
19:00:47 It's the minimal amount that we can ask for in order
19:00:49 to do that.
19:00:50 It's important to note that this project is entirely
19:00:52 oriented towards Martin Luther King and away from the

19:00:55 existing neighborhoods.
19:00:58 We have worked extensively with your staff and with
19:01:00 the Planning Commission.
19:01:01 Planning Commission found it consistent with the
19:01:03 comprehensive plan.
19:01:04 Your staff has generally found it consistent with the
19:01:07 land development regulations except for two areas.
19:01:11 The first has to do with landscaping.
19:01:13 And I'm happy to report that we can meet all the
19:01:15 conditions that are set forth in the staff report.
19:01:17 In fact, we thought we had -- whether there was a
19:01:21 miscommunication with Mary, we can state on the record
19:01:23 that we will meet all the conditions set forth in the
19:01:25 staff report.
19:01:26 The other issue is solid waste.
19:01:28 And that issue is one involving 588 spaces next to
19:01:32 where the trash compacters are.
19:01:35 Quite frankly, that has been in place since 2006 and
19:01:38 we weren't aware of any complaints from the trash
19:01:40 haulers, the people picking up the trash.
19:01:42 So with all due respect the staff would like to keep
19:01:44 those spaces and the compacter there if possible,

19:01:47 because we are again not aware of any complaints.
19:01:51 I am going to turn it over to Kimberly guy at this
19:01:53 point honor is going to talk a little about the
19:01:55 hospital and then John LaRocca who will give you some
19:01:57 land use comments.
19:02:00 At that point we will be happy to answer any
19:02:01 questions.
19:02:02 Thank you.
19:02:03 >>> I'm Kimberly guy.
19:02:13 I was introduced by the administrator at the women's
19:02:15 hospital for St. Joseph's and happy to be associated
19:02:18 with a hospital that's going to provide their 75th
19:02:20 year of care to the community next year.
19:02:22 It's my privilege to be here this evening and I thank
19:02:24 the council for their approval in 2006.
19:02:26 As Jim stated, this is an amendment to make a change
19:02:30 in just the location of the addition of the building.
19:02:34 As you are aware, this project does treat our most
19:02:36 vulnerable patients, our critically ill and premature
19:02:40 babies.
19:02:40 Upon receipt of your approval in 2006 we started our
19:02:43 planning and design.

19:02:46 The plan was not feasible in terms of safety for our
19:02:49 smallest babies.
19:02:50 Our plan was to demolish half of the -- half of the
19:02:53 existing neonatal existing unit, move the babies over,
19:02:59 and then do the same on the second site.
19:03:01 That would require jackhammering and all kinds of
19:03:03 construction next to our very tiniest of babies, and
19:03:06 we felt that we would be hard pressed to find a
19:03:08 construction team that would -- anywhere near a
19:03:14 nursery containing those types of patients so we went
19:03:16 back to the drawing board.
19:03:17 As you mentioned as well, the need to have access to
19:03:20 natural light did change our design, because the way
19:03:22 we had initially planned to have our beds set up we
19:03:26 were going to have them more internally located so
19:03:28 that did require a change.
19:03:30 We are fortunate to be able to find that on the
19:03:32 northeast corner, if we just changed the footprint and
19:03:35 the height of the building, we would be able to
19:03:37 accomplish the very same things that we had in place
19:03:39 for our 2006 plans.
19:03:41 There is no change in the scope of this project, no

19:03:43 change in the number of beds, and no change in the
19:03:46 services to be provided.
19:03:48 What it required is us to split up the two units.
19:03:51 The neonatal care unit containing 64 beds could now be
19:03:56 housed on two floors, 32 each. This requires
19:03:58 duplication obviously in nursing stations, support
19:04:01 station circulation, and the same thing would occur
19:04:04 for the inpatient bed area, 52 bed unit, again split
19:04:08 26 and 26.
19:04:10 And so that really accounts for the difference in our
19:04:13 square footage in the plan.
19:04:16 Thank you for your consideration this evening.
19:04:18 We really believe this plan will help us to continue
19:04:20 to serve our community and this very vulnerable
19:04:24 population.
19:04:29 >>> Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of council.
19:04:32 I'm John LaRocca, agent for the petitioner
19:04:34 representing them on the planning land use zoning
19:04:39 matters, my address 101 East Kennedy Boulevard and I
19:04:42 have been sworn.
19:04:43 Not to repeat what Jim has stated in his presentation
19:04:47 and Kimberly in her commentary as to the reason for

19:04:49 this change.
19:04:50 You may recall that in 2006, we essentially brought
19:04:54 the same rezoning before you.
19:04:56 And we are essentially changing the footprint.
19:04:58 I want to indicate that what we look for are issues
19:05:02 relating to compatibility with the plan, and how this
19:05:06 proposal, in any of the minor changes that we made,
19:05:08 that makes this footprint and plan different than the
19:05:11 one presented in 2006, didn't change anything in terms
19:05:16 of consistency, compatibility.
19:05:17 And in addition to what the Planning Commission's
19:05:20 commentary has indicated, I want to indicate that the
19:05:23 hospital is designated in that whole area, in a
19:05:27 regional activity center and designated major public
19:05:31 semi-public in the comprehensive plan.
19:05:33 We are only marginally increasing the square footage
19:05:36 because of a tighter footprint to accommodate the same
19:05:39 concept of uses.
19:05:42 The proposed rezoning is consistent with the goals,
19:05:45 objectives and policies outlined in the Tampa
19:05:47 comprehensive plan in general and for regional
19:05:50 attracters, specifically the rezoning would permit the

19:05:52 necessary revisions and modernization as indicated by
19:05:56 Kimberly required to meet the state's mandates for
19:05:59 hospital uses of this type and they are all within an
19:06:01 area recognized in the Tampa comprehensive plan to
19:06:03 serve not only the local community but the Tampa Bay
19:06:07 community and beyond.
19:06:07 We'll be glad to answer any questions that relate to
19:06:10 the zoning and consistency with the two versions of
19:06:13 the plan.
19:06:13 Thank you.
19:06:17 >>> That concludes the applicant's main presentation.
19:06:20 We'll be available for any questions and we have other
19:06:22 experts if you have any specific questions.
19:06:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Questions by council?
19:06:26 Councilwoman Mulhern?
19:06:29 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know, Mr. Porter, if you want
19:06:31 to answer this.
19:06:31 I want here in 2006 for that other rezoning.
19:06:34 But our staff report says you are going to demolish
19:06:39 the existing 28,000 square foot building.
19:06:42 I'm trying to figure out which building -- oh, it's
19:06:46 not on the site plan.

19:06:47 >>
19:06:52 >> This is looking at Martin Luther King north. This
19:07:01 represents -- the blue represents the construction.
19:07:06 And this is what it will look like when it's finished.
19:07:09 >> But what are you demolishing?
19:07:13 >> The light blue part.
19:07:14 >> The blithe light blue.
19:07:16 Okay.
19:07:16 Then my other question for now is, there's a
19:07:18 pedestrian bridge over MLK?
19:07:21 >>> That's part of the approval in 2006 we requested
19:07:24 and council approved a bridge connecting the women's
19:07:27 hospital with the main hospital.
19:07:28 That mainly has to do with ease of transport of the
19:07:32 vulnerable patients from one to the other and that
19:07:34 will be constructed in the future.
19:07:35 We are not asking that to be changed for part of the
19:07:37 approval.
19:07:38 This is a request to change the configuration.
19:07:41 >> The women's hospital is across MLK?
19:07:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
19:07:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Is that a first?

19:07:49 I can't picture any pedestrian bridges over a major
19:07:54 street.
19:07:57 I understand, I can't picture another one.
19:08:02 >> It's approved.
19:08:03 We are not asking for a change.
19:08:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda, Dingfelder,
19:08:13 Saul-Sena.
19:08:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Certainly it's very difficult when
19:08:17 you have a rezoning and no one is going to argue about
19:08:19 a neonatal center.
19:08:21 That's number one.
19:08:22 But I am going to tell you this.
19:08:23 St. Joseph lied.
19:08:25 Not in this hearing.
19:08:26 Not in miss guy.
19:08:29 Not Mr. Porter.
19:08:29 Not plaintiff Larocca. But years ago they stood here,
19:08:32 and I can get you those tapes, and they said, all we
19:08:35 want is this nice building so the doctors can
19:08:38 accommodate their patients right there next to the
19:08:41 women's center.
19:08:42 And not you, Mrs. Guy.

19:08:46 I'm not certain of that.
19:08:47 How much property did St. Joseph own within a mile of
19:08:52 St. Joss of? Are there house on Virginia?
19:08:55 Are there other houses on San Isabel to the east?
19:08:58 There are any properties north of Armenia?
19:09:01 Like seven or eight acres?
19:09:08 >>> With all due respect, council members, we are here
19:09:12 today --
19:09:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm asking the question, sir.
19:09:14 With all due respective floor.
19:09:17 Your turn will come.
19:09:18 >>> I understand.
19:09:20 Miss guy indicates she doesn't have the answer to
19:09:21 that.
19:09:22 >> Who does?
19:09:22 >>> I don't have the answer to that.
19:09:24 >>: Because if Tampa general had to pay a million
19:09:26 dollars to do what they ought to do, St. Joseph owns
19:09:29 this community a billion dollars for what they have
19:09:32 done.
19:09:34 There used to be houses, nine of them between San
19:09:37 Isabel.

19:09:38 It wasn't St. Joseph, it was another hospital that did
19:09:41 it.
19:09:41 It was all the properties on Virginia, all the way
19:09:44 from Gomez to Armenia, all the properties on San
19:09:47 Isabel.
19:09:49 And I have nothing with the doctors.
19:09:50 I think they are wonderful doctors, wonderful nurses
19:09:53 at St. Joseph's hospital.
19:09:54 I say that on the record.
19:09:56 But I as a patient would rather die than go there.
19:09:59 Because of what the management of St. Joseph's said to
19:10:02 this board, in 2003.
19:10:06 They said they had all the ample parking that they
19:10:08 needed.
19:10:09 Yet a year and a half later, they built 11-story
19:10:12 parking garage.
19:10:13 They said they had all the ample parking.
19:10:15 Yet on San Isabel and Gomez they knocked down a house,
19:10:19 another house, and put in more parking.
19:10:21 So I can understand where you're coming from.
19:10:24 But St. Joseph piecemeals so they get everything they
19:10:29 wanted.

19:10:29 At one time I imagine there would be no neighborhood
19:10:31 there.
19:10:32 And every time they come, they come with another
19:10:35 attorney, a new one.
19:10:36 And I'm not talking to you, Mr. Porter.
19:10:40 I have the right to ask these questions.
19:10:41 How many more properties does St. Joseph oaf R -- and
19:10:46 I'm doing it in the record for the future -- how many
19:10:48 more properties does St. Joseph own under their name,
19:10:52 or maybe another doctor's name in the area?
19:10:54 >>> With all due respect, Mr. Chairman, and council
19:11:05 member Miranda, I have to officially object.
19:11:07 We have a due process right to have this petition
19:11:09 heard on what we are asking for.
19:11:11 >> I --
19:11:15 >>> If I may, please.
19:11:16 I respect your right.
19:11:16 I respect what you are saying.
19:11:18 I have to ask the city attorney to weigh in on this,
19:11:22 for you to recuse yourself if you are not able to be
19:11:24 unbiased on this.
19:11:25 This is a land use quasi-judicial hearing.

19:11:29 We have a right to be heard on this petition.
19:11:32 I can't control what happened in the past.
19:11:34 We are asking for additional square footage, for
19:11:37 reconfiguration of the site plan based on what this
19:11:40 council approved in 2006.
19:11:42 So I am going to officially object and I am going to
19:11:44 ask councilman Miranda ton please recuse yourself.
19:11:46 >> I am not going to recuse myself.
19:11:48 I have every right to do this.
19:11:51 That's number one.
19:11:51 And number two, sir, first of all, in order to recuse
19:11:55 yourself you have an interest.
19:11:59 Mine is worth nothing.
19:12:00 You know why?
19:12:00 Because it's worth nothing, I pay no tax.
19:12:03 So it doesn't bother me at all.
19:12:06 I just have the right to say I would rather die than
19:12:08 go to St. Joseph.
19:12:10 Thank you, sir.
19:12:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
19:12:14 Councilman Dingfelder, Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
19:12:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, council.

19:12:19 Before we proceed, there's been an objection made on
19:12:21 the record.
19:12:22 Ms. Cole, did you want to address council?
19:12:24 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
19:12:27 In many other cases and many other situations you have
19:12:29 to look at a case based upon the evidence which is
19:12:31 presented to you at the hearing and that is an
19:12:35 important part of our process.
19:12:37 In addition, while you are required to vote on the
19:12:41 item, if in fact, unless you have some kind of
19:12:43 financial interest, if there is some kind of concern
19:12:46 that there's a bias on the part of the particular
19:12:48 council member, we have in the past, and done this on
19:12:52 other boards, recommending that the council member
19:12:54 recuse himself.
19:12:55 So I would ask since an objection has been made on the
19:12:58 record if Mr. Miranda wants to indicate on the record
19:13:00 whether or not he feels he can be objective in this
19:13:02 particular case, make that statement on the record,
19:13:05 and go ahead and proceed.
19:13:06 However, if there is a concern, I would recommend that
19:13:08 you do recuse yourself.

19:13:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have never said that I was in
19:13:13 this thing here to vote against it.
19:13:14 Never.
19:13:16 What I am saying is for information, because I know
19:13:19 exactly how they operate.
19:13:21 So what I'm saying is, what is your traffic pattern
19:13:24 and circulation pattern for the traffic on this
19:13:26 location?
19:13:26 >>> We would be happy to have Mr. --
19:13:31 >> Okay, bring him up.
19:13:34 >>> Steve Hendry, links and associates, west Laurel,
19:13:47 Tampa 33607.
19:13:50 Your question is the traffic patterns?
19:13:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes, sir.
19:13:54 >>> The traffic patterns essentially would be the same
19:13:56 as what we have there today.
19:13:57 The access points are not proposed to change.
19:14:00 We have got the access on MacDill, the northern
19:14:03 access, and also the southern access on MacDill,
19:14:06 which is a left-in, right in, right out, and those are
19:14:11 projected to be the same.
19:14:13 We don't expect significant change in the traffic

19:14:15 patterns with the proposed expansion.
19:14:17 >> And is that going to increase or decrease the
19:14:19 traffic?
19:14:20 >>> The expansion will slightly increase the traffic.
19:14:22 >> Is it four lane or two lane?
19:14:25 >>> 2001-lane road.
19:14:26 >> Two-lane road.
19:14:27 How much traffic is on MacDill now?
19:14:29 >>> We have done a comprehensive analysis.
19:14:36 It has been reviewed by your staff.
19:14:37 And looking at that, the amount of traffic on
19:14:40 MacDill, during the peak hours it's approximately
19:14:52 two directions about 800 cars in each direction --
19:14:55 excuse me, total.
19:14:57 >> And when was the study done, sir?
19:15:00 >>> When was the study done?
19:15:02 The study was done in May of this year.
19:15:04 >> What about in the months of January, February and
19:15:12 March, or December and March, and November?
19:15:16 >>> We do our traffic counts, the D.O.T. comes up with
19:15:21 adjustment factors and we adjust those counts to peak
19:15:24 season.

19:15:24 So we look at the peak season, the peak heard period
19:15:28 of the year for those counts.
19:15:30 We take the existing and adjust them to peak season.
19:15:33 Look at the peak season for analysis.
19:15:35 >> Yes, sir.
19:15:35 So then you are saying that during all the doings at a
19:15:40 certain stadium that that's calculated in the 800?
19:15:45 >>> We don't do it during, let's say, a football game
19:15:47 or something like that, no.
19:15:49 >>: So those are thrown out?
19:15:51 >>> Well, we look at typical a.m.- p.m. hours.
19:15:55 We don't look at special events that are not
19:15:57 controlled by the hospital.
19:15:58 >> Well then there's no traffic count of what happens
19:16:01 in those months when there's events at that venue?
19:16:06 >>> We look at -- special events, no. And in no
19:16:13 traffic study do we ever look at, unless it's for that
19:16:15 facility itself, do we go out and do traffic studies
19:16:18 for special events.
19:16:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay, thank you.
19:16:21 >>> Thank you.
19:16:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder, then

19:16:25 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
19:16:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: First I want to start off by
19:16:29 defending my good friend Charlie Miranda.
19:16:33 I think perhaps a little overly enthusiastic, but I
19:16:35 think that everything -- all his questions and his
19:16:38 comments based upon is unique experience and past
19:16:41 history are relevant to our inquiry, and they are
19:16:45 relevant in regard to us evaluating the integrity and
19:16:48 the quality and the veracity of the evidence from a
19:16:53 petitioner.
19:16:53 So I don't have a problem with hearing what he has to
19:16:58 say and giving us the benefit of his wisdom of the
19:17:01 history, because I wasn't on back in the day when he's
19:17:04 referencing.
19:17:06 Those events.
19:17:07 Now, moving forward with today, my question is pretty
19:17:11 simple.
19:17:12 And I go back to Ms. Guy, I guess.
19:17:17 You are going from three floors at 15 feet -- excuse
19:17:21 me, 45 feet total.
19:17:24 And I was on the board when we approved that in 2006.
19:17:29 That's what we approved.

19:17:30 Three new floors, 45 feet total.
19:17:32 That's what it says on here, your diagram.
19:17:35 And now we are going -- which is an average of 15
19:17:38 feet.
19:17:39 Now we go to five floors, 85 feet, which by my math
19:17:45 seems to be a little taller per floor, something like
19:17:50 that.
19:17:50 Is that a function of the natural light, your ceiling
19:17:54 Heights prior per floor?
19:17:55 Or do you know?
19:17:56 >>> I actually don't know.
19:17:58 Probably our architect could answer that question more
19:18:00 directly for you, sir.
19:18:01 >> I don't see an architect.
19:18:02 >>> We have one if you would like him to come forward.
19:18:06 >>> Carl Beers, HKS Architects, 225 East Robinson
19:18:16 Street, Orlando 32801, and I have been sworn in.
19:18:21 The extra ten feet is related to the penthouse on the
19:18:23 top of the building which is the part that has the air
19:18:27 conditioning in it.
19:18:27 Otherwise, the floor Heights are the same, 15 feet.
19:18:34 >> But your previous approval was for three floors at

19:18:36 45 feet.
19:18:37 So was it in fact 60 feet before?
19:18:40 >>> No, sir.
19:18:41 It would have been three times 15.
19:18:44 >> So now we are five times 15 which is 75.
19:18:48 >>> 75 plus 10, yes, sir.
19:18:49 >> That doesn't add up right.
19:18:53 Did you not have the ten-foot penthouse before?
19:18:56 >>> I'm not sure, sir.
19:18:58 Didn't do that -- I'm sorry, I don't have an answer to
19:19:02 that this evening.
19:19:03 But the floor Heights are the same as in the previous
19:19:05 application.
19:19:05 >> Because usually, we don't include the height for
19:19:09 the equipment room.
19:19:13 Where are our planners?
19:19:15 Usually the height that's requested and approved
19:19:20 didn't include the equipment.
19:19:22 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
19:19:24 That is correct.
19:19:25 The maximum building height does not typically include
19:19:28 equipment that is located upon the roof that is

19:19:29 allowed to encroach into the height limitation on a
19:19:32 typical building that would fall under like a
19:19:35 Euclidean district, a maximum of 35.
19:19:37 Could you still have elevator shafts, et cetera, that
19:19:41 even encroach above that height.
19:19:43 >> So I think just for clarification we could probably
19:19:45 do this between first and second reading.
19:19:48 You guys should get together and make sure, because I
19:19:50 wouldn't want us to approve 85 and then have it
19:19:53 possibly be built out at 95, because they could have
19:19:56 that confusion in additional height.
19:19:59 Why don't you all look at that in between first and
19:20:01 second?
19:20:02 >>> Let me clarify though, are you saying then if the
19:20:04 building is at 75 feet you wouldn't like to see any
19:20:07 additional encroachments above ten feet?
19:20:09 Are you speaking -- because the code doesn't limit
19:20:13 that, so you would have to make a special condition of
19:20:15 council to direct that any mechanical equipment could
19:20:18 not be greater than ten feet above, and that would be
19:20:21 a council-imposed condition.
19:20:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What I'm saying, in fact maybe

19:20:25 that's what we might do.
19:20:27 What I'm saying let's just give them approval for what
19:20:30 they need so there is no confusion or anything down at
19:20:32 Construction Services Center down the road, five years
19:20:35 from now, if and when this thing ever gets built.
19:20:38 >>> We are going to need to take care of that tonight,
19:20:40 if it's something that's going to need between first
19:20:42 and second --
19:20:44 >> Maybe petitioner can clarify what they would like.
19:20:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena and
19:20:49 Councilwoman Mulhern.
19:20:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for Mr. Porter,
19:20:53 and it's about where the new construction is proposed.
19:20:56 I believe you said that before but I just wanted to
19:20:59 make sure I heard it properly.
19:21:04 Do you have a map that shows the surrounding uses?
19:21:09 >>> Yes.
19:21:10 We have the land use and the zoning.
19:21:17 The light blue is going to be demolished.
19:21:20 Dark blue is where the new construction will be.
19:21:22 The gray area is the existing hospital that will
19:21:25 remain.

19:21:26 >> Thank you.
19:21:27 What I want to see is where the new proposed
19:21:29 construction is, vis-a-vis the surrounding land uses.
19:21:35 So what's on the east, west and south?
19:21:39 >>> This is the surrounding zoning map.
19:21:42 Immediately adjacent to the east.
19:21:44 An eye clinic.
19:21:47 Medical use.
19:21:49 CI represents the Bucs training facility.
19:21:53 Martin Luther King Boulevard.
19:21:55 The main St. Joe campus.
19:21:59 To the south is St. Ace bell with -- it's vacant right
19:22:06 there.
19:22:06 Our immediate surrounding neighbors are all medical
19:22:09 uses or the Bucs training facility.
19:22:11 >> And as we are looking at the blue portion which is
19:22:14 the entire hospital site --
19:22:16 >>> This is only --
19:22:18 >> And where is the proposed expansion that you are
19:22:21 discussing?
19:22:22 >>> In this general area here.
19:22:24 >> So it's in the northern portion closest --

19:22:28 >>> It's entirely oriented with Martin Luther King.
19:22:31 >> Thank you.
19:22:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
19:22:40 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone)
19:22:51 >>> This is our medical office.
19:22:53 And we don't have any objection from our immediate
19:22:56 neighbors.
19:22:56 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm doing that again.
19:23:00 My question may be for the architect.
19:23:03 I'm trying to figure out, okay, this new portion is
19:23:08 going to be the neonatal, is that right?
19:23:12 >>> I'll ask him to address.
19:23:18 >>> The new portion, the five story, the first floor
19:23:21 is ancillary space which will be dedicated to the
19:23:26 breast center.
19:23:27 The second and third floor would be the neonatal
19:23:29 intensive care unit.
19:23:30 32 beds each.
19:23:31 And the fourth and fifth floor would be the inpatient
19:23:34 adult private beds, 26 beds each.
19:23:36 >> And so these are the same uses that the other
19:23:41 zoning --

19:23:43 >>> If there were no zoning changes.
19:23:44 >> I'm just trying to understand this because I wasn't
19:23:46 here when the original zoning thing was changed.
19:23:54 The labor and delivery -- they are not at women's
19:23:57 hospital?
19:23:57 >>> They are at women's hospital in another part of
19:23:59 the building.
19:24:00 It's on the picture.
19:24:00 >> Maybe you can just explain to me why we need that
19:24:03 pedestrian bridge.
19:24:04 >>> The reason for the pedestrian bridge is for
19:24:07 transport to the main hospital and to children's
19:24:10 hospital.
19:24:11 We do not have an intensive care unit at women's
19:24:14 hospital.
19:24:14 We do not have certain diagnostic equipment that's
19:24:18 over at the main hospital.
19:24:19 Currently our adult patients and our neonatal
19:24:23 patients, if they require service that is are house
19:24:24 add cross the street, we must bring them down in a
19:24:27 transport unit to an ambulance, drive them across the
19:24:30 street, and -- be able to do them directly across, we

19:24:36 would be able to just take them from the unit directly
19:24:38 across an enclosed environmentally controlled bridge
19:24:41 to get them immediately to access those services.
19:24:44 We do think that would be safer and more effective.
19:24:48 >> So did children's hospital across the street and
19:24:51 women's hospital and -- it just seems odd that you
19:24:55 would put the neonatal unit across the street if --
19:25:00 the labor and delivery happens at women's.
19:25:02 >>> Yes.
19:25:02 >> But --
19:25:02 >>>
19:25:05 >> If they need intensive care they have to go across
19:25:07 the street.
19:25:08 >>> Direct.
19:25:09 The adult women would go across the street.
19:25:10 Actually the intensive care, that's the neonatal
19:25:14 intensive care unit.
19:25:18 And it best to have the neonatal intensive care unit
19:25:21 close to where they are delivering in case there's a
19:25:23 problem at delivery.
19:25:24 >> Yes, that makes sense.
19:25:25 It seems it would be best to have the women there,

19:25:27 too.
19:25:30 Okay, thanks.
19:25:30 >>> Thank you.
19:25:33 >> Essentially, though, the issue is really not the
19:25:36 bridge.
19:25:36 Essentially, it is what's requested under state law.
19:25:41 That's the reason you're here.
19:25:42 And I think we have to keep focus on that.
19:25:45 You have the ask the line of questions but we have to
19:25:48 stay focused on what the issue is before us tonight,
19:25:50 and only here because of what state law requires.
19:25:56 Is that right?
19:25:58 Mr. Porter?
19:25:59 >> I understand.
19:26:10 (off microphone).
19:26:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I was speaking to the entire council
19:26:13 because it's our job to understand.
19:26:15 We can ask any question we want to. At the end of the
19:26:17 day, because we have a court reporter sitting here, go
19:26:21 across the street, the court is going to look at
19:26:25 actually what we request and what we talked about.
19:26:32 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (off microphone).

19:26:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Could you turn your microphone on?
19:26:36 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I'm sorry.
19:26:37 If it's a state mandate that this has to be done, we
19:26:40 have no alternative but to say yes.
19:26:43 Is that the case?
19:26:45 >> I can't answer that.
19:26:46 I'm not an attorney.
19:26:50 So someone from legal will have to answer that.
19:26:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you look at the site plan and you
19:26:56 could look at the request and you wish to inquire
19:26:58 further whether state law can be satisfied with other
19:27:00 alternatives, you may inquire as to what other
19:27:03 alternatives are.
19:27:04 If you are concerned as to specific effects of the
19:27:06 present site plan as it's presented.
19:27:09 So what you are looking at is you are looking at the
19:27:13 proposal which they intend to implement in order to
19:27:15 satisfy state law, whether there are other
19:27:17 alternatives, that is a line of inquiry if you wish to
19:27:20 take up.
19:27:21 Otherwise this is what's been presented for your
19:27:23 approval or your denial.

19:27:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other question by council?
19:27:33 >> (off microphone)
19:27:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: In a roundabout way, the amount of
19:27:46 zonings that happened in that area due to St. Joseph
19:27:50 hospital?
19:27:50 I just want that on the record.
19:27:53 >>> My memory is not -- Michelle Ogilvie, Planning
19:27:56 Commission staff.
19:27:57 My memory only goes back to 1987 when --
19:28:03 >>I don't think you were born in '87.
19:28:05 I think you are younger than that.
19:28:07 >>> When there were several rezonings that were
19:28:12 initiated by surrounding property owners on St.
19:28:18 Isabel, particularly, that came in conflict with the
19:28:21 single-family homes in the bigger picture.
19:28:24 >> It was very interesting to me to see some
19:28:27 photographs of some medical office -- and again I want
19:28:29 to say they have fine doctors and fine nurses that
19:28:32 work there.
19:28:33 There's nothing wrong with them.
19:28:34 But if you put that slide up, I want to show you, with
19:28:37 all the parking that they have done, on Gomez, which

19:28:41 is adjacent to this property, they park on all the
19:28:45 right-of-way on both sides of the road.
19:28:49 It's a slide they had that came with a slide that's up
19:28:51 on the screen now.
19:28:54 I don't know, it shows the cars -- no, it's one that
19:29:03 shows the parking and it shows the new building and it
19:29:06 shows the new hospital, and it shows -- I mean, I know
19:29:12 I'm not seeing things.
19:29:14 Not yet anyway.
19:29:18 Well, that's inside their property, the one on -- that
19:29:34 shows the one on Gomez.
19:29:39 That's on their property.
19:29:41 That used to be a house there that they said had
19:29:45 adequate parking.
19:29:47 >>> Those are the other ones.
19:29:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's the new portion, the pink or
19:29:55 orange or whatever color that was.
19:29:57 You showed that one early on.
19:30:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's on MacDill?
19:30:03 >>> Just put --
19:30:09 >> That's on the south side of the parking garage?
19:30:12 >>> This is it.

19:30:14 No?
19:30:16 That's where the nine houses were?
19:30:33 All right, thank you very much.
19:30:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?
19:30:40 Okay.
19:30:41 Mr. Porter, five minutes.
19:30:48 All right, anyone from the public wish to address
19:30:50 council?
19:30:50 Anyone here from the public?
19:30:52 Yes, sir, come on down.
19:30:57 Anyone else?
19:30:58 From the public?
19:31:01 >>> My name is Joseph Pereira, and I live at 428 --
19:31:26 Drive, Lutz, Florida, 33548.
19:31:29 My brother John and I were born 13 weeks early and
19:31:33 were taken to the NICU at St. Joseph's women's
19:31:39 hospital.
19:31:40 My mom and dad were very scared, but said that
19:31:44 everyone took great care of us until we finally went
19:31:49 home.
19:31:50 My mom said we shared our room with a lot of other
19:31:56 babies, and even in another room.

19:32:05 Dad said it was awesome the machines and other babies.
19:32:10 It sure would be great if you let them build a new
19:32:16 place where babies would have their own room and their
19:32:19 moms and dads could be with them all the time.
19:32:27 >>> Have a good evening.
19:32:36 >>> Very good reading, young man.
19:32:40 >>> My name is Robin Rowe, 16805 Stanza court, Tampa,
19:32:46 Florida.
19:32:46 On Mother's Day of 2001 my son was born nine weeks
19:32:50 premature, after me staying in St. Joseph's women's
19:32:54 hospital for nine weeks prior to that.
19:32:56 And the women's hospital and NICU are right in the
19:33:00 same building.
19:33:01 So he's now seven and a half years old.
19:33:04 He's considered a miracle by many.
19:33:07 He's not supposed to be here.
19:33:09 We were told several times before, even before he was
19:33:12 born, that he would not make it.
19:33:16 During the time that he was down here, we were told
19:33:23 three times that he was going to die, and we had no
19:33:28 privacy.
19:33:28 We were in a cluster with eight other children, eight

19:33:32 other infants, that were extremely ill.
19:33:36 The problem that I personally had was I'm getting bad
19:33:41 news, my son is being reintubated so he can stay
19:33:45 alive, and another family would come in and have great
19:33:48 news, and they had family members there, and be happy,
19:33:52 and it was very hard to take that, but it was even
19:33:57 harder when someone else was losing their child.
19:34:03 Times we were told we couldn't come into the clusters
19:34:06 because of a child that was in trouble.
19:34:09 They wouldn't allow other parents in so I couldn't sit
19:34:13 with my son.
19:34:17 During the daily tours that they do with the doctors,
19:34:21 you weren't allowed to be in there for privacy issues.
19:34:24 Yet when they had to discuss things about my son, I
19:34:27 had no privacy.
19:34:29 It was just a traumatic experience for us, but more
19:34:39 privacy.
19:34:39 My son also contracted MRSA in there.
19:34:47 For whatever reason.
19:34:48 But there's a lot of people in and out of those little
19:34:50 clusters with the family members, the staff, and with
19:34:54 the private rooms, it would certainly be a lot less

19:34:58 stressful for the infant, a lot more healthy, and a
19:35:01 lot less stressful for us as parents.
19:35:04 So I would hope that you take it into consideration.
19:35:06 And I will go to St. Joes, because they saved my
19:35:10 little boy.
19:35:11 Thank you.
19:35:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: In 2004 I was dying.
19:35:20 I lost 52 pounds.
19:35:21 I didn't go to St. Joseph.
19:35:23 Not because of the fine doctors, but because the
19:35:25 gentleman who runs the hospital.
19:35:28 When they stood here and didn't tell us the truth.
19:35:31 I went to Tampa general.
19:35:33 I was operated by a fine doctor, Dr. Michael Albrecht.
19:35:38 And I don't know how he did it.
19:35:40 I don't think he -- with the brain too much but
19:35:47 somehow my stomach was backwards, it was on top of my
19:35:50 chest up here.
19:35:51 I had a hernia that was cut open by -- the diaphragm
19:35:57 was cut in half, put in my chest and folded backwards,
19:36:03 the stomach.
19:36:04 Anything I ate went up.

19:36:09 Although I lived two blocks from there -- and this is
19:36:13 not about me or the hospital.
19:36:16 This is about the way they run the hospital.
19:36:20 And that's why I said what I said.
19:36:22 And I say these things on the record because I know
19:36:25 who I am dealing with.
19:36:27 I put it on the record so that next time that property
19:36:32 south, of saint Isabel, where Dr. Lane used to be from
19:36:38 MacDill to Gomez, I'll have a lot more ammunition.
19:36:41 And that's why I said what I said.
19:36:45 If the counsel objects with me so be it.
19:36:48 I wasn't here looking for an argument with you, sir,
19:36:50 or anybody else.
19:36:51 But I have a lot of taste from the last meeting and I
19:36:54 have everything they said on the record.
19:36:56 So next time you come for that piece of property, be
19:37:00 ready.
19:37:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
19:37:07 >>> My name is Mike Ferrara, 428 lackduden drive.
19:37:16 I'm a 25 year captain with Hillsborough County fire
19:37:18 rescue, and I'm aware of the medical profession, and
19:37:22 St. Joseph's women's hospital and the NICU

19:37:27 particularly, they saved my children's lives.
19:37:28 They were three months early.
19:37:30 And the one that spoke, Joseph, they did an
19:37:36 experimental treatment on him that had never ever been
19:37:39 done before.
19:37:39 They were yanked on December 23rd in the middle of
19:37:42 the night, and he crashed and burned and then died on
19:37:46 Christmas Eve.
19:37:49 And Dr. Wybel who is there wanted to try this
19:37:53 experimental treatment, had never been done, and he
19:37:55 called the hospital administrator in the middle of the
19:37:57 night to get permission.
19:37:58 And it was hooking up nitric oxide gas to get his
19:38:04 lungs to start up.
19:38:04 He was on the vent 400 times a minute.
19:38:06 And in the wee hours of Christmas morning his lungs
19:38:10 started up.
19:38:11 And he was named after Joseph, Jesus' father on earth,
19:38:15 and then he had a grade 3 bleed in his brain and they
19:38:20 said no guarantees, no crystal balls, and you can see
19:38:23 how he is today, six and a half years old.
19:38:26 Now as far as quiet, having independent rooms, those

19:38:30 babies thrive on quietness.
19:38:32 All the sounds, all the noises, all the machines
19:38:34 around.
19:38:35 The poor babies that were there with Joseph, Joseph's
19:38:38 machines took up a whole wall because he had so many
19:38:41 illnesses and problems.
19:38:42 So being in their own rooms, John wasn't able to be
19:38:46 with Joseph.
19:38:47 He was in another cluster.
19:38:48 The cluster John was in as the other lady just spoke
19:38:52 contracted MERSA, and no other children were allowed
19:38:55 to come into that cluster until the last child leaves.
19:38:58 So that cuts down on the amount of space that they are
19:39:01 allowed to have there.
19:39:03 And then the whole cluster has to be disinfected.
19:39:06 So I thank God every day, and we are -- we still keep
19:39:11 in contact with that hospital for the gift of life
19:39:13 they gave our children.
19:39:14 So, please, I ask you to please support them.
19:39:17 Thank you very much.
19:39:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
19:39:19 Okay.

19:39:21 We have rebuttal now.
19:39:23 Mr. Porter, five minutes.
19:39:24 >>> I won't take five minutes.
19:39:25 I just want to thank the council for their
19:39:27 consideration.
19:39:27 We are here today again for a very narrow request, in
19:39:30 order to comply with state law, and provide a
19:39:32 demolition and construction schedule that won't harm
19:39:35 the patients that you heard about tonight, and we
19:39:37 respectfully ask for your approval.
19:39:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
19:39:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You heard my comment about the
19:39:46 height.
19:39:47 I don't want there to be any confusion.
19:39:49 It seems to me myrrh really asking for 75 feet.
19:39:52 If we could have a moment, let me ask the architect
19:39:55 about that.
19:39:59 The architect confirms the actual height of the
19:40:11 building is 75 feet and the ten feet is to accommodate
19:40:13 the air conditioning.
19:40:15 I think your point about construction services is a
19:40:17 good one, so there's no confusion.

19:40:19 Let me be clear about what we need.
19:40:21 We need 85 feet for the actual building and for the
19:40:23 air conditioning.
19:40:24 So we are fine with your 75 or 85, but we need the 85
19:40:32 in order to accommodate the air conditioning.
19:40:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Our typical PD and typical codes
19:40:38 you ask for the 75 and then you get whatever you need
19:40:40 for the additional AC and that sort of thing.
19:40:45 At least that's what I understood.
19:40:49 >>> Yes, if the building height was stated at a
19:40:51 maximum of 75 feet, they could have encroachment
19:40:58 further high as long as it didn't total over 20% of
19:41:00 the square footage of the building.
19:41:02 So you would have that whole roof area up to 75 feet
19:41:05 and then you can have your projections for elevator
19:41:08 shaft, air conditioning, as long as all that
19:41:10 mechanical doesn't exceed 20% of that total coverage.
19:41:14 So they should be fine if they need 85 feet for the
19:41:16 elevator shaft, et cetera, above the 75, as long as
19:41:19 all their mechanical equipment doesn't exceed 20%.
19:41:23 If they think mechanical equipment will, then they
19:41:25 should be fine.

19:41:26 If they want to revise their site plan to put the
19:41:29 maximum building height at 75 with the allowed
19:41:33 encroachment for mechanical equipment.
19:41:37 >>> If that's council's desire we would be happy to do
19:41:39 that.
19:41:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
19:41:41 Any other questions?
19:41:42 >> Move to close.
19:41:46 >> Second.
19:41:46 (Motion carried)
19:41:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we have an ordinance?
19:41:51 >> I am going to support this, because I had an
19:41:59 experience, my grandson was born there, two months and
19:42:02 a half early.
19:42:02 He was one pound when he was born.
19:42:06 And we went through that same experience in that room.
19:42:08 It was overcrowded.
19:42:09 All the machines.
19:42:10 The mother couldn't go in because she was in a
19:42:12 different part.
19:42:13 And was -- needed it four years ago so I really
19:42:19 support this.

19:42:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just say to St. Joseph.
19:42:27 We in this community value what you are doing.
19:42:30 Two of my children were born there, and then my last
19:42:33 grand baby was born about four months ago, had to go
19:42:35 into the special room as well, had some complications,
19:42:40 had to be put in an intubator.
19:42:43 So we just went through all of that with my daughter
19:42:45 about four months ago, and so -- and I am a pastor.
19:42:51 I have gone with my parishioners, gone to the hospital
19:42:54 in the prenatal and all of that, gone back and seen
19:42:57 those babies and their condition.
19:42:59 So I have firsthand experience with what you do.
19:43:03 I also want to thank you for at least putting another
19:43:05 parking spot for the clergy.
19:43:07 Thank you.
19:43:08 [ Laughter ]
19:43:12 >> Amen.
19:43:14 [ Laughter ]
19:43:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to say that I support
19:43:21 this because the proposed development is located total
19:43:23 north toward Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard.
19:43:26 The truth is that I don't think anybody, including the

19:43:30 planners, understood 25 years ago when we did an area
19:43:33 study for the med medical uses in this area how far
19:43:37 the medical uses have spread.
19:43:39 They have truly taken over the neighborhood.
19:43:41 Mr. Miranda is correct that there used to be a
19:43:44 neighborhood there, residential neighborhood, and it's
19:43:46 because of the hospital's success that a great number
19:43:50 of physicians want to locate their practices nearby,
19:43:52 and it's been very difficult for the people who still
19:43:54 want to live in the neighborhood to maintain a normal
19:43:57 life, because there's never been enough parking,
19:44:00 people tend to park all over.
19:44:03 For the reason that I feel comfortable supporting this
19:44:05 expansion is because it's to the north, oriented
19:44:07 toward Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard.
19:44:10 I hope that in the future, if the hospital ever wants
19:44:12 to expand again, that it will recognize that at the
19:44:18 commercial corridor, that's the place to be and to
19:44:20 focus its development to the north, not to the
19:44:22 southern portion which impacts the residential
19:44:24 area.Miranda
19:44:28 >>GWEN MILLER: An ordinance rezoning property at 3030

19:44:32 west Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard and 4220 north
19:44:36 Gomez Avenue and more particularly in section 1 from
19:44:41 PD planned development, hospital, medical office, to
19:44:44 PD, planned development, hospital expansion, providing
19:44:47 an effective date.
19:44:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
19:44:51 Mr. Dingfelder yielded to me to second for approval.
19:44:55 I just wanted to put on the record for the next
19:44:58 battle.
19:44:59 This is not a battle.
19:45:00 I knew I was going to lose.
19:45:02 And I'm not losing because I knew I was going to vote
19:45:05 for it in the beginning but I had to come on real
19:45:08 strong because I know how they think.
19:45:09 And not the doctors, not the nurses, certain people in
19:45:12 the administration.
19:45:13 So I had to put on the record.
19:45:17 I got that.
19:45:19 I want on the record here what happened five or six
19:45:22 years ago, that I'm prepared for bear.
19:45:27 Thank you.
19:45:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion by Councilwoman Miller,

19:45:29 seconded by councilman Miranda.
19:45:31 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
19:45:33 Opposes?
19:45:34 Yes.
19:45:35 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
19:45:37 Second reading and adoption will be October 2nd at
19:45:39 9:30 a.m.
19:45:40 >>LaCHONE DOCK: I apologize.
19:45:45 We did include the conditions that were listed in
19:45:47 addition to the note indicating the maximum --
19:45:50 Yes, those will be included in the motion.
19:45:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Could you just -- I believe it's the
19:45:53 desire to have those read, just so that it's clear.
19:45:56 Could you just read under number 6?
19:46:00 Do you have that before you?
19:46:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead, read them.
19:46:03 >>LaCHONE DOCK: The number of required trees and
19:46:08 correct the number of replacements in the tree, debit
19:46:11 and credits, to add the following note, the parking
19:46:13 garage, will meet 80% of opacity requirements,
19:46:17 landscaping ornamental screening, revise landscape
19:46:21 note number 2, replace 50% with 60%, the five ADA

19:46:26 spaces within the mechanical support area --
19:46:28 No, that is the one they did not request.
19:46:30 That was the ADA remain where they are.
19:46:34 Is that council's desire to allow that?
19:46:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
19:46:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, okay.
19:46:38 So we will allow the five ADA spots to remain where
19:46:41 they are.
19:46:41 >>LaCHONE DOCK: And then to add a note the maximum
19:46:45 building height will be at 75 feet.
19:46:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.
19:46:47 Yes.
19:46:48 So all of that is incorporated into the motion.
19:46:50 Okay?
19:46:51 Is that clear?
19:46:53 >>> Thank you.
19:46:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you again.
19:47:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to open item number 7.
19:47:11 >> Second.
19:47:12 (Motion carried).
19:47:13 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Land Development Coordination.
19:47:28 And I have been sworn.

19:47:29 The next item on tonight's agenda is petition number Z
19:47:31 08-52, for the property located at 201 to 217 South
19:47:36 Dale Mabry Highway.
19:47:38 The petitioner is requesting to rezone the property
19:47:40 from CG commercial general to PD planned development
19:47:43 to add an additional curb cut.
19:47:45 The property measures approximately 1.38 acres.
19:47:48 The site contains a 3,060 square fat restaurant,
19:47:52 15,430 square feet of retail, with one access located
19:47:58 on South Dale Mabry Highway.
19:47:59 The petitioner is proposing to add an additional curb
19:48:02 cut on Platt Street which will allow additional access
19:48:05 to the site.
19:48:06 The current development and existing uses will remain.
19:48:10 The project requires 53 parking spaces, and 74 spaces
19:48:13 are provided.
19:48:19 And I have an aerial of the site.
19:48:29 This is the site located here in green on Dale Mabry.
19:48:34 North of the site.
19:48:36 Platt is south of the site.
19:48:40 Just north of the site, it was recently rezoned for PD
19:48:43 mixed use PD development.

19:48:49 This is an aerial of the site on Dale Mabry.
19:48:53 And the location of the curb cut will be on that side,
19:48:55 the southern portion of the site.
19:49:00 >> Access now on Dale Mabry?
19:49:03 >>> Yes.
19:49:04 >> Not Cleveland?
19:49:05 >>> Platt.
19:49:10 >> I mean to the north on Cleveland.
19:49:13 And I know they want to add Platt but I was wondering
19:49:15 if they have Cleveland.
19:49:17 >>> On Dale Mabry.
19:49:19 >>> This is a picture of the site on Dale Mabry.
19:49:33 This is a view of the site on plat and where they are
19:49:36 proposing to put the curb cut.
19:49:38 This is just another view of the site.
19:49:43 This is west of the site on Cleveland.
19:49:50 West of the site on plat.
19:49:55 This is north of the site.
19:50:01 Located northeast of the site.
19:50:07 East of the site.
19:50:13 And this is south of the site.
19:50:22 And this is for the south, on Dale Mabry.

19:50:26 The development review committee has reviewed the
19:50:28 petition and transportation finds it inconsistent with
19:50:31 City of Tampa Land Development Code.
19:50:36 That concludes staff's presentation.
19:50:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question of staff.
19:50:41 Does transportation want to elaborate on that or do
19:50:44 you want top elaborate on that for them?
19:50:47 >>> Transportation, I think was part of their
19:50:50 technical manual.
19:50:58 >>> Melanie Calloway, transportation.
19:51:04 We are objecting because they are asking for access to
19:51:06 a local street.
19:51:07 They have a full access driveway currently on Dale
19:51:10 Mabry, and also our code 27-246-J says nonresidential
19:51:17 parking lots have to access arterial collector street
19:51:19 and we are continuing to hold all objections accessing
19:51:22 that local street.
19:51:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Probably the same question.
19:51:28 Let me just follow up.
19:51:31 LaShon showed us a picture of the adjacent -- the next
19:51:35 shopping plaza, I think to the north, has a side cut
19:51:41 on the side, on the side street.

19:51:45 On Cleveland.
19:51:46 Do you have any recollection how that got there?
19:51:55 Right there, we go.
19:51:58 >>> You are asking me about property to the north?
19:51:59 >> Yes.
19:52:00 They got a side cut on Cleveland.
19:52:03 You guys want to do the same thing on the south of
19:52:06 their property to plat.
19:52:09 I guess my question is, what's good for the goose is
19:52:13 good for the gander?
19:52:18 >>> This is a zoning map for the property.
19:52:23 The north property is CG.
19:52:29 1995, nonresidential parking lot to access arterial
19:52:34 and collector street.
19:52:36 Prior to that they were allowed to access the local
19:52:38 street.
19:52:39 I'm assuming that that property was developed before
19:52:41 1995.
19:52:42 >> Grandfathered in or something.
19:52:47 Do we take into consideration the proximity to like
19:52:53 Dale Mabry and that sort of thing when we make these
19:52:55 decisions?

19:52:56 >>> Yes, we do take that into consideration.
19:52:58 We take into consideration the fact that if there is a
19:53:00 signal at that location that we would be more
19:53:03 accessible to supporting that driveway cut, because
19:53:07 that's more safe, to be able to have a signal there
19:53:10 and allow guests to turn into the access to the
19:53:14 residential street.
19:53:16 And we do also try to encourage the petitioner to
19:53:19 channelize his driveway as a right-in, left-out to
19:53:23 discourage cutting through the neighborhood on
19:53:25 channelized driveway.
19:53:26 But petitioner does not have to do that.
19:53:28 We just say, now, that's one way that you can, you
19:53:31 know, try to get a driveway that way.
19:53:34 >> Well, as everyone knows, I'm all for protecting
19:53:38 neighborhoods but in this case I tried to go into that
19:53:41 restaurant by payway off of Dale Mabry, and it's
19:53:44 extremely hard.
19:53:45 You have to like go up and spin around and come back,
19:53:48 so you can be in the southbound lane so you can turn
19:53:51 in there, whereas if you can come off that side street
19:53:54 at Platt, I think it just makes a lot more sense.

19:53:57 Thank you.
19:53:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I was just going to suggest the
19:54:02 channelization.
19:54:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Melanie, don't sit down.
19:54:05 I have a couple questions.
19:54:07 I think the overhead must be old.
19:54:10 Because it really looks in this photograph like -- it
19:54:16 looks like there is an entrance on Cleveland to the
19:54:20 property.
19:54:20 >>> This aerial was done in 2006.
19:54:26 This is 2008.
19:54:27 It's two years old.
19:54:28 And they have redeveloped that area.
19:54:29 >> So there is no entry on Cleveland?
19:54:31 >>> No, your site plan is actually the right one.
19:54:34 That's exactly what it looks like.
19:54:36 >>: And your plat -- is Platt two way there?
19:54:40 >>> Yes, it is.
19:54:41 >> And Cleveland is two?
19:54:43 >>> Yes.
19:54:43 >> Planning Commission?
19:54:47 >>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

19:54:51 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff.
19:54:55 There are three policies in your staff report that
19:54:57 address this issue.
19:54:59 One is to protect the neighborhood, protect the
19:55:03 neighborhood by insuring the development is compatible
19:55:10 to the affected area.
19:55:11 Other policy speaks to mitigation of adverse impacts
19:55:14 of traffic into adjacent neighborhoods.
19:55:17 And the third is the creation of like uses, or the
19:55:20 creation of complimentary uses as a part of accessing
19:55:24 a redevelopment project.
19:55:26 Planning Commission staff reviewed this request and
19:55:29 found -- excuse me, I forgot to put up the aerial.
19:55:36 That's from Kennedy south.
19:55:39 Each block has an access point along a local street,
19:55:44 and it is Planning Commission's staff recommendation
19:55:48 that based on the existing conditions that this would
19:55:51 be -- this request would be consistent with the
19:55:54 comprehensive plan.
19:55:56 Which is our recommendation.
19:55:59 >> Questions by council?
19:56:00 Thank you.

19:56:01 Petitioner?
19:56:05 >>> Thank you.
19:56:07 I would like to submit some binders for the record for
19:56:09 each council person.
19:56:13 >>> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen of the council.
19:56:41 My name is Bryan Taub and I'm the petitioner under Z
19:56:46 08-52.
19:56:47 I am also the owner and developer of the subject
19:56:50 property.
19:56:52 Which was recently built and completed in 2007.
19:56:57 The property consists of an 18,750 square foot retail
19:57:01 center which is the home of heritage furnish ter,
19:57:07 payway diner and AllTel communications.
19:57:12 Back in 2006 during pre-development I inquired about
19:57:16 obtaining a curb cut on Platt Street, because FDOT
19:57:21 granted us access on Dale Mabry, which was requested
19:57:25 by the city transportation department.
19:57:28 We were denied access to Platt Street.
19:57:33 Due to tenant's eagerness to get open they decided to
19:57:36 pursue the development, but requested that we revisit
19:57:42 the issue of the Platt Street access once the center
19:57:46 was opened.

19:57:47 In February of this year, the tenants contacted me
19:57:51 asking me to pursue once again the Platt Street
19:57:54 access, due to their customers being upset about
19:57:58 congestion and lack of ease of access through and to
19:58:02 the center.
19:58:04 After investigating with the city staff how to obtain
19:58:10 Platt Street access --
19:58:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Brian, can I interrupt you for one
19:58:15 second since our chairman is not here?
19:58:16 >>GWEN MILLER: I am.
19:58:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I know.
19:58:19 But you have got two letters of support from the
19:58:24 neighborhood association and from the Bon Air
19:58:26 neighborhood association.
19:58:27 So why don't we just see if anybody is here in
19:58:30 opposition?
19:58:31 >>> I had this great --
19:58:34 >> I know, I know.
19:58:35 You got your haircut, you know, and everything.
19:58:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
19:58:41 wants to speak on item number 7?
19:58:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.

19:58:44 >> Second.
19:58:44 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
19:58:47 Opposed?
19:58:47 >>> We got a lot of stuff tonight, Brian.
19:58:55 Thank you.
19:58:56 >> I think it would be better to protect the
19:58:58 neighborhood.
19:58:58 Did we already agree to make it channelized?
19:59:01 >>> No, we didn't talk about channelization.
19:59:03 Go ahead.
19:59:03 I don't know how you are going to channelize it.
19:59:05 >> You just make it --
19:59:07 >>> What are you going to do?
19:59:08 >> You have to open the public hearing if you are
19:59:13 going to talk about it.
19:59:14 >> Move to open.
19:59:15 >> Second.
19:59:15 (Motion carried).
19:59:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If you want to protect the
19:59:18 neighborhood you make it go toward Dale Mabry, and not
19:59:21 toward the neighborhood.
19:59:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But the neighborhood wants the

19:59:25 access.
19:59:25 Did you read the letter?
19:59:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You're right.
19:59:28 Sorry.
19:59:28 Okay.
19:59:29 Move to close.
19:59:30 >> Second.
19:59:31 (Motion carried).
19:59:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: An ordinance rezoning property in
19:59:35 the general vicinity of 201-217 South Dale Mabry
19:59:37 Highway in the city of Tampa, Florida more
19:59:39 particularly described in section 1 from zoning
19:59:41 district classifications CG commercial general to PD
19:59:44 planned development, restaurant, retail, providing an
19:59:45 effective date.
19:59:47 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
19:59:48 Autumn in favor say Aye.
19:59:50 Opposed, Nay.
19:59:52 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Scott being absent at
19:59:54 vote.
19:59:54 Second reading and adoption will be on 2nd at 9:30
19:59:58 a.m.

19:59:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 8 is a continued public
20:00:01 hearing.
20:00:46 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Land Development Coordination, and I
20:00:48 have been sworn.
20:00:49 The next item on tonight's agenda is petition number
20:00:51 Z-08-32, for the property located at 2616 South
20:00:56 MacDill Avenue and 3008 west Barcelona street.
20:01:00 Petition is proposing to rezone the property from CI
20:01:03 commercial intensive to PD planned development to
20:01:06 allow for restaurant, specialty retail and parking
20:01:11 uses on-site.
20:01:13 This request consists of two parcels.
20:01:15 The first parcel is located on MacDill Avenue.
20:01:18 The plan proposes to convert the existing 4,090 square
20:01:23 foot building into a restaurant and retail uses.
20:01:25 Property contains approximately 15 that you square
20:01:28 feet.
20:01:29 The plan proposes access to the site from both
20:01:32 MacDill and Palmira Avenue.
20:01:36 Proposed setbacks are as follows -- north 36.77 feet,
20:01:40 east 12.10 feet, west 43 feet, and south 13 feet.
20:01:46 The second parcel is located on Barcelona street.

20:01:49 The petitioner proposes principal commercial parking
20:01:53 on the site to serve the restaurant, retail uses.
20:01:56 The property contains approximately 11,007 square
20:02:02 feet.
20:02:02 Required parking for the project is 35 spaces and 39
20:02:05 parking spaces will be provided.
20:02:13 And I have an aerial of the site.
20:02:18 This is the location of the main site here on
20:02:20 MacDill bordering it to the west, Barcelona to the
20:02:23 south, and this is the location for the parking.
20:02:28 Mostly CI zoning with a couple of spots, residential
20:02:32 multifamily.
20:02:35 And this is an aerial of the site.
20:02:40 MacDill bordering the west.
20:02:42 Barcelona, Grenada, the expressway to the east.
20:02:53 And this is a picture of the site on MacDill.
20:03:00 Another view of the site.
20:03:06 This is the commercial north of the site on
20:03:08 MacDill.
20:03:14 Located northwest of the site.
20:03:16 West of the site.
20:03:22 And this be is south of the site.

20:03:23 >> Is that the city fire house?
20:03:30 >>> They recently purchased that property.
20:03:34 >> Purchased it from the city?
20:03:35 >>> I don't know who the previous owner was.
20:03:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: how did that happen?
20:03:44 >> I don't remember it coming to council.
20:03:46 That's strange.
20:03:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It was a historic fire house and
20:03:49 it's not there anymore.
20:03:57 >>LaCHONE DOCK: This is east of the site on Barcelona.
20:04:01 This is north of the site for parking on Barcelona.
20:04:03 This is the site for the parking.
20:04:15 This is east of the site on Barcelona for the parking.
20:04:18 And this is located south of that parking -- the
20:04:22 proposed parking site.
20:04:23 And these another view.
20:04:29 The development review committee has reviewed the
20:04:32 petition and it found it inconsistent with City of
20:04:35 Tampa Land Development Code.
20:04:37 However, if the requested modifications are made
20:04:40 between first and second reading staff will amend the
20:04:43 request and find it tint consistent.

20:04:46 A sheet was also handed out with the information that
20:04:49 was provided.
20:04:51 But I also wanted to just go over the landscape
20:04:55 specialist comments as it relates to the groan space
20:04:58 waiver.
20:05:00 Staff did find that waiver consistent with chapter 13.
20:05:03 The petitioner has provided mitigation to a landscape
20:05:08 in lieu payment and basically due to configuration of
20:05:12 the site.
20:05:13 There are additional comments that are listed in bold.
20:05:15 There is an off-site tree located east of the site in
20:05:19 question.
20:05:22 There was an issue with the placement of the dumpster.
20:05:25 And it being able to provide the necessary clearance
20:05:28 for the tree that was located off site.
20:05:31 The petitioner has worked with staff and has agreed
20:05:35 upon a location for a dumpster.
20:05:37 So that comment will be amended.
20:05:39 With the revised map.
20:05:42 So both solid waste code and landscape code will be
20:05:47 met.
20:05:50 And the waiver request from solid waste to allow

20:05:53 maneuvering within the right-of-way, solid waste does
20:05:56 acknowledge that request, and with City Council
20:05:58 approval the department does not object to that.
20:06:04 >> It is my understanding 8 and 10 are supposed to go
20:06:07 together.
20:06:07 Is that accurate?
20:06:09 >>> Actually, the petitioner is also requesting for
20:06:12 alcohol sales.
20:06:13 It is under the new process that it is a special use
20:06:16 application so it can be opened separately.
20:06:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: My computer is not working right
20:06:24 now. That used to be the old MacDill auto supply?
20:06:29 A hundred years ago or --
20:06:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ten years ago.
20:06:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I know where I'm at now.
20:06:37 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Also under stormwater comments, add a
20:06:40 finding of inconsistency.
20:06:41 They would like to have the following note added on
20:06:43 the site plan, that the project will retain one half
20:06:46 inch of run-off over the parking area site.
20:06:49 And that concludes staff's presentation.
20:06:52 If you have any questions.

20:06:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Questions by council?
20:06:57 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry, it's getting late.
20:06:59 The proposed parking is on MacDill?
20:07:03 >>> The proposed parking is on Barcelona.
20:07:07 >>MARY MULHERN: And that's where the fire house was?
20:07:14 >> Yes.
20:07:15 >>MARY MULHERN: Does anyone from staff know what
20:07:18 happened to the fire house?
20:07:21 >> No one knows.
20:07:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman?
20:07:27 My suggestion would be, council, that you confine your
20:07:31 discussion to what you have before you.
20:07:33 If you have some concerns that you may want to raise
20:07:35 perhaps at next week's meeting or perhaps the end of
20:07:37 this meeting, but I would suggest that you confine
20:07:40 yourself to the issue at hand.
20:07:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
20:07:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And not have that influence you in
20:07:44 any way.
20:07:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
20:07:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Planning City Commission.
20:07:53 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff.

20:07:56 Staff reviewed the request and found that the reuse of
20:07:59 the existing -- of an existing building in an area
20:08:03 that is developed with a mixture of uses would be
20:08:06 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
20:08:09 We did provide you a staff report with our findings.
20:08:13 One of the findings being policy D-3-1, the creation
20:08:17 of like uses, or creation of complementary uses or
20:08:24 mitigation of adverse impact.
20:08:26 City staff has given you ways in which this petition
20:08:28 can accomplish its policy guidance.
20:08:31 Planning Commission staff does not object to this
20:08:34 finding the request to be consistent with the
20:08:37 comprehensive plan.
20:08:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Questions by council?
20:08:43 Petitioner?
20:08:44 >>> Dick La Rosa, Hamilton engineering and surveying,
20:08:54 311 New Port.
20:08:56 I have not been sworn.
20:08:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
20:08:57 Anyone else?
20:08:58 I saw a lot of people just come in.
20:09:00 Have you been sworn? Has everybody been sworn that's

20:09:03 going to address council?
20:09:04 If you have not, please stand and raise your right
20:09:06 hand.
20:09:08 (Oath administered by Clerk).
20:09:15 >>> We appreciate the opportunity to be here tonight.
20:09:18 For the delicatessen. This site is on the corner of
20:09:23 Mac bill and Barcelona, at one point was the Nissan
20:09:27 one shop, became a floral shop for awhile.
20:09:30 We are wanting to convert to the similar uses, it will
20:09:33 have some inside dining.
20:09:35 Again, this is an existing building.
20:09:37 We are trying to reuse so it does have some challenges
20:09:39 with it, and that does bring forth some of the
20:09:42 inconsistencies with the transportation code but we
20:09:45 are doing our best to work around those.
20:09:47 We worked diligently with staff to resolve a lot of
20:09:50 irons.
20:09:51 I'll put some stuff on the Elmo that we feel will make
20:09:55 the site a lot better for the community.
20:09:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me ask if anyone here is going to
20:09:59 speak in objection to this project?
20:10:01 Anyone here that's going to address council in

20:10:04 objection?
20:10:05 Are you opposed to this project?
20:10:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would you raise your hand?
20:10:09 >> Okay.
20:10:10 Just need to No. go ahead, sir.
20:10:15 >>> This is an exhibit of the site plan as we propose
20:10:19 it.
20:10:21 Some of the objections from transportation were
20:10:23 because of that existing parking up front.
20:10:26 What we have done, though, we have created as you can
20:10:28 see a substantial amount of green space.
20:10:32 Across the street are some town homes.
20:10:37 So we are put something green space there. We are
20:10:39 proposing to do some tree planting in that leaks.
20:10:43 We are working with staff.
20:10:43 The dumpster is existing currently resides in this
20:10:46 area, as mentioned there is an off-site oak tree.
20:10:49 We propose to shift that and slightly prune the tree.
20:10:54 We have been working with Mary and we are going to get
20:10:56 an arborist on board to prune that tree so we do get
20:11:00 the clearance with solid waste.
20:11:02 We have also included a little bit of green space up

20:11:04 here to separate these two parcels.
20:11:06 Transportation does want the cross access agreement
20:11:09 which we have agreed to.
20:11:12 One of the issues we did face was the lack of parking,
20:11:14 of course.
20:11:15 So the developer did in fact go and acquire a parcel
20:11:18 right down the street, and actually I'll put the two
20:11:22 so you can get a relationship.
20:11:26 This is the off-site parking that we are proposing.
20:11:28 Again, we are creating a fair amount of green space
20:11:31 around the perimeter.
20:11:33 There is existing sidewalk for safe pedestrian access.
20:11:36 We are come in to put the detectable surfaces at the
20:11:39 crosswalk.
20:11:39 You will be able to access the building through here
20:11:41 as well.
20:11:42 We aren't requesting a parking waiver at this time.
20:11:45 We do propose some staff parking along the north side
20:11:47 of the building here, an existing shell which we would
20:11:51 prefer to keep that way, it functions well, allows
20:11:53 percolation.
20:11:54 We want to try minimum amount of paving as possible.

20:11:57 I am going to have Roger Perry and his wife Suzanne to
20:12:03 speak to some of the energy efficiency and some of the
20:12:05 green that they are going to incorporate into this
20:12:07 development.
20:12:11 This is a blow-up of the lot itself.
20:12:13 We do have a letter from the property owner to the
20:12:17 east here.
20:12:18 He did not object to us doing a PVC fence in lieu of a
20:12:21 CMU wall.
20:12:22 We also did talk with the homeowner association to the
20:12:28 west and we have agreed to put in place in the wall
20:12:31 here, we also agreed to make sure that there's no way
20:12:33 to cross between the two parcels because there are
20:12:36 some large oaks.
20:12:37 We have adhered to natural resources request to leave
20:12:42 a large portion of existing asphalt here because it
20:12:44 would impact the trees to remove that.
20:12:46 Again we have worked very diligently with staff to try
20:12:48 to bring the site up to code as best we can.
20:12:52 Again it does have some challenges.
20:12:55 At this point I would like to ask Roger Perry, Suzanne
20:13:00 Perry to come up, and Chef --

20:13:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Before you get into the menu and
20:13:06 that sort of thing, I had a couple of questions.
20:13:13 We did get a letter from Keith Stanton who is the
20:13:16 developer and I guess homeowner association president
20:13:21 and it looks like, Dick, you got the same letter.
20:13:25 >>> Yes, I did.
20:13:26 >> The four items.
20:13:27 So you're saying that you believe that you have
20:13:29 addressed the item 4 as related to the privacy wall?
20:13:34 >>> Correct.
20:13:35 >> And the dumpster location, he mentions as item 2.
20:13:43 I would be concerned, I guess if I lived right across
20:13:46 the street from that dumpster, they always have
20:13:49 dumpster problems.
20:13:51 There was no other location behind your building on
20:13:54 MacDill?
20:13:55 >>> Unfortunately, the access of the truck is the
20:13:57 issue.
20:13:58 >> Show me your drawing for the MacDill building.
20:14:03 >>> Absolutely.
20:14:06 >> You can go up a little bit there.
20:14:17 So they can access it from MacDill on the north

20:14:24 side?
20:14:25 >>> Wanda may be better able to address it.
20:14:33 >>> Wanda Shae, City of Tampa solid waste department,
20:14:37 and I have been sworn.
20:14:38 If we were to even consider, which I would not,
20:14:42 because you are looking at 160-foot solid waste
20:14:46 vehicle, backing up through, what is it, a 20-foot or
20:14:53 25-foot -- no, it's a 15-foot ingress-egress easement
20:14:58 through Calusa's back parking lot and they would be
20:15:05 backing out onto the street. That is a very large
20:15:08 amount of backup.
20:15:09 There's a lot of safety concerns with that as well as
20:15:11 other Calusa parking area.
20:15:14 >> We are talking about something -- something is out
20:15:17 of sync.
20:15:19 Wait a minute.
20:15:20 Leave that up for a second.
20:15:21 On the north side of the building, isn't that your
20:15:25 property?
20:15:26 On the north side?
20:15:27 >>> Yes, that is.
20:15:29 >> We are not seeing the image.

20:15:31 Would you put the image back?
20:15:35 >>> Okay.
20:15:35 If he came in on the north side of this property, we
20:15:37 would either have to do a rear loader or a front
20:15:40 loader.
20:15:41 And again you are backing on a main thoroughfare.
20:15:45 MacDill Avenue.
20:15:51 Our trucks run anywhere from 6:00 to 7:00 in the
20:15:59 evening. That is their route schedule time.
20:16:01 It's not 5:00 in the morning.
20:16:03 Contrary to much belief.
20:16:05 Because they get neighborhood complaints about the
20:16:09 dumpster sound, the trucks making noise coming through
20:16:12 the neighborhood.
20:16:13 So they are limited.
20:16:15 Actually, we really don't like to go out till closer
20:16:17 to 6:30.
20:16:20 On the route by 7.
20:16:21 >> Who located this dumpster there?
20:16:23 You guys did?
20:16:24 >>> That is my preferred location, yes.
20:16:28 >> Did you all have a different location?

20:16:30 >>> Actually, council member, I represent the
20:16:34 petitioner.
20:16:35 That dumpster has been in the same location for the
20:16:37 past ten years, I believe, from the day of it being
20:16:42 Nissan plaza.
20:16:42 >> But there was no residential across the street back
20:16:45 then.
20:16:45 >> I understand, council member.
20:16:46 But it been there because it was a practical solution
20:16:50 at the time.
20:16:50 And it remained the most practical solution.
20:16:52 >> Practical, yes.
20:16:54 Aesthetic, perhaps not.
20:17:00 >>> As it stands now, I understand -- right now there
20:17:02 is a dumpster.
20:17:03 What we propose to do is what's required by the city
20:17:06 to construct a screen wall around it, with an
20:17:09 enclosure that is not visible from the right-of-way,
20:17:12 it will match the exterior of the building itself, so
20:17:14 we are trying to do our best to kind of make it
20:17:18 more -- aesthetically pleasing, with a stucco finish.
20:17:23 >> Painted.

20:17:24 >> Yes, to match the building.
20:17:26 >> Doors that don't fall off?
20:17:27 >>> Yes.
20:17:28 >> PVC doors?
20:17:30 >>> Yes.
20:17:31 >> And on your property?
20:17:33 Right now, it's out on city right-of-way.
20:17:36 And enclosed.
20:17:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other question I had, who
20:17:41 knows, who can tell me when your clients acquired that
20:17:46 Barcelona property?
20:17:48 This isn't for you, Wanda, thank you.
20:17:50 When did your clients acquire that property, from the
20:17:52 City of Tampa?
20:17:53 Because I sure as heck don't remember seeing it on our
20:17:56 agenda.
20:17:56 >>> My name is Roger Perry.
20:17:58 My wife and I Suzanne own the Barcelona property and
20:18:01 the MacDill property.
20:18:04 I know that I needed parking, extra parking for the
20:18:07 restaurant.
20:18:07 And my real estate agent who works with Coldwell

20:18:10 Banker said the city was going to be picking up this
20:18:14 Barcelona piece of property for a bid.
20:18:16 They tore the fire house down, the city did, and it
20:18:19 was a vacant lot with chain link fence around it.
20:18:22 I submitted a bid along with several other people --
20:18:26 >> Long answer to a short question.
20:18:28 Do you know when?
20:18:30 >>> Maybe three or four months ago.
20:18:33 I don't have the exact date.
20:18:34 >> And it came to council on council's agenda?
20:18:37 >>> I don't know how you run your business here.
20:18:39 I know that I did what I was supposed to do and
20:18:41 submitted a bid.
20:18:44 I submitted a bid and it was accepted.
20:18:45 And I paid $505,000 for the property.
20:18:50 You accepted my check.
20:18:53 So I assume that everything was, you know.
20:19:01 >> Council member, if I may, the petitioner purchased
20:19:03 the property, the additional Barcelona lot, and the
20:19:03 principal lot was purchased November 2007.
20:19:07 So it's all basically recent activity on petitioner's
20:19:10 part.

20:19:10 When he first found the Barcelona lot, essentially it
20:19:13 was a dumping ground and storage facility that cost
20:19:15 the City of Tampa thousands of dollars per year.
20:19:17 So that's all we know.
20:19:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You know what?
20:19:21 We can discuss that long and hard, because the
20:19:24 neighborhood wanted that as a community center.
20:19:27 But that's for another day.
20:19:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Sir, if you put your name on the
20:19:31 record again, please.
20:19:32 >>> Bryan gray.
20:19:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Gray, you handed me two letters.
20:19:36 Oh do you want those given to council and entered into
20:19:42 the record?
20:19:43 >>> We have two letters with one possible objection
20:19:46 everyone including the neighborhood association
20:19:48 supports the beautiful work that's being done with
20:19:51 that building, and one very prominent neighborhood
20:19:58 resident turned an eyesore into what promises to be an
20:20:02 attractive metropolitan place for the residents ton
20:20:05 dine and enjoy their evenings.
20:20:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.

20:20:07 Let me hear from the gentlemen who has an objection.
20:20:11 Then we'll come back to you.
20:20:16 Anyone here in support of it?
20:20:18 Do you all want to speak or just your presence
20:20:22 signifies your support?
20:20:23 >>> Good evening.
20:20:24 My name is Mike Kalupa.
20:20:28 I own the property just north of the new venture that
20:20:31 Mr. Perry is doing.
20:20:33 And I'm here tonight not to speak against this
20:20:38 project.
20:20:39 Our concern is parking.
20:20:41 As we all know, South Tampa is a parking nightmare.
20:20:45 More businesses have gone broke in South Tampa for
20:20:47 lack of parking than anything else.
20:20:49 I think everybody would agree with that.
20:20:53 I own the building just to the north of Mr. Perry's
20:20:57 project.
20:20:57 I think he's done an outstanding job with the
20:21:00 building.
20:21:00 We have no problems with that at all.
20:21:02 And it's a great improvement to the neighborhood.

20:21:07 But we are already fighting parking and all they are
20:21:12 doing is taking applications.
20:21:14 I have been called some names in the last week that I.
20:21:18 Been called in a long time.
20:21:21 But the parking is going to be the issue.
20:21:24 Now, another thing -- and I wasn't aware that there
20:21:26 was an issue with you the garbage pickup.
20:21:32 I think there is a problem with where that dumpster
20:21:35 is.
20:21:37 But it should be allowed on the other side of their
20:21:42 building, where our dumpster is, and the two should
20:21:45 maybe sit together, so the city can get maybe a little
20:21:48 economy of scale.
20:21:51 And we can block those dumpsters off.
20:21:55 They are already backing out of my driveway, you know.
20:21:58 And that's a common driveway back there.
20:22:01 And, you know, maybe we could -- work together on that
20:22:05 and I would be more than willing to do that, okay.
20:22:07 It solves everybody's problem, the city's problem, our
20:22:10 problem.
20:22:10 We don't like our dumpster sitting there.
20:22:14 And it would solve their problem.

20:22:16 And we don't have to mess around with the neighbor in
20:22:18 the back street.
20:22:19 I do have a letter from the neighbor immediately
20:22:23 behind the property in discussion.
20:22:28 And I would like to submit that.
20:22:31 And I have got a copy for all the commissioners.
20:22:40 There is a photography studio back there and it's a
20:22:56 husband and wife team.
20:22:57 They have very little traffic impact back there.
20:23:02 They are very concerned about the parking situation.
20:23:06 When Nissan place was parked there he had to have cars
20:23:11 towed, he said, constantly.
20:23:13 And it's not an issue of not being a good neighbor.
20:23:16 It's an issue of liability, it's an issue of us doing
20:23:20 business on our own property, and it just creates real
20:23:25 problems.
20:23:29 I know we are going to fight parking in that area
20:23:31 going forward.
20:23:32 And moving it down the street on Barcelona doesn't
20:23:36 necessarily solve the problem.
20:23:38 Because you are all restaurant consumers.
20:23:43 And you know that you park in the closest place

20:23:46 available, whether it's in front of the restaurant, or
20:23:49 right next door.
20:23:52 And those are our main concerns.
20:23:56 And as long as I'm here, we don't -- I haven't talked
20:24:00 to anybody that has a problem with the COP type
20:24:05 license.
20:24:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Sir, I have a question.
20:24:09 My familiarity with Barcelona is that adjacent to the
20:24:14 proposed property to the east is a costume -- where
20:24:21 are these photographers?
20:24:23 >>> They are in between features and in the back of
20:24:25 Mr. Perry's building.
20:24:27 It's just a very -- there isn't even a sign on the
20:24:30 building.
20:24:32 They have a lot of very expensive equipment in there
20:24:34 and they don't publicize it.
20:24:38 >> Are there any other questions I can answer?
20:24:40 >> Thank you.
20:24:41 Those in support -- people in support again?
20:24:47 Do you all want to come up?
20:24:48 You don't have to all speak.
20:24:51 You can just stand and say I'm in support, if you want

20:24:53 to.
20:24:54 >>> My name is Steve Clint.
20:24:56 I live at 2802 west Angeles.
20:24:59 My wife and I live in the neighborhood.
20:25:01 I have been sworn in.
20:25:01 My wife and I traditionally walk that neighborhood,
20:25:04 walk by the restaurant site many times.
20:25:07 We are members of the Palma Ceia neighborhood
20:25:09 association which has not met in the last five months.
20:25:12 So they have not met to consider this, although we did
20:25:15 get an e-mail that this hearing was occurring.
20:25:17 Parking is of prime importance to our neighborhood
20:25:20 association.
20:25:20 We have had police officers out to talk about that
20:25:23 many times, and various members that I have spoken to
20:25:26 about this are greatly in support of the fact that
20:25:29 they, the restaurant, took the initiative to do
20:25:31 something about the parking in the neighborhood, and
20:25:34 was proactive to it.
20:25:36 Yes, there's a problem with parking in our
20:25:37 neighborhood.
20:25:38 And we need a lot of attention to that.

20:25:43 I welcome this restaurant to the neighborhood.
20:25:47 I have eaten chef's food in the past.
20:25:49 And I'm a very big fan of it.
20:25:52 And I wish that -- his burgers on Thursday night are
20:26:00 to die for but I don't get home in time to take them
20:26:03 home so thank you very much.
20:26:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
20:26:08 >>> My name is Joe Argentine, I own a business at 3220
20:26:12 South MacDill and we have some issues, some past
20:26:17 problems with parking in that area with my business
20:26:19 and the surrounding businesses, we normally work them
20:26:21 out.
20:26:22 And as far as what I do with Roger at his property, I
20:26:28 think it's a great thing especially having extra
20:26:30 parking and just bringing another restaurant to the
20:26:32 area, I think is good, also.
20:26:34 So I definitely support it.
20:26:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
20:26:37 Anyone else in support? That feels the need to come
20:26:42 and talk?
20:26:43 All right, thank you.
20:26:45 Now, we just need to address the issues.

20:26:47 Can we do that?
20:26:48 We have other issues straightened out and move on.
20:26:51 I appreciate you being here but let's get to the
20:26:53 issues that we need staff and petition theory we need
20:26:57 to resolve.
20:26:57 >>> Yes, Mr. Chairman, just to address the issues of
20:27:00 parking which seems to be a prominent issue tonight.
20:27:03 Mr. Perry and the petitioner have been very diligent
20:27:06 and very proactive in preventing any kind of parking
20:27:09 problem.
20:27:10 I have already given the clerk a copy of a lease for
20:27:14 eleven additional parking spaces, just as a cautionary
20:27:17 measure, to prevent any kind of parking problem.
20:27:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
20:27:26 Councilman Dingfelder, then Saul-Sena.
20:27:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What is this, staff, a PD or
20:27:31 special use?
20:27:32 >>> PD.
20:27:33 >> It's a PD.
20:27:37 Michelle, has anybody done the parking calculation?
20:27:40 Is that part of your report?
20:27:42 If this was a Euclidean zoning, how many spaces would

20:27:45 they need?
20:27:45 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Let's see.
20:27:50 >> Is this a reduction in parking?
20:27:52 >>> Actually the parking that is required is for the
20:27:59 site itself.
20:28:00 Based on the square footage and the layout of the
20:28:02 restaurant use.
20:28:04 >> So what are the calculations then?
20:28:06 >>> On the first sheet of the site plan, at the
20:28:09 bottom, next to the zoning signature box.
20:28:25 The calculations are here.
20:28:26 >> So translate it for us.
20:28:28 >>LaCHONE DOCK: The parking based on an occupant load
20:28:39 based on -- total occupant load of 138.
20:28:44 At .25 spaces.
20:28:49 The parking required of 35 spaces.
20:28:53 In between both sites, they are providing a total of
20:28:58 39 spaces.
20:28:59 >> Does that include take-out?
20:29:04 I mean, typically, also a deli is a lot of takeout,
20:29:10 this and that.
20:29:10 >> Yes, that also will be included.

20:29:15 >> Where does that get fit into --
20:29:20 >>> The calculation, break down of how the restaurant
20:29:24 will be laid out is actually calculated into that,
20:29:27 also.
20:29:31 >> How many employees?
20:29:35 >>> We haven't finalized the number yet.
20:29:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Sir, you have to come and speak on the
20:29:39 Mike.
20:29:39 For the record.
20:29:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Approximately how many employees
20:29:43 have you got?
20:29:44 >>> 65 to 75 but we are open from seven in the morning
20:29:48 to ten at night six days a week and then seven to
20:29:50 three on Sundays so they are not all there at the same
20:29:53 time.
20:29:53 >> So how many employees would be there at one time?
20:29:55 >>> 15, 20 maybe.
20:30:00 >> So that leaves you --
20:30:02 >>> I would like to say of the people we have hired,
20:30:04 most of them live in the neighborhood.
20:30:06 So they walk, ride bicycles.
20:30:09 We are putting up bicycle stanchions so they can park

20:30:12 their bicycles.
20:30:13 So you have 15 or 20.
20:30:14 That leaves you 15 to 20 customer spaces?
20:30:17 >>> No, I have off-site parking for the employees,
20:30:20 also.
20:30:21 >> That's all part of your site plan?
20:30:23 >>> That's the additional spaces.
20:30:25 It's part of our site plan.
20:30:26 And I contract additional spaces so we can park
20:30:28 employees on, also.
20:30:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, Ms. Feeley is shaking her
20:30:34 head, no, it's not part of your site plan.
20:30:37 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
20:30:39 Eleven spaces earlier this evening have not been
20:30:42 reviewed or approved by staff.
20:30:43 You always have an opportunity to provide additional
20:30:45 off-site parking through an on-site agreement but that
20:30:50 is extra parking space that is cannot count as
20:30:55 somebody's spaces.
20:30:56 Not having seen these eleven space where is they are,
20:30:58 how they are functioning, they have to meet city code
20:31:00 or the fact that there is a legal agreement between

20:31:01 the owner and the other owner to have that agreement.
20:31:04 We cannot speak to those businesses either.
20:31:09 We have to go with what's on the plan as the 39
20:31:11 spaces.
20:31:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And that's irrelevant any anyway.
20:31:18 They have 35, 39, it's irrelevant to what's required
20:31:23 to meet that qualification.
20:31:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect,
20:31:28 it's not irrelevant when you are talking about 15 to
20:31:30 20 employees there at a time, and then you only have
20:31:33 another 15 or 20 spaces.
20:31:36 We have got parking problems on MacDill.
20:31:39 When Kevin's place, what's the name of it?
20:31:42 Rustica used to be in that vicinity.
20:31:47 We had huge parking problems.
20:31:49 Fortunately they moved down the street.
20:31:50 I hope this place is very successful.
20:31:52 When it is, we are going to have huge parking problems
20:31:54 again right in that location.
20:31:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm really familiar with this
20:32:05 neighborhood.
20:32:06 And I think that purchasing the additional parking on

20:32:09 Barcelona will be a good step.
20:32:10 I also think that people are going to realize that
20:32:12 walking is probably easy for people who live in the
20:32:15 neighborhood, it's easier than finding a parking
20:32:17 space.
20:32:18 I'm very pleased to compromise with the city to
20:32:22 relocate the dumpster.
20:32:23 I drove and looked at the tree and I was very
20:32:25 concerned.
20:32:25 That was my big concern tonight.
20:32:29 I believe you are going to have to revise your site
20:32:31 plan between first and second reading to show the new
20:32:34 location and the visual screening.
20:32:40 With that, I'll be able to --
20:32:47 >>> Thank you.
20:32:47 >> How many seats in the restaurant?
20:32:49 >>> Let me pull that information.
20:33:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I didn't mean top ask you a hard
20:33:05 question.
20:33:05 >>> I apologize.
20:33:09 The calculation is based on square footage but I I'll
20:33:13 count the four tops and two tops.

20:33:20 The first floor plan.
20:33:23 You will see seating downstairs we have two.
20:33:29 There's 30 downstairs.
20:33:30 30 seats downstairs.
20:33:33 And then the second floor, there are one, two, three,
20:33:40 four, five -- 13, 52, 54, 56, approximately 56
20:33:49 upstairs.
20:33:51 And then there is a lounge area where we'll just have
20:33:55 couches and seating in there.
20:33:58 And again we based our parking calculations off the
20:34:01 City of Tampa life safety code as required.
20:34:05 We broke out the areas as required by city code.
20:34:08 We did the calculation based on city code, meeting the
20:34:12 requirements.
20:34:13 >> So I would assume you will have six or seven
20:34:16 servers, a couple of bus people, then in the kitchen
20:34:20 you are going to need two shifts of whatever.
20:34:24 So you will have about 15 employees at one time.
20:34:36 And a bartender.
20:34:38 >> It will just be a runner running through.
20:34:40 Upper there is would be servers and we would have two,
20:34:43 maybe three on shift.

20:34:43 >> Not that I know anything about restaurants.
20:34:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
20:34:48 >> Second.
20:34:52 (Motion carried)
20:34:52
20:34:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What's the pleasure of council?
20:34:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Understanding that there will be a
20:35:01 new site plan submitted between first and second
20:35:04 reading --
20:35:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, does this also include the
20:35:09 Z-08-32 revision sheet?
20:35:12 >> Yes, that's correct.
20:35:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
20:35:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Including the revision sheet.
20:35:15 I would like to move an ordinance rezoning property in
20:35:17 the general vicinity of 2616 MacDill Avenue and
20:35:22 3008 west Barcelona street in the city of Tampa,
20:35:24 Florida and more particularly described in section 1
20:35:26 from zoning district classification CI commercial
20:35:29 intensive to PD planned development, restaurant,
20:35:32 retail, principal parking, commercial, providing an
20:35:38 effective date.

20:35:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And that includes the revision sheet
20:35:43 and the --
20:35:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Relocation of the dumpster.
20:35:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right, and the second reading.
20:35:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I am not going to support the
20:35:54 motion.
20:35:54 I have no doubt that I will walk over there and eat
20:35:56 there because my stomach prevails over my brain.
20:35:59 But, in all due seriousness, we are going to have some
20:36:06 parking problems around there, and even though the
20:36:10 gentleman, nice of him to buy the empty lot, now empty
20:36:13 lot from the city for $500,000, to add some spaces, I
20:36:18 don't think it's going to be enough.
20:36:20 I'm confident it's not going to be enough, as
20:36:22 successful as I think they are going to be.
20:36:24 So I can't support it.
20:36:26 And I'd like to reserve a second after we are done
20:36:29 with this hearing to speak to a different issue.
20:36:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The motion and second.
20:36:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
20:36:38 I think it's great we are getting another restaurant
20:36:42 in my neighborhood.

20:36:44 But I have experience actually with this site where --
20:36:52 well, I had a question.
20:36:53 But it doesn't matter.
20:36:55 I'm not going to be able to support it either because
20:37:01 I have the concerns of a couple of the neighbors.
20:37:03 And I don't feel -- and it's all about the parking.
20:37:06 And I don't feel like they have been addressed.
20:37:10 The photographers are very concerned, because they
20:37:15 have had this problem before, when another restaurant
20:37:21 was in this same location.
20:37:22 And then the condo building is worried about the
20:37:26 parking, too.
20:37:27 So I just don't feel like there's enough parking.
20:37:31 And I am not going to be able --
20:37:34 Motion, moved and seconded.
20:37:35 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
20:37:37 Opposes?
20:37:38 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder and
20:37:39 Mulhern voting no.
20:37:41 Second reading and adoption will be on October 2nd
20:37:43 at 9:30 a.m.
20:37:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Dingfelder

20:37:48 begins, I just want council to be aware that the next
20:37:51 item is a wet zoning close to the same property so I
20:37:55 don't know whether it's appropriate or not.
20:37:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion to open.
20:38:02 >> So moved.
20:38:02 >> Second.
20:38:03 (Motion carried)
20:38:17 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
20:38:20 V-08-64 is the special use application for the sale of
20:38:25 alcoholic beverages on the property which you just
20:38:26 rezoned.
20:38:27 The staff report I just gave you, there are some
20:38:29 problems with the doc agendaing of this staff report
20:38:33 and Catherine Coyle is out today.
20:38:37 In the report I just gave you on page 2 at the top,
20:38:41 you will see where it says Land Development
20:38:42 Coordination inconsistent.
20:38:45 In another, those inconsistencies were all based on if
20:38:50 the PD rezoning had been denied, because there would
20:38:52 have been some additional waivers that would have been
20:38:54 needed to go to VRB that were approved through the PD.
20:38:58 That is actually all clear now.

20:39:00 Let me go quickly through.
20:39:02 You will see the waivers.
20:39:03 These are the waivers that were brought forward from
20:39:07 the PD rezoning plan to the special use plan, and they
20:39:10 are requesting alcoholic beverage 2(COP), which is
20:39:15 beer and wine for consumption on and off the premises,
20:39:19 and they are requesting that it be only in conjunction
20:39:22 with restaurant and deli uses.
20:39:26 The property prior to your other motion was zoned CG.
20:39:31 So the request for the sale of alcoholic beverages was
20:39:34 permitted, and it's still permitted now with the PD
20:39:39 rezoning.
20:39:40 There are some waivers associated with distance
20:39:43 separation.
20:39:43 There are several locations that are wet zoned within
20:39:47 a thousand feet of this, the closest being divine,
20:39:53 there are also residential properties as you know on
20:39:55 Palmira, 187 feet.
20:39:58 And there is the Jehovah Shalom church which is 109
20:40:03 feet so there are three waivers for the distance
20:40:05 separation there for reductions from the 1,000 feet to
20:40:08 those corresponding square footages.

20:40:11 Given that you are familiar with the site based on the
20:40:13 previous application, I won't go through the whole
20:40:17 presentation, if you have questions.
20:40:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why not 2(COP-R)?
20:40:26 >>> I don't know the answer to that.
20:40:30 I'll let the petitioner speak to that.
20:40:33 Mr. Gray?
20:40:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Officer Miller?
20:40:42 Just wait.
20:40:43 We'll get to you.
20:40:44 >>> Officer Don Miller, City of Tampa police
20:40:47 department.
20:40:47 City of Tampa police department has no objection to
20:40:50 this wet zoning.
20:40:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner?
20:40:58 Petitioner?
20:41:01 Now it's your turn.
20:41:02 >>> Your name again please for the record?
20:41:06 >>> Bryan gray appearing on behalf of the petitioner.
20:41:09 The retail sales, it's only 45% by total sales, so --
20:41:20 >> I don't think there's any minimum.
20:41:22 There's only a maximum.

20:41:22 >> Right.
20:41:25 >>> The "R" as you know is a reporting, and it's also
20:41:30 in association with the ratio of the sale of food to
20:41:33 the sale of beverages.
20:41:34 51% of the sales would have to be associated with
20:41:37 food.
20:41:38 49%, you couldn't exceed 49% of your sales in alcohol.
20:41:42 And you have to report on a semiannual basis to the
20:41:45 city to show that your sales are meeting that 51-49%
20:41:49 ratio.
20:41:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Right.
20:41:51 And your point was only 5% was liquor?
20:41:54 >>> No, the ratios don't make sense to apply for an R.
20:41:57 That's my point, council member.
20:41:59 >> Tell me more.
20:42:00 I don't understand.
20:42:01 >>> I could have Mr. Perry tell you more because he's
20:42:03 the administrative brain child of all of this.
20:42:05 >> Yes.
20:42:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to ask the city one
20:42:09 thing on these R things.
20:42:10 It's been on my mind for some time.

20:42:13 We recently did some tuneup.
20:42:15 Instead of getting five or ten we get 143 that were
20:42:18 delinquent in their reporting.
20:42:20 And my question is, do we really check them all?
20:42:22 Do we have an auditing system that goes in and
20:42:25 calculates the purchases of food versus the purchases
20:42:28 of alcohol sales and makes a calculation as to what is
20:42:33 49-51?
20:42:35 It used to be 60-40, back when Columbus came in.
20:42:39 It changed to 59-41 sometime back in the 70s.
20:42:44 And that was initiated by then mayor Freedman.
20:42:48 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Miranda, how do they check?
20:42:51 Do they actually go in and see the sales receipts and
20:42:54 check the papers?
20:42:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm asking the same question, sir.
20:43:01 I'm sorry, I apologize to you, sir.
20:43:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Answer my question first.
20:43:06 My question I think was to the petitioner.
20:43:10 >>> I think as long as you sell less --
20:43:12 >>> Yes.
20:43:13 We are not a bar.
20:43:14 We are a restaurant.

20:43:15 We are just offering --
20:43:17 >> You are a restaurant.
20:43:17 Then why --
20:43:20 >>> And I don't want to say unusual products but
20:43:28 upscale products.
20:43:29 We are going to be carrying products that have a
20:43:31 heritage, unusual wines, and hope to sell full bottled
20:43:34 wine as part of our business.
20:43:36 >> So that's what it is.
20:43:37 You want to sell package to take out.
20:43:39 >>> Yes.
20:43:40 Yes.
20:43:40 >> That answer it is question.
20:43:41 >>> Yes.
20:43:41 >> Thank you.
20:43:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Now answer council Miranda's question.
20:43:51 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
20:43:53 I'm not the attorney who handles the wet zoning
20:43:55 applications.
20:43:56 And Ms. Feeley is also just here just to handle this
20:44:03 item.
20:44:03 So neither one of us are really in a position to

20:44:05 answer that question.
20:44:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
20:44:09 >> Save that for a later day.
20:44:11 Any other questions to the petitioner? Anyone from
20:44:13 the public wish to address council?
20:44:17 Anyone opposed to it?
20:44:19 All right.
20:44:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
20:44:21 >> Second.
20:44:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Who wants to read?
20:44:31 Councilman Miranda.
20:44:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move an ordinance approving a
20:44:38 special use permit S-2 for alcohol beverage sales,
20:44:41 small venue and making lawful the sale of beverages
20:44:43 containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight and not
20:44:46 more than 14% by weight and wines regardless of
20:44:49 alcoholic content, beer and wine, 2(COP) foe
20:44:52 consumption on premises and in sealed containers for
20:44:54 consumption off premises at or from that certain lot,
20:44:57 plot or tract of land located at 2616 South MacDill
20:45:01 Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more particularly described
20:45:03 in section 2 hereof approving waivers as set forth

20:45:06 herein, wavering certain restrictions as to distance
20:45:09 based upon certain findings, providing for repeal of
20:45:12 all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective
20:45:13 date.
20:45:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved by Mr. Miranda,
20:45:16 seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.
20:45:21 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
20:45:23 Opposes?
20:45:25 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder voting no.
20:45:28 Second reading and adoption will be on October 2nd
20:45:30 at 9:30 a.m.
20:45:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 11 is a continued public hearing.
20:45:43 Are you ready?
20:46:30 It's a continued public hearing.
20:46:32 I assume it already open, is that right?
20:46:35 >> Yes.
20:46:38 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Land Development Coordination.
20:46:40 And Irv sworn.
20:46:42 Mr. Chairman, item number 12, also, can be opened with
20:46:45 this petition, item number 12 is a request for alcohol
20:46:50 sales.
20:46:51 It is under the old --

20:46:54 So we need to open both?
20:46:56 >>LaCHONE DOCK: This file number Z 08 ---WZ-08-14.
20:47:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 11 and 12 are both together.
20:47:07 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Yes.
20:47:09 And I will present the petition Z-08-46 for the
20:47:16 property located at 4215 north 15th street.
20:47:19 The petition is requesting to rezone property from
20:47:22 RS-50 residential single-family to PD planned
20:47:25 development to allow for retail grocery store use.
20:47:29 The property contains approximately 7,000 square feet.
20:47:33 The existing one-story, 1,311 square fat willed
20:47:37 building will remain.
20:47:38 The building height is 15 feet.
20:47:40 The PD setbacks are as follows -- north 7.6 feet,
20:47:44 south 46.4 feet, and west 20 feet, east 9.4 feet.
20:47:51 The total of 5 parking spaces are required and four
20:47:54 parking spaces are being provided.
20:47:56 The petitioner is requesting a waiver for the
20:48:00 deficiency of one parking space.
20:48:05 And I have an aerial of the site.
20:48:13 This is a site at 15th bordering on the west,
20:48:17 Genessee is south. This is MLK south of the site.

20:48:22 With multiple commercial running along MLK and the
20:48:25 residential along 15th.
20:48:35 And this is an aerial of the site.
20:48:45 This is a picture of the site on 15th street.
20:48:48 Another view of the site.
20:48:55 This is located south of the site.
20:49:02 This is residential located east of the site.
20:49:08 This is located north of the site on 15th.
20:49:14 West of the site.
20:49:18 Another view west of the site.
20:49:22 And another view west of the site.
20:49:28 The development review committee has reviewed the
20:49:32 petition and finds it inconsistent with applicable
20:49:34 City of Tampa land development regulation.
20:49:37 However, the applicant revise it is site plan with the
20:49:39 required notes and revisions, between first and second
20:49:42 reading, the DRC will amend the determination and find
20:49:47 the petition consistent.
20:49:48 I did hand out also a revision sheet to go along with
20:49:51 that, with the requested revisions between first and
20:49:54 second reading.
20:49:56 And that concludes staff's presentations.

20:49:58 If you have any questions.
20:50:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions?
20:50:11 Planning Commission?
20:50:12 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff.
20:50:17 I have been sworn in.
20:50:19 Planning Commission staff reviewed this request and
20:50:22 has the following findings: The site under review
20:50:27 this evening was established according to the property
20:50:29 appraiser in 1947, was a grocery store.
20:50:36 The comprehensive plan provides guidance for legal
20:50:40 nonconforming uses, and it states that they may be
20:50:44 supported through the planned development process,
20:50:49 which is being complied with this rezoning.
20:50:53 Planning Commission staff finds that the request is
20:50:56 also consistent with comprehensive plan policies that
20:51:00 speak to the mitigation of adverse impacts, the site
20:51:04 being in the same spot doing what its asking for,
20:51:08 approval in terms of a grocery store, since 1947.
20:51:12 Neighborhood commercial uses that serve the needs of
20:51:16 residents in the area, should be designated in the
20:51:20 correct manner, and the comprehensive plan is --
20:51:25 petition, excuse me, is consistent with that policy.

20:51:28 And based on those findings, Planning Commission staff
20:51:31 is recommending consistency to the council.
20:51:38 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
20:51:43 Request also associated with this property is WZ
20:51:46 08-14.
20:51:47 This is a wet zoning request that was filed prior to
20:51:50 wet zonings becoming special uses on the property.
20:51:53 That's why it's not before you as a special use this
20:51:55 evening.
20:51:56 The request is for 2(APS) which is the sale of
20:52:00 beverages containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight
20:52:03 and not more than 14% by weight and wines regardless
20:52:06 of alcoholic content sealed containers for consumption
20:52:09 off the premises only.
20:52:15 There are no wet zoned establishments within a
20:52:17 thousand feet of this.
20:52:18 There are residential including a PD that's 70 feet,
20:52:23 and there are institutional uses, the closest one
20:52:26 being 220 feet.
20:52:28 The current residential zoning that is on the property
20:52:32 does not allow for the sale of alcoholic beverages.
20:52:34 That's why it's being rezoned to PD this evening to

20:52:36 allow for alcoholic sales.
20:52:40 Also bringing a convenience store into a district that
20:52:44 will allow for modification to the.
20:52:46 It's a legal nonconform use the way it's sitting in
20:52:48 the RS-50.
20:52:53 >>> Officer mill per, City of Tampa police.
20:52:56 City of Tampa police department has no objections.
20:52:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions by council?
20:53:01 Petitioner?
20:53:02 >>> Frank Otero, 101 south 12th Street.
20:53:07 I do have letters of support from the adjacent and
20:53:12 residents, and there's also three churches in the area
20:53:14 that got notified, and two of the three we have support
20:53:20 letters.
20:53:21 Third church, I believe, is vacant, so we could get no
20:53:25 response from them.
20:53:26 But one of the church representatives is here tonight,
20:53:29 and he would like to speak to you.
20:53:30 And I do have letters of support from neighbors and
20:53:38 churches.
20:53:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And you would like that in the
20:53:41 record, sir?

20:53:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anything else?
20:53:46 >>> Yes.
20:53:52 Like I say, we do have the support of the surrounding
20:53:54 property owners, the churches, the police department,
20:53:57 the neighborhood association, had a special meeting
20:53:59 and they had no objection.
20:54:00 And their main concern was if the -- most of my
20:54:10 tenants, customers, actually walk up there to buy
20:54:12 their groceries, and their cigarettes, and that's why
20:54:16 they are in support of it because they want to be able
20:54:18 to buy it at the same time.
20:54:25 And the site is kind of small as you see in the
20:54:27 picture.
20:54:27 They did have issues with the parking.
20:54:31 The dumpster.
20:54:32 And after speaking with Wanda Shea there's only one
20:54:36 spot where the dumpster could go.
20:54:37 So we had to do the parking around the dumpster, 25
20:54:41 feet from the neighbor.
20:54:43 And that's why we are requesting the waiver, the four
20:54:47 parking spaces.
20:54:48 And there are some more waivers.

20:54:51 One is the -- the vinyl fence with the concrete
20:54:58 masonry fence.
20:54:59 We have no problem with. That we wanted to rezone the
20:55:02 property to get the wet zoning because the tenant
20:55:04 definitely needs the extra income to survive.
20:55:09 Thank you.
20:55:09 I do have the owner here and the tenant.
20:55:16 >>MARY MULHERN: The letters will get down here
20:55:18 eventually but I thought you could just answer for me.
20:55:21 Are the neighbors and the churches supporting the
20:55:24 rezoning?
20:55:26 Are they also --
20:55:29 >>> They are actually supporting both of them,
20:55:30 actually.
20:55:31 And until now I did not realize there are two separate
20:55:35 cases.
20:55:35 But we actually talked about the rezoning and the wet
20:55:39 zoning.
20:55:39 But we have one letter from both actually.
20:55:41 >>: Most of them focus on the base.
20:55:47 >>MARY MULHERN: They are supporting?
20:55:48 >>> For 50, 60iers, then we definitely upgraded,

20:55:53 repaved the parking and put the actual landscape
20:55:55 parking.
20:55:56 So the big issue to us --
20:56:03 >>MARY MULHERN: I do have one letter from south
20:56:05 Seminole Heights.
20:56:06 Neighborhood association.
20:56:10 And they are not in support of the wet zoning.
20:56:12 They are in support of the rezoning.
20:56:14 And the store.
20:56:15 But they say -- so I don't know what neighborhood
20:56:18 association, unless they changed their mind.
20:56:21 >>> Two of them actually.
20:56:27 >> This is.
20:56:35 >> I spoke to them.
20:56:37 They are not in support of it.
20:56:39 They said --
20:56:48 >> South Seminole, East Tampa actually, not south.
20:56:58 I mean, they said it but -- the neighborhood is East
20:57:03 Tampa civic association.
20:57:07 >> If I can just clarify for a moment, they fall
20:57:13 within the clarification of both of those neighborhood
20:57:15 associations.

20:57:16 They had to notify the East Tampa civic and also the
20:57:19 southeast Seminole Heights.
20:57:22 >>: I understand that.
20:57:23 But, anyway, I know where it is.
20:57:37 Someone else wanted to speak?
20:57:38 The church is here?
20:57:39 >>> My name is Robert Saviar, the property owner's
20:57:44 husband.
20:57:45 She's on a business trip so she couldn't make it.
20:57:47 The reason why we have the support of the community is
20:57:51 we purchased the property about seven years ago, it
20:57:53 was an eyesore to the community, and we worked on the
20:58:00 interior and exterior of the property and obviously we
20:58:02 want the best for the community.
20:58:05 This tenant is an excellent tenant.
20:58:07 He has been in place for about five years and has been
20:58:09 struggling to just make ends meet.
20:58:11 We have had to even reduce the rent amount two
20:58:17 different times already, because clearly he's not
20:58:19 making it.
20:58:22 Thank you.
20:58:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker?

20:58:31 >> Daniel Washington.
20:58:33 I'm a member of the missionary Baptist church.
20:58:36 And we have at our church agreed for this store for
20:58:44 the sale of alcohol, and we have no problem at all
20:58:46 with it.
20:58:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
20:58:48 All right.
20:58:54 >> Anyone else?
20:58:55 >>> My name is Tom Wyle, I live at 4706 N. 10th
20:58:55 Street. I am a member of southeast Seminole Heights
20:59:09 neighborhood association.
20:59:10 And we haven't had any communication with the
20:59:13 applicant at all, so I don't know what he's talking
20:59:14 about.
20:59:17 As you know, the property is located in the middle of
20:59:20 a residential neighborhood and it's surrounded by
20:59:22 churches and nursing home.
20:59:24 There is the -- we don't have any problems with it.
20:59:29 We think that's great.
20:59:30 We encourage them to improve the property.
20:59:32 But we don't support the wet zoning at all.
20:59:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

20:59:38 All right.
20:59:40 Anyone else from the public?
20:59:46 Okay, yes, sir.
20:59:46 >>> One of the neighborhood associations supported
20:59:53 this.
20:59:53 And then I have had three e-mails, I have two phones,
20:59:57 and they received a letter, and I have never received
21:00:00 any objection to it.
21:00:02 And I do have 50 letters from adjacent property owners
21:00:05 that support it.
21:00:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
21:00:15 You are walking further away.
21:00:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
21:00:26 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question.
21:00:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You have a question?
21:00:29 Yes.
21:00:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Maybe Abbye or someone, can you show
21:00:34 us on this map where the neighborhood associations
21:00:36 are?
21:00:37 No?
21:00:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It was my understanding the reason
21:00:58 they were seeking the rezoning, to be able to have the

21:01:01 alcohol sales, I personally feel comfortable
21:01:03 supporting the rezoning, because it recognizes an
21:01:06 existing use.
21:01:07 But I don't feel comfortable to putting alcohol,
21:01:13 and -- I guess we'll take them one at a time.
21:01:19 >>MARY MULHERN: I am going to go look at my map and
21:01:22 figure out where the boundaries are.
21:01:24 >> Do you want to us wait?
21:01:25 >>Well wait on you.
21:01:33 Go ahead.
21:01:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I recall, that neighborhood, you
21:01:35 go down 15th street, about three blocks north of
21:01:38 MLK, right on the right-hand side.
21:01:42 And you go three or four more blocks before you get
21:01:45 right at the corner of Osborne, where there's a big
21:01:47 dip in the road.
21:01:49 There's a 7-Eleven type store there.
21:01:52 Is it still there?
21:01:53 >>> Yes.
21:01:56 It's not a 7-Eleven.
21:01:59 >> And on the southwest corner of the intersection.
21:02:08 >> Correct.

21:02:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Okay.
21:02:14 And that building has been there for 50 or 60 years.
21:02:19 Is that the one by the big oak tree?
21:02:24 Thank you very much.
21:02:25 >> Move to close.
21:02:27 >> I want to add that we definitely would have spoke
21:02:37 to him if we knew to speak to him.
21:02:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
21:02:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion to close.
21:02:48 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
21:02:50 Okay.
21:02:52 Do you want to wait?
21:02:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Which one do you want to vote on?
21:02:57 11 or 12?
21:03:03 Well, let's take up number 11 and rezone.
21:03:06 I don't have a problem with the rezoning.
21:03:15 >>CHAIRMAN: An ordinance rezoning property in the
21:03:20 general vicinity of 4215 north 15th street in the
21:03:23 city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described
21:03:24 in section 1 from zoning district classifications
21:03:27 RS-50 to residential single-family to PD planned
21:03:31 development, retail, grocery, providing an effective

21:03:33 date.
21:03:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: With the revision sheet?
21:03:39 >>GWEN MILLER: With the revision, yes.
21:03:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: With the revision.
21:03:43 Moved and seconded by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
21:03:45 All in favor -- we are voting on rezoning now.
21:03:51 >>MARY MULHERN: I know.
21:03:52 I want to tell that you 15th street is all in
21:03:55 southeast Seminole Heights district.
21:03:57 According to my neighborhood map.
21:04:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
21:04:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I want here for the making of the
21:04:10 motion.
21:04:10 Did that include --
21:04:11 Yes.
21:04:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
21:04:12 I apologize.
21:04:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes, the revision.
21:04:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.
21:04:19 Opposes be?
21:04:19 >>MARY MULHERN: No.
21:04:21 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern voting no.

21:04:24 Second reading and adoption will be on October 2nd
21:04:26 at 9:30 a.m.
21:04:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close number 12.
21:04:31 >> Second.
21:04:31 (Motion carried)
21:04:41 >>GWEN MILLER: An ordinance making lawful the sale of
21:04:47 beverages containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight
21:04:50 and not more than 14% by weight and wines regardless
21:04:54 of alcoholic content beer and wine 2(APS) in sealed
21:04:58 containers for consumption off premises only at or
21:05:02 from that certain lot, plot or tract of land located
21:05:05 at 4215 north 15th street, Tampa, Florida, as more
21:05:09 particularly described on section 2 hereof, waiving
21:05:12 certain restrictions as to the distance based upon
21:05:15 certain findings providing for repeal of all
21:05:17 ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
21:05:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder?
21:05:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, unlike the three of
21:05:26 you, I don't know where this -- where this store is
21:05:31 and I don't know what the context is other than the
21:05:33 testimony we have heard.
21:05:34 I would like to hear perhaps from any of the three of

21:05:37 you your feelings about this, because that's going to
21:05:42 be influential on my vote.
21:05:46 You know, as we have heard some of the churches are
21:05:48 okay with it.
21:05:49 We have got one neighbor who has a problem with it.
21:05:52 We have got neighborhood associations got problems it
21:05:54 with.
21:05:54 We have 50 neighborhood letters in support.
21:05:58 That sort of thing.
21:05:59 So, anyway --
21:06:05 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (off microphone) saying that the
21:06:13 nearest store is two miles away.
21:06:14 This is a walking neighborhood and if somebody is
21:06:16 going to walk two miles to get a bottle of beer, they
21:06:19 might not get home.
21:06:21 All right?
21:06:22 And this is more convenient for the residents of that
21:06:24 area.
21:06:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Councilwoman Mulhern.
21:06:29 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry, I was not focused or I
21:06:33 would have voted for the zoning.
21:06:34 I thought we were voting --

21:06:36 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Would you like a motion for
21:06:38 reconsideration?
21:06:40 >>MARY MULHERN: It doesn't matter.
21:06:41 I just want him to know that I supported the rezoning.
21:06:44 Sorry.
21:06:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to say that the -- this
21:06:52 is a little store in the middle of the neighborhood.
21:06:55 It not on a major commercial street.
21:06:57 And that's why I feel lake the neighbors, residential
21:07:03 homes, now, and that store across the street close by,
21:07:06 and the idea is going to be buying some beer and
21:07:15 breaking bottles.
21:07:16 I think it can have a negative impact on the
21:07:18 neighborhood, and that's why I don't feel comfortable.
21:07:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
21:07:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am not trying to sway anyone's
21:07:26 vote.
21:07:27 You can vote however you like.
21:07:29 But I can tell you that from my experiences in the
21:07:32 past, there's a railroad track about three or four
21:07:34 blocks to the east that runs that way, if I remember
21:07:38 that neighborhood.

21:07:40 And Mr. Dingfelder called me Google Miranda.
21:07:44 He says I memorize all that stuff.
21:07:46 I'll take that nickname.
21:07:48 But what I'm saying is I don't know -- know the
21:07:51 neighborhood pretty well.
21:07:52 It's been there a long time.
21:07:53 That was the expansion, when you sit on the other side
21:07:58 of MLK when I was a little boy you were in the
21:08:01 country.
21:08:01 And then they started building these real nice small
21:08:04 homes in there, were mainly wood and then started
21:08:08 building the concrete homes, small ones.
21:08:10 And then to the immediate west of that property, I
21:08:13 would say that building used to make me dizzy because
21:08:16 it's built that way but the land was at one time not
21:08:20 level so they built the building so the building looks
21:08:22 level.
21:08:22 But when you look at it you probably had a headache.
21:08:25 I will never forget that building.
21:08:27 So I know the location very well.
21:08:30 And I don't see anything wrong with the alcohol at
21:08:33 this time.

21:08:35 >>GWEN MILLER: I don't either.
21:08:36 I travel that way frequently because that's in my
21:08:38 area.
21:08:39 And if the neighborhood was against it, I think they
21:08:42 would have signed the petition, we had 30 and everyone
21:08:46 Griese agreed plus the church, fanned they disagreed,
21:08:49 Seminole Heights should have been here, if they are in
21:08:52 proximity to it and let them know, that is a
21:08:56 neighborhood -- I don't see it's going to be an effect
21:08:59 on the neighborhood because it is a nice neighborhood
21:09:01 and people that live there agree with it so I think
21:09:03 they are going to keep it nice.
21:09:04 I don't think anything is going to happen.
21:09:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We do have one person here from
21:09:10 Seminole Heights that did speak.
21:09:12 Yes.
21:09:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
21:09:16 And I just -- I don't live in that neighborhood, but
21:09:20 according to my math, and unless -- map, and unless
21:09:24 someone tells me differently the houses surrounding
21:09:26 that, their neighborhood association didn't want to
21:09:29 sell liquor.

21:09:31 And, you know, I don't want to hurt your business, and
21:09:34 I know they support the business and they want it to
21:09:37 survive.
21:09:38 So it looks like this is not going to matter.
21:09:43 But I think the south Seminole Heights people better
21:09:49 start frequenting this grocery store if he doesn't get
21:09:52 a liquor license because otherwise it sounds like he's
21:09:54 not going to make it.
21:10:02 >> Motion and second.
21:10:05 Moved by Councilwoman Saul-Sena, seconded by
21:10:07 councilman Caetano.
21:10:10 All in favor?
21:10:11 Opposed?
21:10:12 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena and Mulhern
21:10:14 voting no.
21:10:16 Second reading and adoption will be on October 2nd
21:10:18 at 9:30 a.m
21:10:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 13, which is a -- item 13,
21:10:36 council, apparently is going to be quite lengthy.
21:10:39 All right.
21:10:44 I was wondering if council wants to take about a
21:10:46 five-minute break, recess.

21:10:48 It's going to be quite lengthy.
21:10:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 5-minute break.
21:10:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I suggest we take a 5-minute break.
21:10:57 So council will be in recess for five minutes and come
21:10:59 right back.
21:11:00 Five minutes.
21:11:01 (City Council in recess)
21:11:10 [Sounding gavel]
21:20:27 Tampa City Council will now come back to order.
21:20:29 Roll call.
21:20:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
21:20:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
21:20:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
21:20:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
21:20:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
21:20:41 Item 13.
21:20:45 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Land Development Coordination.
21:20:47 And I have been sworn.
21:20:49 The next item is petition number Z 08-11.
21:20:52 This is a continued public hearing.
21:20:54 The petition was previously before council on June 12,
21:20:58 2008, at that time council directed the petitioner to

21:21:01 meet with the neighborhood to discuss the project and
21:21:05 also to eliminate the parking waiver that was
21:21:07 requested.
21:21:08 The petitioner has amended the site plan and is
21:21:13 proposing 3500 square feet for medical office and 5245
21:21:18 square feet for general office.
21:21:21 Which reduces the required parking spaces from 44 to
21:21:23 39.
21:21:25 Also four additional parking spaces have been added to
21:21:29 increase the number of parking spaces provided from 35
21:21:32 to 39.
21:21:35 The petitioner did speak to the neighborhood meetings,
21:21:41 discussions they had with the neighborhood.
21:21:44 There are two additional changes requested on the site
21:21:46 plan between first and second reading and that is to
21:21:48 add the note regarding the waiver of the green space,
21:21:51 should be listed as the square footage required, and
21:21:54 state that it will be assessed in payment in lieu fee
21:21:58 per section 13-161-E.
21:22:00 The fee should be paid to the city of parks and rec
21:22:05 department at the time of permitting.
21:22:06 The fee should be paid prior to the issuance of the

21:22:08 first building permit.
21:22:11 And also solid waste would like to add the following
21:22:14 waiver request to section 27-132-B to allow the
21:22:18 dumpster within the front yard.
21:22:23 >> Questions by council?
21:22:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Are those on a waiver sheet as well,
21:22:31 those requests that you have?
21:22:35 They are not listed on the blue, is that correct?
21:22:37 I just want to be clear for council.
21:22:42 >>LaCHONE DOCK: No, they are not.
21:22:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You will have to reiterate them at
21:22:49 the time.
21:22:49 >>> I will.
21:22:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Did we get the photographs and the
21:22:53 sheets on this?
21:22:55 >>LaCHONE DOCK: The site photographs in the aerial?
21:22:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Usually you show us photographs
21:23:06 surrounding the property.
21:23:09 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Sure.
21:23:10 Since it's a continued hearing I didn't show them.
21:23:16 This is an aerial of the site.
21:23:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What I want to see is the street to

21:23:25 the east of it.
21:23:31 >>> Matanzas?
21:23:34 >> Okay, thank you for that.
21:23:35 >>> You're welcome.
21:23:36 Did you need to see site photographs, also?
21:23:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Planning Commission.
21:23:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I had a question, Mr. Chair.
21:23:45 LaShon, do you know anything about the exterior
21:23:47 treatment of the garbage enclosure, solid waste
21:23:53 enclosure?
21:23:53 Do we have a requirement that the treatment is the
21:23:56 same?
21:23:57 >>LaCHONE DOCK: We do, yes, sir.
21:23:58 >> Whether it's brick or if it's stucco then it's
21:24:02 stucco?
21:24:03 >>> Yes.
21:24:04 It should be of the same material that the building
21:24:05 is.
21:24:05 >> And petitioner can confirm that.
21:24:07 Thank you.
21:24:21 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: I have been sworn in.
21:24:24 He found the request to be consistent with the

21:24:26 comprehensive plan, siting policies that direct such
21:24:31 considerations as approve development site plans must
21:24:35 demonstrate safe and convenient on-site parking with
21:24:40 new development and redevelopment must mitigate the
21:24:42 adverse noise, visual, odor and vibration impacts
21:24:46 created by the development, in proximity to the
21:24:49 proposed development or redevelopment, and a finding
21:24:54 that the request is consistent with generally
21:24:56 development and redevelopment shall be integrated with
21:24:58 the adjacent land uses crew the creation of like uses,
21:25:03 the creation of complementary uses, mitigation of
21:25:05 adverse impacts, transportation connections, and other
21:25:09 appropriate mechanisms.
21:25:13 Planning Commission staff recommends approval.
21:25:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions?
21:25:20 Petitioner?
21:25:21 This is a continued public hearing.
21:25:37 Chris Kishner on behalf of petitioner Ed Kempsen to
21:25:43 provide the revised design for the office building at
21:25:47 3224 Henderson Boulevard, and Ivan not been sworn.
21:25:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else has not been sworn, please
21:25:52 stand and raise your right hand.

21:25:56 (Oath administered by Clerk).
21:26:04 >>> With me presenting tonight is Mr. La Rosa with
21:26:06 Hamilton engineering to address any site issues should
21:26:09 it be required.
21:26:09 At the last hearing, council advised to us modify
21:26:13 design, to take into a variety of items.
21:26:17 We went to the transcript and kind of categorized them
21:26:21 into three items.
21:26:23 One was to redesign the site, to remove the parking
21:26:26 waiver.
21:26:27 The second was to revise the design top reduce the
21:26:32 intensity of the use.
21:26:33 And the third was to try to redesign the building to
21:26:36 reduce the footprint or the overall size of the
21:26:39 building.
21:26:40 Council also advised us to meet with the remote
21:26:43 residents who had not been noticed on the zoning
21:26:46 hearing being that they were not within 200 feet in
21:26:48 order to discuss the project and review their
21:26:50 concerns.
21:26:52 Following the advice of council we undertook to meet
21:26:55 with the residents fir, Mr. Bruce young, here this

21:26:57 evening, at south woodland was kind enough to
21:27:01 volunteer his home for that meeting, organized
21:27:03 everyone.
21:27:04 I believe that one of the successful result of the
21:27:06 meetings is we were able to demonstrate that the
21:27:08 design prevents vehicular use of Bradford which is the
21:27:13 street to the west of the site, to the east of the
21:27:16 paving structures and security gate, which is one of
21:27:18 the concerns that was expressed at the prior meeting.
21:27:21 The prior hearing.
21:27:23 However, much of the discussion focused on the
21:27:25 commercial versus residential planning in the
21:27:27 neighborhood, and along Henderson Boulevard commercial
21:27:29 corridor, and other particular specifics of the design
21:27:35 were not discussed.
21:27:38 After conducting the meeting we proceeded to review
21:27:40 the design, considering all the comments of the
21:27:42 council, the immediate neighbors, the remote
21:27:45 residences as well as those of the staff, and what you
21:27:49 have before you is a compromise plan than addresses
21:27:52 the concerns of all interested parties.
21:27:54 We have -- we have redesigned the site, and we have

21:27:58 removed the parking waiver as requested.
21:28:01 Second, Dr. Kempsen has agreed to reduce the intensity
21:28:04 of the design, and he has reduced the amount of his
21:28:08 medical use from 5,412 square feet down to 3,500
21:28:12 square feet.
21:28:13 Third thing, we have reduced the footprint of the
21:28:15 building slightly from 5,412 square feet to 5,142
21:28:19 square feet.
21:28:20 I believe we have done our best to address the
21:28:22 concerns of the neighborhood while balancing the needs
21:28:24 of the overall project.
21:28:28 Dr. Kempsen compromised and we have removed the
21:28:32 parking waiver as requested.
21:28:33 We have also maintained the lead design, and intend to
21:28:37 proceed forward with. That we have agreed to keep the
21:28:39 design elements produced as a result of a compromise
21:28:42 of the immediate neighbors who are here to speak in
21:28:44 support.
21:28:45 And I think it's important again to emphasize that we
21:28:48 have satisfactorily addressed the immediate concerns
21:28:53 of the neighborhood and do support it.
21:28:57 Thank you.

21:28:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Questions by council?
21:29:06 All right.
21:29:08 The public, those in support and those who are in
21:29:13 opposition, line up on one side.
21:29:15 And those in opposition line up to my right.
21:29:20 This is your left.
21:29:21 In support.
21:29:23 To my left.
21:29:33 Those in support to my left.
21:29:35 Opposition to my right.
21:29:37 Okay.
21:29:38 We will an eternity both sides.
21:29:40 Okay.
21:29:49 >> My name is Christy king and I am the neighbor
21:29:51 directly east of the property.
21:29:54 And myself and Carolyn, who is directly behind, and
21:30:01 Dora and Ophelia, we are all in support of the
21:30:03 project.
21:30:04 We feel the developer has agreed to do everything that
21:30:06 we have requested.
21:30:07 We don't want a huge building behind us, don't get me
21:30:10 wrong.

21:30:10 But we understand what they are allowed to build, and
21:30:12 we are in support of what they are proposing.
21:30:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thanks.
21:30:19 Sir?
21:30:19 >>> Joe wall Rick, 206 south Bradford Avenue.
21:30:25 I have lived there for 26 years.
21:30:27 Also, I just want to let you know I got a waiver.
21:30:32 For some extra minutes.
21:30:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Before you start speaking, sir.
21:30:36 That's okay.
21:30:37 Before you start -- that's okay.
21:30:39 The five names here.
21:30:41 Would you please acknowledge your presence?
21:30:43 David Smith.
21:30:45 Thank you.
21:30:45 John van pelt, thank you.
21:30:48 Scott Molgart? Thank you.
21:30:51 Gale Demeter? Thank you.
21:30:53 Thank you.
21:30:53 And Joe Caglio or something to that effect. Five
21:30:56 extra minutes.
21:31:05 A total of eight minutes.

21:31:14 By all outward appearances it just appears like that,
21:31:29 a typical South Tampa neighborhood, here is a little
21:31:33 closer shot, sort of atypical in that we share each
21:31:36 others triumphs and tragedies and any hurricane we are
21:31:40 out there helping each other pick up and clean up.
21:31:42 It's a very close knit neighborhood.
21:31:44 Just thought I would bring that to your attention.
21:31:51 Just to talk about where we were.
21:31:52 Just to give you an idea what the property looks like
21:31:55 right now.
21:31:56 It pretty much overrun.
21:31:57 The lawn hasn't been mowed in a couple of months.
21:32:00 There's all sorts of construction debris in the
21:32:03 center.
21:32:04 Water, mosquitoes, you pretty much get the picture
21:32:07 there.
21:32:10 More importantly the issues, first and foremost is the
21:32:13 architectural compatibility, not really compatibility
21:32:17 with the neighborhood.
21:32:19 We find it to be way too big for our neighborhood,
21:32:22 actually for the land that is -- really scaled back,
21:32:29 in our opinion.

21:32:30 The residential buffers, what little there are, are
21:32:32 inadequate.
21:32:34 Just not close to what we need.
21:32:36 The parking, there's a couple issues with parking that
21:32:38 I'll talk about.
21:32:40 Home values, we don't see how this adds anything to
21:32:43 our neighborhood especially when you consider that
21:32:45 tumultuous real estate market that we are in right now
21:32:48 we just don't see how this is going to do anything to
21:32:50 benefit us.
21:32:52 We feel it's going to hurt us.
21:32:54 And stormwater run-off, we have stormwater run-off.
21:32:57 We do have a problem with run-off that's probably
21:32:59 unique to our area that I would like to show you and
21:33:01 perhaps, you know, there's some resolutions we can
21:33:03 find there.
21:33:04 We don't see how this is going to benefit us.
21:33:07 In addition to that, we think there's going to be some
21:33:09 increased traffic through the local neighborhoods
21:33:12 because of this project, because of the size, the
21:33:14 amount of square footage of the project.
21:33:16 And there's also potential for driving hazard, and I

21:33:21 hope to show you some images tonight.
21:33:24 And this quite frankly is a trust issue.
21:33:27 As Chris mentioned we did get together with him, he's
21:33:31 a nice guy, we had a chat, we thought it would be more
21:33:33 of a give or take but it was more of a give and we
21:33:37 take, so to say.
21:33:38 He told us that after some serious consideration,
21:33:41 don't Kempsen felt he only needed 3500 square feet as
21:33:45 opposed to the 52 or 5400 he originally thought he
21:33:48 needed.
21:33:49 That contained of set some alarms off that we'll get
21:33:52 to here in a moment.
21:33:54 But equally as important we were told that this is it,
21:33:56 take it or levy.
21:33:59 Very nicely, and I don't hold Chris accountable.
21:34:03 I think he was doing the bidding of his boss but the
21:34:05 simple reality is they are going to build something
21:34:07 there and it may not be nearly as nice, and may have
21:34:10 windows in the back, and everything else.
21:34:15 There's been some strong arm act ticks.
21:34:20 Neighbors have been threatened and told that they are
21:34:22 going to build, no matter what we have to say, it's

21:34:25 not going to be important.
21:34:33 It's going to have to deal with some of the issues we
21:34:35 talk about here.
21:34:40 The structure started at -- 45.
21:34:45 What happened quite frankly is the medical use and the
21:34:48 general office use just got transposed, they just
21:34:51 flipped the numbers.
21:34:52 And quite frankly, my initial feeling and shared by my
21:34:56 neighbors is this is a poorly veiled attempt to Don
21:34:59 fuse us or deceive us in order to get the zoning they
21:35:04 wanted and then when they build it they are just going
21:35:06 to allocate that space anyway they choose to.
21:35:08 In order to get the extra parking spaces you can see
21:35:10 over here they are just changing the buffer sizes so
21:35:15 the buffers they are already asking for a waiver
21:35:17 for -- and right now, that site is zoned RO.
21:35:20 So not only asking for a PD but asking for waivers on
21:35:23 top of the PD which really kind of set off the
21:35:26 neighborhood.
21:35:26 It's like, if you want a PD, fine, build within the
21:35:30 parameters, we'll go along with it.
21:35:32 But now we are asking for waivers on top of the zoning

21:35:34 changes.
21:35:35 So now we are talking about 39 parking places opposed
21:35:38 to the 44.
21:35:40 And that's just the wrong direction, in our opinion.
21:35:43 If anything, we feel as if they need more parking, not
21:35:46 less.
21:35:46 And by transposing the numbers, this is just math.
21:35:51 Nothing has really changed.
21:35:52 We are just changing the allocations.
21:35:55 How the space is divided up.
21:35:57 Now, I got to tell you, it really got into a square
21:36:02 footage issue, in the subsequent meetings we had, also
21:36:04 the neighbors I talked to casually on the street,
21:36:07 there was a lot of issues brought up about square
21:36:09 footage, and you probably don't recall the last time
21:36:12 we were in front of you there was a big issue about
21:36:15 square footage whether it was 1470 or 1490.
21:36:18 Well, we went through and researched a little bit and
21:36:20 what we found was that the garage was closed in.
21:36:23 That's the extra 500 square feet.
21:36:25 So it's really 2,000, approximately 2,000 square foot
21:36:28 office.

21:36:29 And so in addition we talked to Chris and said, look,
21:36:32 give us something.
21:36:33 Put some meat on the bones.
21:36:35 How can you a sure us that what you are telling us,
21:36:39 the 3500 versus the 5400, that's how it's going to end
21:36:43 up.
21:36:43 When it all said and done.
21:36:45 We don't want to be policing this.
21:36:46 This isn't our job.
21:36:47 We all have real jobs we have to go through every day.
21:36:50 We have families to raise.
21:36:51 We have dogs to bring to the vet.
21:36:54 How can you tell us, how can we ---how can we know
21:36:59 what you are telling us is going to occur?
21:37:01 That's where it's going to be?
21:37:02 Well, the direction at that point that he gave, and I
21:37:05 think he was shooting from the hip trying to come up
21:37:07 with an answer, but he suggested that occupational
21:37:09 license might be the way to go, you can check the
21:37:11 occupational license, which I did.
21:37:13 And it wasn't.
21:37:14 After several phone calls and hours of researching and

21:37:16 going on line researching it, I did find occupational
21:37:20 license on that site, on that particular address, Dr.
21:37:23 Kempsen is the only one that had an occupational
21:37:25 license for the last six years.
21:37:27 But there's also three practices, if you notice on the
21:37:30 sign, there's three practices operating out of one
21:37:32 location, and in the upper right you are going to
21:37:35 notice, you are going to see the sign has been
21:37:38 repainted over that and his name is behind Savidge and
21:37:44 Dr. Clark and canter.
21:37:46 So at any point in time you had two or three practices
21:37:48 in that 2,000 square feet.
21:37:51 So our question is, with all of this going on, you
21:37:54 know, you have got three different practices.
21:37:58 Only one occupational license.
21:38:01 And I don't know if for a fact but I'm assuming only
21:38:05 one person is supposed to be there.
21:38:06 But, you know, it kind of explained one thing, and it
21:38:09 brought to life why this particular assignment has 18
21:38:14 parking places for 2,000 square feet.
21:38:18 Now, you know, there's a good point to this and then
21:38:22 it also brings on another question.

21:38:25 The neighbors want to know how you can justify
21:38:29 replacing a 2,000 square foot building with 18 parking
21:38:32 places with a structure four and a half times as
21:38:36 large, but you are only putting in parking -- you are
21:38:40 putting in just twice, plus three parking places, the
21:38:44 amount of parking that was originally there for the
21:38:47 2,000 square feet.
21:38:48 Now, I understand.
21:38:49 You know, you have got the building codes.
21:38:51 You have the standards.
21:38:52 And it has to work that way.
21:38:53 I do understand.
21:38:54 But we do have a circumstance here where this practice
21:38:57 is unique, and very creative, and God bless em, you
21:39:00 know, I am not trying to begrudge the guy an income.
21:39:04 But it's having an impact on our neighborhood.
21:39:05 It's causing more traffic on our streets.
21:39:07 And as you can see, parking places, and their patients
21:39:11 still park on my street, at the end of the street,
21:39:14 their cars still park across the street at Edwards.
21:39:17 It just is an environment that really we have got to
21:39:20 take a little bit deeper look into the parking

21:39:22 situation than it is.
21:39:24 So I just want to outline this for you just a little
21:39:27 bit just to show you what we don't really think -- and
21:39:30 we are not engineers, okay?
21:39:31 And I know from an engineering standpoint I'm sure
21:39:34 this is acceptable.
21:39:34 But you have got to be realistic.
21:39:36 I mean, you are talking about 23 parking spaces --
21:39:40 Sir, okay.
21:39:41 That's eight minutes.
21:39:42 That's it.
21:39:42 >>> Okay.
21:39:45 That's it.
21:39:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker to my left.
21:39:56 >>> Melinda brower, I live at 111 south Matanzas.
21:40:00 I am one. Two lots that back up entirely, there's
21:40:06 only two lots that are completely behind it.
21:40:09 I am one of the lots.
21:40:10 And we are for it.
21:40:13 We would prefer that there would be no large building
21:40:16 put there.
21:40:17 However, we know we can't stop what is going to

21:40:20 happen.
21:40:21 And we look -- the plan that they are planning on
21:40:24 doing, it will be 60 feet away from our property line,
21:40:28 and we are talking about going up 35 feet.
21:40:32 If they keep it as an RO, which that's what everyone
21:40:35 else in the neighborhood wants, they can still go up
21:40:39 35.
21:40:40 They can still put a large building there.
21:40:42 But it will be 25 feet away from our property line.
21:40:45 And I understand there will be more traffic.
21:40:47 However, there's going to be traffic in whatever
21:40:50 happens here.
21:40:50 We can't stop them from building something.
21:40:54 So, I mean, that's going to happen one way or the
21:40:57 other.
21:40:57 But being able to put a building 25 feet away from my
21:41:01 property, or 60 feet away, we can do something.
21:41:05 That's your job.
21:41:06 You can do that.
21:41:07 And out of everyone here, I am one of the people that
21:41:10 is the most affected.
21:41:11 It's my backyard.

21:41:13 And Dr. Kempsen, they did come to us.
21:41:16 Anything that we have asked for them to do, they have
21:41:18 been willing to do.
21:41:20 And, you know, we are just for it and so are the other
21:41:25 neighbor Carolyn, who is at 109 south Matanzas.
21:41:28 She is for it for the same reason.
21:41:30 She is the only other yard that completely backs up to
21:41:34 it.
21:41:34 There could be people around it on Matanzas, but they
21:41:37 are not going to completely back up.
21:41:39 Thank you.
21:41:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: May I ask a question?
21:41:42 >> Yes.
21:41:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, ma'am, I have a
21:41:44 question.
21:41:46 On our write-up, it says, you know, they are
21:41:49 requesting waivers like reducing the waiver from, you
21:41:53 know, 15 feet with a 6-foot masonry wall to five feet
21:41:57 with an 8-foot masonry wall along the east.
21:42:01 Are you aware that they are requesting these waivers,
21:42:04 and the difference involved?
21:42:08 >>> We spoke to them about possibly putting up an

21:42:12 8-foot masonry wall.
21:42:14 And then we were told it would be better to have this
21:42:18 six feet because Carolyn, who is the other one who is
21:42:20 completely behind it, feels that would box her in more
21:42:23 if it was that high.
21:42:24 So we were okay with the six feet.
21:42:27 >> And the regular rule is 15 feet, and they are going
21:42:32 to be five feet away from the wall.
21:42:35 You are aware of that.
21:42:36 >>> Well, parking is going to be there and we know
21:42:40 their parking is mainly during the day, when we are
21:42:43 away, when we are working, and this north there on the
21:42:45 weekend.
21:42:46 So that's not going to affect us that much.
21:42:50 A building that's 20 feet away from my property line,
21:42:53 there is no -- it's there all the time, 24/7 so that's
21:42:58 why it works out much better for us to have it away,
21:43:00 and we also know in that building they are not putting
21:43:03 any windows in the back of the building, which for our
21:43:12 privacy.
21:43:13 Thank you.
21:43:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker to my right.

21:43:16 Yes, sir.
21:43:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: There was a question from the
21:43:20 audience.
21:43:20 I'm sorry to interrupt.
21:43:21 But there is a little light here.
21:43:24 There's a green, yellow and red.
21:43:26 The yellow light comes on when there's one minute
21:43:28 remaining and when the red light comes on that means
21:43:30 you have 30 seconds to wrap up before the beep goes
21:43:32 off.
21:43:32 >>> I wish we would have known that because we miss
21:43:35 board of director the last two or three minutes of
21:43:37 very, very important -- if we have time we would
21:43:39 really like to show the rest of Jay's presentation
21:43:43 that we spent weeks putting this together, if you
21:43:45 would consider that.
21:43:45 Let me start, chairman Thomas Scott and the honorary
21:43:49 members of City Council, and the City Council staff.
21:43:51 My name is John TABIS, I liver at 204 south Bradford
21:43:56 area.
21:43:56 I lived there right at 30 years and my house was built
21:43:59 by Joe smiley, the owner of the Tampa Tribune and

21:44:03 times, probably one of Charlie Miranda's friends back
21:44:05 in 1938.
21:44:08 And that's what South Tampa is all about, you know, is
21:44:11 keeping our neighborhoods and our heritage.
21:44:14 And what I have brought with me is a notarized
21:44:19 statement from Ms. Oh feel owe bono which the first
21:44:23 lady on the other side said she was for it.
21:44:26 Unfortunately she has changed her mind, I guess.
21:44:28 I talked to her weeks and weeks ago and I have a
21:44:30 notarized statement I would like to read to City
21:44:32 Council.
21:44:32 She owns the largest single piece of land that's
21:44:34 involved in this particular hearing.
21:44:36 She's south of the project.
21:44:38 She has a half acre or two lots, and she's been there
21:44:41 over 40 years.
21:44:44 I can either hand you the notarized statement or I can
21:44:46 read it.
21:44:53 The whole presentation goes back to what Joe had said.
21:45:05 The whole thing is an issue of trust.
21:45:06 While preparing for the hearing we found so many
21:45:11 questionable discrepancies that surfaced and how the

21:45:13 property was at 1475, the property appraiser, the
21:45:16 petitioner stated 2,000 when they wanted to make it
21:45:18 6,000 in their behalf.
21:45:20 And how a garage is possibly enclosed, when an
21:45:25 operating room has been exiting for 15 years.
21:45:27 That's not everyone on the site plan.
21:45:29 We couldn't find any permits pulled against that so I
21:45:32 don't know how far back the city records go but that
21:45:34 kind of upset us at that point about the trust in the
21:45:39 property.
21:45:39 The other thing is that we trusted them to do a good
21:45:41 job on demolition of the property.
21:45:44 They pulled the permit on the 30th of June.
21:45:49 They demolished the project over the Fourth of July
21:45:52 weekend.
21:45:52 They brought no water trucks in to bring the dust and
21:45:55 dirt down which I understand by code.
21:45:58 It's still not fenced in.
21:45:59 The pictures that Joe showed is you what we are living
21:46:02 W.we had rubble, concrete piles.
21:46:04 There's been no removal of the excess degree debris.
21:46:07 I understand the person that did the demolition got

21:46:11 sick and didn't come back.
21:46:13 We have been living with it for over two and a half
21:46:15 months.
21:46:16 And the other thing is there's no yard maintenance.
21:46:18 Since the -- excuse me.
21:46:26 Since we started in June, and Dr. Kempsen abandoned
21:46:29 the property, nobody has mowed the yard on the street
21:46:32 side, sidewalk side, or around the neighbors.
21:46:37 But we wanted to be assured, the neighbors want to be
21:46:40 assured of the usage.
21:46:41 And we did talk to Chris, the architect, and we were
21:46:45 told the City of Tampa business license division will
21:46:48 enforce usage.
21:46:49 They won't get more than one license number to that
21:46:52 address.
21:46:52 Well, we already had Dr. Kempsen has his license there
21:46:55 but there's two other people operating out thereof so
21:46:58 we know that's not a true statement, so we have no
21:47:00 trust in how this is going to be managed and
21:47:02 controlled.
21:47:03 And last but not least, the flip-flop.
21:47:06 Originally, and I rounded this off to 6,000, 3,000.

21:47:11 Originally they wanted 6,000 medical, 3,000 for
21:47:14 outside business.
21:47:14 Now to meet the parking criteria, if you flip-flop the
21:47:18 numbers and have 3 that you for medical and 6,000 for
21:47:22 business, then it works.
21:47:24 (Bell sounds).
21:47:26 Without ever shrinking the size of the building back
21:47:29 to what we really need.
21:47:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
21:47:30 >>> Thank you.
21:47:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I understand Lindsey picker and
21:47:44 Walter picker are not here.
21:47:45 Tracy Hector?
21:47:47 Thank you.
21:47:48 Kevin Hector?
21:47:49 Lee Rubin.
21:47:53 Moore.
21:47:53 Chris SLILY.
21:47:57 That's five additional minutes.
21:48:00 Five extra minutes.
21:48:01 Eight minutes total.
21:48:02 >>> Good evening, Chairman Scott, honorable men's of

21:48:05 council.
21:48:05 My name is Bruce young.
21:48:07 My wife --
21:48:10 >> Hold on one second.
21:48:13 >> those people who just gave their names, you didn't
21:48:23 put your names on any previous sheet, is that correct?
21:48:27 Okay.
21:48:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: How many minutes?
21:48:35 >> Eight.
21:48:36 Five and three.
21:48:37 >> When you see yellow there's one minute left.
21:48:40 Red is 30 seconds.
21:48:41 Okay.
21:48:42 >> And I do have a PowerPoint presentation so I want
21:48:44 to tell the visual people.
21:48:49 My name is Bruce Young.
21:48:51 Friends and neighbors.
21:48:52 My wife and four children and I have lived in the
21:48:55 southern pines neighborhood at 201 south -- for the
21:48:57 last eight and a half years.
21:48:59 >> You're on.
21:49:08 >> I just want to let you know I strongly object to

21:49:10 the rezoning of the property on 3224 Henderson.
21:49:13 Using the PD criteria in your code, 27-321, contrary
21:49:19 to what was stated earlier, I believe this building is
21:49:23 not appropriate in location, character and
21:49:26 compatibility with the surrounding impacted
21:49:28 neighborhood.
21:49:28 The building is too large, has a design inconsistent
21:49:31 with the neighborhood, will create traffic and parking
21:49:33 issues throughout the neighborhood, and has an
21:49:35 inadequate buffer between it and the neighbors and the
21:49:37 adjoining residential properties.
21:49:39 To prove my point I would like to show council
21:49:42 photographs taken throughout the neighborhood.
21:49:43 This is -- let me back up for a second, please.
21:49:48 This is the residence, actually 3220 Henderson
21:49:52 Boulevard, not a residence, actually a lawyer's
21:49:54 office.
21:49:55 The next one address is 116 Bradford.
21:49:59 This is on the south side of the petitioner's
21:50:01 property.
21:50:02 This is from Ophelia bono who submitted the letter,
21:50:07 that she is not in favor.

21:50:09 And here is the site we talked about 3224, as you can
21:50:12 see, is between the two properties that I just
21:50:14 mentioned.
21:50:16 If you look at this picture, that was the building
21:50:22 from the last time we got plans from the architect.
21:50:25 So just looking at those pictures together, to me this
21:50:28 does not fit the neighborhood.
21:50:31 Similar to the -- if we move to the next picture these
21:50:34 are the houses on the east side, and the two women
21:50:39 that were in favor of this, that is their house right
21:50:42 there.
21:50:42 That is at 111 Matanzas.
21:50:45 The next door neighbor is at 109 Matanzas which is
21:50:48 another residential neighborhood.
21:50:50 And the third one on the east side of the property is
21:50:52 at 107 Matanzas.
21:50:55 And they are not in favor of this property.
21:50:59 So as you can see, this does not fit our neighborhood.
21:51:01 As residents of southern pines, we are friends within
21:51:06 very good neighbors in our neighbors.
21:51:10 These businesses have maintained properties and
21:51:12 buildings that are consistent with designs in the

21:51:13 neighborhood.
21:51:14 The first one at 111 Bradford, this is actually a
21:51:18 property that was developed, I believe, about four or
21:51:20 five years ago, to us.
21:51:22 It's not three stories tall.
21:51:24 It has great architecture.
21:51:28 And so this is one that we like, from a PD
21:51:31 perspective.
21:51:32 The next one at 217 Matanzas, this property is
21:51:36 currently zoned RO 1 and house it is medical practice
21:51:39 of Dr. Candle.
21:51:43 This one is on, I think -- this is a building that is
21:51:48 on 205 MacDill.
21:51:51 This property is currently zoned PD and houses a
21:51:55 psychiatrist.
21:51:58 This building right here is 307 MacDill.
21:52:01 This is a building that was just completed this year.
21:52:05 Just completed this year, as you can see, in reference
21:52:07 to the building behind it.
21:52:09 It is consistent with the neighborhood.
21:52:10 It's not too big, it not gigantic and overpouring.
21:52:17 That's way wanted to look at.

21:52:19 Like I said, the doctors within our neighborhood, they
21:52:23 don't have those imposing structures and do have nice
21:52:26 buffers for the neighborhood.
21:52:27 During the last meeting the architect stated he showed
21:52:30 a number of photographs of commercial buildings within
21:52:33 the vicinity of petitioner's site.
21:52:35 He says the building he was proposing with consistent
21:52:37 with other structures in the area.
21:52:38 I disagree.
21:52:39 Although they may be made of brick and it would be to
21:52:42 three stories, there is one distinct characteristic
21:52:45 which differentiates the petitioner's from those and
21:52:49 it's buffering residential neighbors.
21:52:51 If I look at this first building this building right
21:52:53 here is on a triangular shaped lot at the intersection
21:52:56 of Henderson and Beverly, and it has two streets which
21:52:59 are Buford from them, no residential neighborhoods,
21:53:04 north side has a commercial building, I believe it's a
21:53:07 real estate office.
21:53:09 The next one, which is at the corner of Henderson and
21:53:11 Azeele as well, is actually on a triangular lot
21:53:15 boarded by Lincoln so there are no neighbors on any

21:53:17 side of this property.
21:53:19 This next one is at 3502 Henderson.
21:53:24 This is than the intersection of Henderson an Deleon.
21:53:29 There is a approximately 120-foot parking lot before
21:53:32 you go to town homes in the back.
21:53:33 Then if you go to the south, the border is -- again it
21:53:38 does not impact the residential neighborhood.
21:53:40 And then this last one 3314, this property is built at
21:53:45 the intersection of Henderson and Azeele.
21:53:47 Once again you have a doctors' office on the east
21:53:49 side.
21:53:50 And then you have a laundromat on the south side.
21:53:59 A huge difference between the petitioners and
21:54:01 neighbors those of other buildings is the commercial
21:54:05 neighbors are residential.
21:54:06 Last point has to do with being a good neighbor.
21:54:08 I do not trust Dr. Kempsen.
21:54:10 He and his architects told us he will build an 8,000
21:54:14 square foot building which is what Melinda told you
21:54:16 about.
21:54:17 And on this site, and we are talking about none of the
21:54:20 niceties of the design.

21:54:21 According to them they would be allowed to put that
21:54:23 size of a structure up on his property regardless of
21:54:25 whether or not the property is zoned R -- 1 or PD.
21:54:29 Personally, I can't seem to engineer that but I'm not
21:54:32 an architect or a planner.
21:54:34 I still think it's too big.
21:54:36 At the last meeting it was suggested this petitioner
21:54:38 and/or Mr. Kirschner met for the approached plan.
21:54:42 He stated with a fairly large group of neighbors
21:54:46 there. Were no negotiations or concessions to win
21:54:48 over our support especially when it comes to the size,
21:54:51 which is our biggest concern.
21:54:53 And finally, Dr. Camp sen is operating his medical
21:54:57 practice out of an RO 1 building designated with a
21:55:00 residential use.
21:55:01 He never requested a use for this property in over 21
21:55:04 years he practiced medicine at that site.
21:55:06 I am not about to believe in a proposed breakout of
21:55:08 medical versus general office within the proposed
21:55:10 building, which they talked about reducing intensity
21:55:13 of the property.
21:55:15 Because there is no one to regulate that activity, and

21:55:17 if it were abused the only one suffering would be the
21:55:20 neighbors due to the traffic and parking problems with
21:55:24 the family neighborhood and that's what I'm looking
21:55:28 for, I think the design although I think it's a great
21:55:30 looking building, it would probably look great on
21:55:32 Kennedy, it would probably look great in other parts
21:55:34 of the city.
21:55:35 But I just don't personally want that in the southern
21:55:38 pines neighborhood.
21:55:39 I thank you for your time.
21:55:40 And I also want to thank you for the staff, LaShon and
21:55:44 Abbye everybody great in helping us and Mr. Miranda,
21:55:47 your secretary has been a big help just helping lead
21:55:50 us through this process.
21:55:51 So thank you very much.
21:55:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
21:55:56 Next speaker.
21:55:59 >>> Good evening.
21:56:00 My name is Robert potter.
21:56:01 I live at 207 south Bradford Avenue which is about
21:56:04 three properties south of the property that we're
21:56:08 talking about tonight.

21:56:09 I'm the rookie in the neighborhood.
21:56:11 I have only been there 25 years.
21:56:14 My neighbors have been there 30, 25, and if she's
21:56:17 still awake has been there for 60 years.
21:56:20 [ Laughter ]
21:56:22 In case you don't get what I'm trying to say, this is
21:56:24 my neighborhood.
21:56:28 Our objection to this building is it's out of
21:56:31 character.
21:56:32 They are trying to plunk in the middle of the buffer
21:56:35 zone a three-story building.
21:56:37 They don't want to just plunk in a three-story
21:56:40 building, they want to take setbacks, they want right
21:56:44 up to the sidewalk, they want to cut down on parking.
21:56:46 All the homes, all the buildings that surround the
21:56:50 proposed building are single-story homes, either
21:56:55 residential homes, or homes that have been converted
21:56:57 into an office.
21:56:59 There's one exception to that, and that's the house or
21:57:03 building -- did I do sog something?
21:57:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The overhead, please?
21:57:09 >>> This is the building -- sorry, this is the

21:57:14 commercial building that's directly across the street
21:57:16 from the proposed building.
21:57:17 It doesn't look like a commercial building.
21:57:20 It looks a lot like a house and a garage but it's not.
21:57:24 It's an office building.
21:57:25 The neighborhood loves it.
21:57:26 We would welcome this sort of same structure on the
21:57:29 property that's before you tonight.
21:57:38 This is kind of a comparison of those 2001 buildings.
21:57:40 We are talking on the one hand one which is entirely
21:57:43 compatible with the residential area, looks like a
21:57:46 residence, and the other one is a great big huge
21:57:49 monstrosity.
21:57:51 It doesn't fit.
21:57:54 Now there's another issue that no one has brought up
21:57:57 that I would like to hit on real quick, and I
21:57:59 apologize for my scribble as I tried to draw the
21:58:03 property and kind of messed up.
21:58:04 But you will notice that the intersection that's at
21:58:09 issue is this intersection right here.
21:58:13 The roads don't come at 90 degrees.
21:58:15 They come at angles.

21:58:17 People are not used to going through intersections
21:58:19 like that.
21:58:20 Everyone on my street can tell you cases where they
21:58:23 have almost been in an accident on this intersection
21:58:26 because of the angles.
21:58:27 The additional problem that we have particularly with
21:58:31 this building, that has been a problem for years, is
21:58:39 this driveway right here.
21:58:42 Probably not seeing it real well but people will come
21:58:44 down sender son and come in this driveway in the
21:58:48 property.
21:58:48 This right here is Bradford.
21:58:50 For some reason, when those people come in and make
21:58:53 this turn, they are completely oblivious to the
21:58:56 traffic on Bradford here as well as Bradford over
21:59:00 here.
21:59:01 The problem with the proposed structure is it still
21:59:04 has that driveway and they are going to put up a gate
21:59:07 that only the garbage man can use it.
21:59:09 I own two commercial properties.
21:59:10 I imagine two other -- manage two other properties and
21:59:14 I can't get the garbage Wen to pick up the garbage

21:59:19 badge when it's up in the open.
21:59:20 They are going to rely on some truck to have it tow or
21:59:23 electronic device.
21:59:26 That gate is going to be left open.
21:59:28 People are going to continue to use that driveway.
21:59:30 They are going to continue to have that problem.
21:59:32 We are starting to have people now --
21:59:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Your time is up, sir is.
21:59:37 >>> And they are going to rip through here.
21:59:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Your time is up, sir.
21:59:40 >>> The people are going to start dying on this
21:59:43 intersection.
21:59:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
21:59:44 Your time is up.
21:59:46 >>> And I apologize for going over.
21:59:52 >> Good evening.
21:59:53 I'm Bryan Ryan, 212 south Bradford Avenue, I'm
21:59:57 married, got two small children, Henry and Samantha
22:00:01 that.
22:00:01 Irv in the house eleven years now.
22:00:03 Also I'm a state certified residential real estate
22:00:06 appraiser.

22:00:10 What I want ton address is going to be the need for
22:00:12 office space.
22:00:13 I am going to work on that topic.
22:00:16 The conversion. Curb now that Dr. Kempsen has flipped
22:00:19 the space usage from 60% office to 40% medical.
22:00:23 This is 180 degrees from what the original site plan
22:00:27 proposed.
22:00:27 The discussion is now about adding more general office
22:00:30 space to the glut of current office space available in
22:00:34 the Tampa Bay area.
22:00:36 After researching the Tampa Bay amount of office space
22:00:39 available, I found the Tampa area market review by DVA
22:00:45 in the second quarter 2007.
22:00:47 It mentions that the Tampa CDB, central business
22:00:50 district, has approximately 6.5 million square footage
22:00:53 of available space.
22:00:56 And if you look up at 6.5 million square feet of
22:00:59 space, you have about 1 million which is currently
22:01:02 vacant.
22:01:04 Just trying to figure out this glut of office space
22:01:06 creates a vacancy rate of about 15.5%.
22:01:10 So we are addressing the issues here that Dr. Kempsen

22:01:15 has all this traditional office space, there's a glut
22:01:18 or a surplus.
22:01:19 Also, I'm also a member of GTR, greater Tampa
22:01:23 association of realtors, and I did an MLS search for
22:01:27 office space available within a five-mile radius of
22:01:29 the subject property.
22:01:30 I found that there's 16 properties which are currently
22:01:33 listed that you can lease, 40 other properties which
22:01:37 are currently listed for sale.
22:01:39 You know, this search was done September the 6th
22:01:41 of this year.
22:01:43 The obvious fact of the matter is that there is a
22:01:45 shrinking economic demand for office space in this
22:01:48 area.
22:01:51 This proposed office building does not match or comply
22:01:53 with any other dwellings or buildings in the subject's
22:01:57 subdivision or neighborhood.
22:01:58 This unique dwelling with a lack of parking and
22:02:02 additional traffic, additional street traffic can also
22:02:05 cause an external obsolescence that would be a
22:02:08 negative effect.
22:02:08 We don't want this to affect our current homeowners

22:02:11 and their residential property.
22:02:13 Please remember that the current drop in residential
22:02:17 home values in the last year, the Tampa Bay market,
22:02:20 drop at about 15% per year.
22:02:22 This is the last two years.
22:02:24 The one thing I want to mention to you is like, why
22:02:27 would you everyone consider adding more economic
22:02:30 distress, especially at the expense of our
22:02:32 neighborhoods, for the approval of this proposal?
22:02:36 Thank you for your time.
22:02:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:02:38 Next.
22:02:42 >> John McKenzie.
22:02:43 I live at 209 south Bradford Avenue.
22:02:46 And I guess actually I'm the rookie of the
22:02:48 neighborhood because I have only been there three
22:02:50 years.
22:02:51 But there is a reason why I live there.
22:02:54 One, I love the house that I moved into.
22:02:56 It was built in 1928.
22:02:58 And I actually have records on since 1867 so was
22:03:03 really proud of this house that I bought.

22:03:05 So when I was looking for new property, because I was
22:03:08 living in Seminole Heights, and I like the quality of
22:03:14 life but I want to still keep in the a friendly nice
22:03:17 neighborhood where there's not a lot of industry,
22:03:18 there's not a lot of commercial properties.
22:03:22 So when I look at this, if I have this on correctly --
22:03:29 what attracted me was this picture right here.
22:03:34 Nice neighborhood.
22:03:34 Nice street going to a nice neighborhood.
22:03:36 Yes, this is right across.
22:03:39 But again like we have all been saying, I thought it
22:03:42 was just a house, a bigger house, a McMansion, if
22:03:45 you will, and then this is what they propose to build.
22:03:48 To me, if I had known that, there is no way I would
22:03:53 want to move into a neighborhood like this.
22:03:55 The other concern I have is parking.
22:04:00 The restaurant moved right in, right on Kennedy.
22:04:04 And if you go any day on a Thursday, Friday, or
22:04:07 Saturday, the cars, that run over from their parking
22:04:12 lot -- because it is a very popular restaurant -- is
22:04:16 now lined up down Bradford Avenue.
22:04:18 If you look at this picture right hear, okay, there

22:04:24 will be no windows in the back overlooking the other
22:04:27 properties.
22:04:29 This do side right here.
22:04:34 Those are windows.
22:04:35 And like we are saying, you don't trust him.
22:04:38 He will build windows in the back if he does not get
22:04:40 what he wants.
22:04:41 Okay.
22:04:41 Right here.
22:04:43 This is where the garbage truck is going to be, where
22:04:45 the garbage dumpster, right hear.
22:04:51 Rate here is where the garbage is going to be.
22:04:53 This is the house, the street that I want to live on.
22:04:58 Not with this right in my backyard.
22:05:00 Other thing is about trust.
22:05:02 And I know it's hearsay but we all have friends that
22:05:06 have friends that have friends, going out to dinner
22:05:09 someone, mentioning, I wonder where our new office is
22:05:11 going to be.
22:05:12 Who do you work for?
22:05:13 So-and-so.
22:05:15 Really?

22:05:15 So we wanted their opinion, and whether this is true
22:05:18 or not, it goes with the trust.
22:05:21 They want this massive building, because if we approve
22:05:24 something, then they can do whatever they want after
22:05:26 that.
22:05:26 We're talking elevators where they can they could
22:05:29 bring the cars up for a helicopter pad.
22:05:31 May be true, may be not.
22:05:33 But guess what, I don't trust this man.
22:05:35 Look at the property.
22:05:36 It's still sitting there.
22:05:37 Okay.
22:05:38 There's no -- there's kids in the neighborhood.
22:05:42 What fer F they are out there playing on their bikes
22:05:44 and they get hurt in all this rubble?
22:05:46 Between the parking, the run-off of the rain, didn't
22:05:50 get the chance to show you the pictures.
22:05:52 This much rain and that's not everyone raining hard.
22:05:54 And that's just normal run-off.
22:05:56 So can you imagine where if they build this building,
22:05:59 where is the run-off going to go?
22:06:00 Down Bradford street.

22:06:02 Okay.
22:06:03 If somebody has an ear ache, okay, I'll be the first
22:06:07 one to say, if they have a prescription do you think
22:06:12 I'm going to go this way or am I going to cut down the
22:06:16 nearest street, which is Bradford?
22:06:18 Thanks very much.
22:06:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:06:19 Next speaker.
22:06:23 >>> Good evening.
22:06:24 My name is Vicky Jejanski and I live at 107 south
22:06:29 Matanzas so my property is on the corner.
22:06:32 There's two other properties behind it.
22:06:33 I'm next to the.
22:06:34 I'm on the corner behind.
22:06:37 And I'm married and I have one child, and I have a
22:06:41 dog, and we walk every day three times a day, all over
22:06:45 there.
22:06:45 And right now it looks like that.
22:06:49 And there is -- my husband and I talked about this.
22:06:54 There's going to be no space -- forgive me, I don't
22:06:58 know the proper lingo but there's no space between the
22:07:00 road, Henderson, and the building.

22:07:02 And right now we walk on this grass and there's space
22:07:05 and there's neighborhood, and with this enormous
22:07:08 building, and there's not going to be any space.
22:07:10 I don't like that.
22:07:17 Oh, I don't like that there's going to be more
22:07:19 traffic.
22:07:19 There's almost 9,000 square feet of office space that
22:07:22 are going to have consumers and patients and whoever
22:07:24 else is going to be visiting, and I don't like the
22:07:26 traffic.
22:07:27 I don't want all that traffic there.
22:07:30 My child doesn't want that traffic there.
22:07:32 You know, we are playing.
22:07:34 We don't want that.
22:07:35 They come down my street already.
22:07:37 And just to reiterate the building is not in scale
22:07:43 from what our neighborhood looks like.
22:07:45 It's enormous.
22:07:46 It would look on Dale Mabry.
22:07:47 It will not look good on southern pines.
22:07:50 Our houses are small and not like that.
22:07:56 Thank you.

22:08:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Next speaker.
22:08:02 >>>
22:08:03 >>> 210 south Bradford.
22:08:05 I have been living there for 13 years.
22:08:08 I got four kids.
22:08:10 Two out of the house already.
22:08:13 Somebody made a count.
22:08:16 Our neighborhood is around 36 kids.
22:08:21 In the southern pines.
22:08:24 This building, besides taking the property value down
22:08:29 for us, with this monstrosity, is going to go ahead
22:08:35 and increase the traffic.
22:08:39 We don't need more traffic.
22:08:40 We have to put cones around that street.
22:08:44 We have to put five minute parking on that street.
22:08:50 When these guys put that building there, I mean, all
22:08:52 the patients, they are going to start looking where to
22:08:55 park, they are going to park on our street, on
22:08:59 Matanzas, including Bradford.
22:09:02 And the best way to get to that property, if you come
22:09:07 from MacDill you are going to take Cleveland,
22:09:10 straight to Bradford to that property or you are going

22:09:13 to go Azeele up to Bradford to that property.
22:09:17 And it's a neighborhood.
22:09:21 I mean, this white elephant there.
22:09:26 We need your help.
22:09:29 Please.
22:09:29 Thank you.
22:09:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
22:09:31 Petitioner?
22:09:32 Sir, you cannot speak again.
22:09:36 You already spoke.
22:09:39 You cannot speak.
22:09:40 Have you spoken, sir?
22:09:42 All right, you may speak.
22:09:46 >>> Mike Urette.
22:09:51 My office is across the street from this property at
22:09:54 3239 Henderson Boulevard.
22:10:05 This is my building which we developed four years ago.
22:10:08 This of course is the petitioner's.
22:10:12 In the end, your decisions comes down to does
22:10:19 commercial and business interest over that is very
22:10:25 active and important to our community, eight hours a
22:10:28 day.

22:10:34 Overweight, the traditional office use that is typical
22:10:39 of this area.
22:10:41 The neighborhood clearly is not in favor, with a few
22:10:46 exceptions.
22:10:47 But everyone the majority are not in favor of this
22:10:50 project, mainly because of the scale of it.
22:10:54 Some of you know that I am a builder.
22:10:58 I have been built probably 15 or 20 projects within
22:11:01 anywhere from a quarter of a mile to a mile of the
22:11:05 proposed project, which is why my office is there.
22:11:09 It's perfectly doable, economically viable, and
22:11:15 everyone really desirable to do a smaller-scale
22:11:20 project on a piece of property of this size.
22:11:24 It becomes more compatible with the neighborhood, the
22:11:27 neighbors are very understanding, and usually
22:11:30 supportive of projects that fit in with the
22:11:35 neighborhood.
22:11:36 City Council and the staff, I have never been turned
22:11:39 down on a request, in some 30 years of coming before
22:11:42 this board.
22:11:44 But you have to be reasonable, and you have to seek
22:11:47 consensus and compromise.

22:11:50 I think your petitioner in this case has failed on
22:11:57 those issues.
22:12:00 The requests for rezoning is not consistent with
22:12:05 protecting the neighborhood.
22:12:09 It does support growth.
22:12:11 It's got a lot of growth in itself.
22:12:13 But when you look at the site plan, the parking that
22:12:18 they do achieve is so tight and so cramped that they
22:12:26 are probably doing a disservice to themselves.
22:12:28 That's their prerogative.
22:12:29 But I certainly wouldn't do it as a builder.
22:12:33 My final comment is they intend to put a dumpster in
22:12:36 their front yard, which is what I have to look at from
22:12:40 my building, and the rest of the community has to look
22:12:44 at -- regardless of it being enclosed or not enclosed.
22:12:48 That's undesirable and unattractive.
22:12:51 And for me unacceptable.
22:12:54 Planning and architecture.
22:12:57 I wish you would not approve this project.
22:12:59 Thank you.
22:13:04 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: How many square feet do you have
22:13:06 in your building?

22:13:17 This building as 2,000 square feet on the first floor
22:13:19 and 2,000 square feet on the second floor.
22:13:21 This is a two-car garage, a little larger an two-car
22:13:27 garage.
22:13:28 It has 700 square feet on the first floor and 700
22:13:31 square feet on the second floor.
22:13:33 >> 1400 in the small building.
22:13:35 Is that an apartment --
22:13:37 >>> It's my office.
22:13:37 >> It's your office?
22:13:38 >>> Yes.
22:13:38 >> Next speaker.
22:13:55 >>> William J. Demeter.
22:14:10 My friends call me Bill Demeter.
22:14:13 My wife and I bought our residence at 213 south
22:14:16 Bradford in 1977 in the spring.
22:14:18 We have raised two daughters there, and because of the
22:14:21 neighborhood the great school support there is in that
22:14:24 neighborhood they were able to go to Florida and
22:14:26 graduate with honors.
22:14:31 Southern pines is a family neighborhood.
22:14:33 There's a lot of young children growing up there now.

22:14:36 It's a wonderful place to raise your children and to
22:14:39 get good values for your home.
22:14:41 But this commercial monstrosity that they are putting
22:14:45 in here is going to do nothing but decrease our
22:14:47 property values, increase the parking and traffic to
22:14:53 our neighborhood.
22:14:54 It's a safety issue.
22:14:55 It's a safety issue for the residents, for the
22:14:57 long-time residents of southern pines.
22:15:01 And I please ask you to consider, don't allow this
22:15:06 monstrosity to come into our neighborhood.
22:15:08 Put something that's in consistency with the
22:15:11 neighborhood that will be there.
22:15:13 The two ladies that were in approval of this were
22:15:17 intimidated by being told that they are going to build
22:15:20 something there any way.
22:15:22 Well, we are not going to be intimidated.
22:15:24 We ask that you not allow this to happen in our
22:15:26 neighborhood.
22:15:27 Thank you very much.
22:15:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker.
22:15:34 >>> I am Teresa Thomas and I own the property at 114

22:15:38 south Matanzas.
22:15:39 And I think probably the most frustrating thing about
22:15:42 this whole thing is the intimidation factor, and that
22:15:47 the folks even after coming back and talking to the
22:15:49 neighborhood made no concessions, the things that you
22:15:53 asked for in looking at scaling back on the project,
22:15:56 really they did none of that and they continued to try
22:15:59 to intimidate by saying, take this or else we are
22:16:02 really going to getcha.
22:16:04 And that's just not right and not the way business
22:16:07 should be done.
22:16:08 And I really would suggest that you don't support it.
22:16:10 Thank you.
22:16:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else?
22:16:16 Okay.
22:16:18 Rebuttal?
22:16:19 Five minutes.
22:16:29 >>> I feel like I'm running for office.
22:16:33 Well, I'm not sure, some things were said that were
22:16:41 quite surprising to me, to say the least.
22:16:43 However, I guess I would simply just like to say that
22:16:49 Chairman Scott said it best at the last hearing.

22:16:54 You have to vote based on the facts in the case.
22:16:56 Speculation and conjecture is not something that I can
22:17:04 everyone speak to regardless.
22:17:05 So we had the staff support.
22:17:10 Planning Commission support.
22:17:12 We did come back with a compromise.
22:17:14 We have the support of the immediate neighbors behind
22:17:17 the project, developed the design together, and I
22:17:24 think really rest on that, to be honest.
22:17:29 Something else we would like to -- I think is
22:17:33 important to mention as well.
22:17:34 A lot of the angst is because people are perceiving
22:17:39 this building to be inside a neighborhood versus
22:17:41 Henderson Boulevard.
22:17:42 I know we went through the whole presentation up and
22:17:44 down Henderson Boulevard.
22:17:46 Don't think we need to go through that again.
22:17:48 But I would just lick to point out its proximity is
22:17:53 not just to the neighborhood, but is part of the
22:17:57 larger commercial corridor that is worth mentioning.
22:18:03 >>> Sur verifying and engineering.
22:18:05 I have been sworn.

22:18:05 I want to kind of comment.
22:18:06 I know it may have been perceived as threats, things
22:18:09 like that to the neighborhood.
22:18:11 What we are really trying to convey is we are not
22:18:13 asking really for any floor area waivers.
22:18:17 What we are asking for heightwise is allowed by the
22:18:20 current zoning.
22:18:21 What we have done in this plan is tried to push the
22:18:24 building as far as we can away from the residential
22:18:26 neighborhood.
22:18:27 Henderson Avenue is an FDOT road, it is a collector
22:18:30 road, there is multi-story buildings up and down that
22:18:33 segment.
22:18:33 The dumpster location, we came up with a number of
22:18:36 options trying to situate it, and again worked with
22:18:41 solid waste, and that was the spot where they could
22:18:44 pick it up best.
22:18:45 We are taking the one driveway that is on Bradford,
22:18:49 out of service.
22:18:50 We are moving -- everything will come off of Kennedy.
22:18:52 We have moved it as far away as Bradford as we can.
22:18:56 A lot of these items we are doing here are really to

22:18:58 try to get this far away from the single-family as we
22:19:01 can.
22:19:02 Again, this building, if it was just all uses wouldn't
22:19:09 meet the massive scale under the current zoning.
22:19:11 It's not a threat, it a mere fact.
22:19:13 And again, we are not trying to intimidate.
22:19:15 We are trying to show that what we are requesting here
22:19:17 is really trying to push it as far away as we can and
22:19:20 that's why we have gone forth with this PD rezoning.
22:19:24 We are asking for waivers but it's been trying to
22:19:25 accommodate all the parking.
22:19:27 We have added walls, enhanced landscaping for the
22:19:30 immediate surrounding.
22:19:31 So we have done everything we can with the immediate
22:19:33 neighbors to try to address our concerns.
22:19:35 Now again there are some neighbors down south because
22:19:38 of traffic issues, cult-through traffic that we have
22:19:40 really no control over.
22:19:41 Again we tried to eliminate the one driveway on
22:19:45 Bradford, mover it as far away on Henderson.
22:19:49 If you have any questions, again that was the intent
22:19:51 of this.

22:19:51 We really didn't mean to perceive any threats on the
22:19:55 neighborhood but let them know this is Dr. Kent's
22:19:57 property and he is allowed under the RO to build
22:19:59 something of this scale.
22:20:01 Again we trade our best to get away from the
22:20:03 neighborhood as best we can.
22:20:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just for the record, I did provide
22:20:09 each council member with the applicable code sections
22:20:12 for rezoning review.
22:20:13 The criteria for waivers and their compatibility
22:20:16 issues, I have done that in the past.
22:20:17 I did this to refresh your recollection.
22:20:22 >> Councilman Dingfelder.
22:20:24 >>> Thank you.
22:20:24 Move to close.
22:20:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
22:20:26 >> All in favor signify by Aye.
22:20:29 >> I just want to have one question for staff.
22:20:35 For Abbye, I guess.
22:20:38 >> Move to reopen.
22:20:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I apologize.
22:20:41 I didn't realize that, Mary.

22:20:42 Move to reopen.
22:20:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
22:20:45 (Motion carried).
22:20:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Can you tell us what RO-1, what can be
22:20:53 built?
22:20:53 Because we heard a lot from the neighbors, what they
22:20:58 are worried about, what they are being told can be
22:21:02 built on that.
22:21:06 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Land development coordination.
22:21:11 What I did was kind of outline out on the site plan,
22:21:14 if you would like to see the setbacks for the RO-1
22:21:17 district.
22:21:22 Business professional office uses are permitted in
22:21:26 RO-1 is that what you are referring to, the uses
22:21:28 there?
22:21:29 >>> No.
22:21:31 The floor area ratio, the height, all of that.
22:21:39 Okay.
22:21:56 Okay.
22:22:00 Will be the setback for the RO-1.
22:22:07 >>MARY MULHERN: Would they be able to have as much
22:22:09 parking as they are asking for on the PD if they left

22:22:13 it under the current zoning?
22:22:16 >>> They would still be required to provide their
22:22:21 parking on-site.
22:22:22 It's just a matter of how they are going to complete
22:22:25 that site to get the parking on there to accommodate
22:22:27 their use.
22:22:28 I mean it's still possible for them to do the parking.
22:22:30 They have the 35-foot height and the RO-1.
22:22:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
22:22:36 Thank you.
22:22:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion to close?
22:22:40 >> Second.
22:22:40 >> Second.
22:22:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, I wanted to ask the
22:22:44 petitioner if they wanted to a direct that one issue
22:22:46 as rebuttal because that was raised after he had an
22:22:50 opportunity to rebut.
22:22:51 Anything you wish to raise in regard to that, just
22:22:53 what was asked?
22:22:57 Thank you.
22:22:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are going to have to talk about
22:23:01 this in the future because I am always under the

22:23:03 impression that council had the opportunity to ask
22:23:05 staff questions, and not have petitioners come back
22:23:07 and rebut later on.
22:23:09 Okay.
22:23:10 Motion to close.
22:23:10 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
22:23:12 Opposes?
22:23:14 Councilman Dingfelder.
22:23:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
22:23:17 Seems like I recently heard the expression that you
22:23:20 can put lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig.
22:23:24 I'm not talking about any vice-president.
22:23:30 I got to say to my good friend Chris, who is the
22:23:37 petitioner's architect and good friends before, good
22:23:41 friends afterwards but I have to say I'm a little
22:23:43 disappointed because I do remember this last time we
22:23:45 heard this whenever it was, in June or before, and I
22:23:52 remember directions, go back to the neighborhood, work
22:23:56 with the neighborhood, you know.
22:23:57 Seems like we talked about reducing the mass, reducing
22:24:00 the scale and the size of this project so it was more
22:24:03 compatible.

22:24:03 Those were the kinds of discussions I heard.
22:24:06 Instead what I'm seeing is just this little flip-flop,
22:24:09 you know, 5400 of medical office, you know, and 3300
22:24:14 of general office, and flipped over, vice versa and
22:24:17 that sort of thing.
22:24:21 I won't belabor it.
22:24:23 I am going to make a motion to deny, and I am going to
22:24:26 make it a little bit elaborately so the record is well
22:24:30 established.
22:24:32 I believe that in regard to section 27-324, they don't
22:24:36 meet the criteria for waivers, specifically as related
22:24:39 to subsections 2, 3 and 4, in regard to compatibility,
22:24:43 PD, section 27-321-6 of the code talks about promoting
22:24:51 encouraging development where appropriate, compatible
22:24:54 with the surrounding neighborhood.
22:24:56 I don't believe this project is compatible in regard
22:24:58 to mass, scale, character, intensity, traffic and
22:25:02 parking.
22:25:04 With the surrounding neighborhood.
22:25:09 Similarly as related to section 27-321 (2) also as
22:25:15 related to compatibility.
22:25:18 You know, just because you can build a big monstrosity

22:25:23 doesn't mean you should build it.
22:25:24 And I'm sure the good doctor does great work in this
22:25:30 community.
22:25:30 I don't know him.
22:25:31 But I think we have heard that before.
22:25:34 But I think that this project is just too large for
22:25:37 the lot that it's on.
22:25:39 And I believe that Mr. Urette did a fine job of
22:25:43 showing that he could have, as Joseph pointed out,
22:25:47 co-have 5400 square feet right across the street, on
22:25:51 virtually I'm sure the --
22:25:55 >>> It's 4,000 in the big building.
22:25:58 >> 5400 square feet in both of those buildings.
22:26:02 You know, which is a nice size property, and I believe
22:26:06 that Mr. Urette lot is virtually the same size as this
22:26:11 lot we are dealing with. I'm not sure of that.
22:26:12 But bottom line, this is too much for too small a
22:26:17 space.
22:26:17 It's in the wrong place, location, location, location.
22:26:20 This is in the wrong location.
22:26:21 I move to deny.
22:26:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.

22:26:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
22:26:27 All in favor say Aye.
22:26:29 Opposes?
22:26:31 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
22:26:34 [ Applause ]
22:26:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to open item number 15.
22:26:43 >> Second.
22:26:44 (Motion carried).
22:26:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Before we do that, can we ask code
22:26:53 to go out and look at the standing water?
22:26:59 [Sounding gavel]
22:27:02 If you all will hold the conversation down.
22:27:04 Council is still in session.
22:27:06 Excuse me.
22:27:07 Excuse me.
22:27:08 Excuse me.
22:27:10 We are still in session.
22:27:35 >>ABBYE FEELEY: The next item on your agenda this
22:27:38 evening is case V-08-49 religious institution or place
22:27:46 of assembly.
22:27:48 Located at 7602 north Orleans Avenue.
22:27:53 And the petitioner pastor self is here this evening.

22:27:59 Current zoning on the property is RS-50.
22:28:06 There are several waivers requested with this request
22:28:11 for special use.
22:28:11 One is to reduce the required parking spaces from 17
22:28:14 to 6.
22:28:15 One is to allow nonresidential traffic, access to a
22:28:18 local street.
22:28:20 There are also yard requirements on a special use,
22:28:23 waivers 3, 4, 5 and 6 are to waive some of those yard
22:28:27 and lot requirements, the front yard from 25 feet to
22:28:29 18 feet, the west yard from 40 feet to 9.2 feet, the
22:28:33 rear yard from 40 feet to 6 feet, and to reduce the
22:28:36 minimum lot size which is required 20,000 to 9,425
22:28:41 feet.
22:28:43 They are also seeking to reduce buffer from 10 feet to
22:28:48 6 feet with a hedge only and to allow five less
22:28:52 parking spaces.
22:28:54 This is an old church that has been in existence for,
22:28:58 I believe, close to 60 years, Patrick self will talk
22:29:03 to you about that.
22:29:04 The inconsistencies you will find in the staff report
22:29:06 are related to tree and landscape and is really

22:29:10 technical.
22:29:12 They were oversights not included on the special use
22:29:15 plan.
22:29:15 We have talked with Mr. Self and he is going to
22:29:18 provide those between first and second reading, in
22:29:21 which case staff would then find that consistent.
22:29:25 I'll go ahead quickly and show you the property.
22:29:28 What I provide in your package also was a revision
22:29:32 sheet so should it be council's desire to approve this
22:29:34 special use this evening could you go ahead and motion
22:29:37 to include that revision sheet as well.
22:29:46 This is zoning atlas sheet.
22:29:48 As you can see everything surrounding the property is
22:29:52 RS-50 and this is located at the northwest corner of
22:29:55 Robson and Orleans.
22:30:02 An aerial there. A couple pictures of the site.
22:30:13 The primary reason for this request this evening is
22:30:15 that the church is seeking to put an addition on the
22:30:17 structure.
22:30:18 And when you have a special use that was never
22:30:21 established as a special use you only get a minimum
22:30:23 amount of square footage that you can add before you

22:30:25 actually have to come in and become the special use.
22:30:28 And apply for that.
22:30:30 So this was established as a place of religion prior
22:30:35 to zoning -- prior to creation of special uses.
22:30:44 This is actually the rear -- the existing structure
22:30:49 where the addition is going to go here.
22:30:54 A little closer where that addition is going to go.
22:30:59 This is the residence across the street.
22:31:01 Across Orleans.
22:31:03 This is the residence to the south.
22:31:05 This is the buffer here.
22:31:07 And this is the residence to the west, to the rear of
22:31:11 the property.
22:31:15 This is the southeast corner of Robson and Orleans.
22:31:26 This is -- I don't know, looking down, I believe
22:31:28 that's looking down Robson to the east.
22:31:30 Here is looking north on Orleans.
22:31:32 The church is to your left.
22:31:33 And then residence to your right.
22:31:39 Predominantly residential in character.
22:31:40 The existing church has a residence of -- residential
22:31:44 character.

22:31:45 Again they are looking to make an addition and the
22:31:47 modifications between first and second reading are
22:31:49 technical modifications.
22:31:52 Staff is available for any questions.
22:31:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Planning Commission?
22:31:55 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff.
22:32:01 Irv sworn in.
22:32:03 As council is quite aware, churches are considered to
22:32:07 be compatible with the residential class category on
22:32:13 which this site is located.
22:32:14 It is also considered to be part of how neighborhoods
22:32:18 maintain their stability and viability.
22:32:23 Planning Commission staff provided for you two
22:32:28 policies within our staff report that we find the
22:32:32 petition to be consistent, one of them being the
22:32:35 development and re development mitigate the adverse
22:32:38 impacts of visual -- adverse noise, visual odor and
22:32:44 vibration impact.
22:32:45 Planning Commission staff find the petition to be
22:32:48 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
22:32:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner?
22:32:53 Is petitioner here?

22:32:54 Where is petitioner?
22:32:58 >>> Good evening everyone.
22:33:06 It's good to be here.
22:33:10 Is everybody awake?
22:33:12 Need something to eat.
22:33:16 Thank you so much.
22:33:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Your name for the record.
22:33:21 >>> Thanks for all these great workers that have
22:33:25 worked on this plan for us.
22:33:27 And we are here to thank all of you for the
22:33:31 accomplishments that has been done.
22:33:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
22:33:35 Put your name on the record.
22:33:36 >>> Now, this is an old building.
22:33:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What is your name?
22:33:42 >>> My name is Jerry, initial J. Floyd Self, like
22:33:49 "yourself."
22:33:50 I'm the general flunky.
22:33:52 I'm the trustee and pastor of the church that we built
22:34:00 in 1951 and 1952.
22:34:02 It's a small building, the corner of north Orleans.
22:34:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here in objection?

22:34:09 Anyone opposing this project?
22:34:11 >>> Am I opposing it?
22:34:15 >>> No, sir. Not you.
22:34:18 >> I hope not.
22:34:19 I hope not.
22:34:20 [ Laughter ]
22:34:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Reverend.
22:34:25 Thank you.
22:34:26 >>> Thank you very kindly.
22:34:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
22:34:29 You can be seated.
22:34:30 Thank you.
22:34:30 >> Move to close.
22:34:31 >> Second.
22:34:32 (Motion carried)
22:34:33 >> Amen.
22:34:34 >> All right.
22:34:35 An ordinance?
22:34:39 The ordinance needs to include the revised sheet here.
22:34:48 >>GWEN MILLER: An ordinance approving a special use
22:34:50 permit S-2 approving a place of religious assembly in
22:34:54 an RS-50 residential single family zoning district in

22:35:00 the general vicinity of 7602 N. New Orleans Avenue, in
22:35:01 the City of Tampa, Florida, more particularly
22:35:01 described in section 1 hereof, approving waivers as
22:35:06 set forth herein providing an effective date and
22:35:11 including the Land Development Coordination sheet that
22:35:13 has all this.
22:35:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Pastor, you were very persuasive.
22:35:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded.
22:35:21 Seconded by councilman Miranda.
22:35:28 All in favor.
22:35:29 >> Second.
22:35:33 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
22:35:34 Second reading and adoption will be October 2nd at
22:35:38 9:30 a.m.
22:35:39 >>> The next item on your agenda VO 8-14 is also a
22:35:48 special use petition at 108 east Floribraska Avenue.
22:35:54 It is a special use request for parking, off-street,
22:35:57 commercial.
22:35:57 It is in association with a place of religious
22:36:01 assembly.
22:36:09 Briefly, this is a piece of property owned by the city
22:36:11 right now.

22:36:11 It's under contract, real estate and the church.
22:36:14 It's a 50 by 110 lot and they are seeking to put some
22:36:20 parking spaces on there.
22:36:22 The place of religious assembly is on the block to the
22:36:25 south, Floribraska, Tampa street to the west, Florida
22:36:31 Avenue to the east, and Keys to the south.
22:36:38 I'll show you an aerial.
22:36:44 You can see where the church currently sits.
22:36:46 They do have parking.
22:36:47 This would be for overflow parking there and they are
22:36:49 seeking to establish --
22:37:06 Three spaces.
22:37:07 This is a picture of the site, of the parking.
22:37:14 This is the structure to the west of that vacant lot.
22:37:18 This is further west on Floribraska.
22:37:23 This is the place of religious assembly, the church.
22:37:28 Here is a view of the church from Tampa street.
22:37:31 Here is a view of some of their existing parking.
22:37:33 This is a look down Floribraska toward Tampa.
22:37:37 This is actually keys north toward that lot on the
22:37:41 other side.
22:37:47 They are asking for two waivers.

22:37:50 One is typically when you have off-street commercial
22:37:54 parking, it's immediately adjacent to the partial use
22:37:57 that is serving.
22:37:58 This is not.
22:37:59 It is separated by Floribraska Avenue so they are
22:38:01 asking for a waiver to that and the second is to allow
22:38:05 for grass drive aisle and grass parking spaces, are
22:38:09 going to pave the apron but that would be it.
22:38:11 Everything else would remain that.
22:38:15 They also were missing -- they really needed some site
22:38:18 revisions, very technical in nature, and notes that
22:38:22 were overlooked.
22:38:23 Transportation does have a finding of inconsistency
22:38:27 related to 100% grass parking.
22:38:31 Transportation required 50% be some other service
22:38:35 either paved or shelac or something.
22:38:39 I think Mellanie is here to speak to that.
22:38:42 If it is council's desire to approve this, I ask you
22:38:47 to refer to the sheet of revisions provided in your
22:38:50 package.
22:38:51 Thank you.
22:38:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Planning Commission?

22:38:54 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff.
22:39:05 I have been sworn in.
22:39:06 This request is located in the Tampa Heights
22:39:08 neighborhood, the first neighborhood plan adopted by
22:39:11 council and attached to this neighborhood for that
22:39:16 reason.
22:39:18 One of the things that I think I'd like to point out
22:39:20 to council in our finding of consistency was that this
22:39:24 petitioner tried very hard to locate the use which is
22:39:29 nonresidential in a manner that is compatible with the
22:39:33 surrounding uses by placing the three parking spaces
22:39:37 closer to the commercial, which is on Floribraska and
22:39:40 Florida Avenue, that is part of the scale and the
22:39:45 conformity with which the comprehensive plan asks us
22:39:49 to consider as we review these requests.
22:39:52 The staff report does provide findings of fact for the
22:39:56 policies which the comprehensive plan supports this
22:39:59 request.
22:40:00 Planning Commission staff is recommending consistency.
22:40:04 >> Thank you very much.
22:40:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
22:40:16 State your name and address for the record.

22:40:18 >>> Jeffrey Singletary, 20923 North Kansas street, is
22:40:25 the church address.
22:40:25 5218. Valrico.
22:40:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here opposing this petition?
22:40:35 Anyone here opposing this petition?
22:40:38 All right.
22:40:39 Motion to close?
22:40:41 >>CHAIRMAN: Motion to close.
22:40:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
22:40:44 (Motion carried)
22:40:44
22:40:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Miranda.
22:40:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
22:40:51 (off microphone)
22:40:53 I move an ordinance approving a special use S-2
22:40:58 approving off-street commercial parking in an RS-50
22:41:01 residential single-family zoning district in the
22:41:03 general vicinity ever 108 east Floribraska Avenue in
22:41:06 the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
22:41:09 described in section 1 hereof approving waivers as set
22:41:11 forth herein providing an effective date.
22:41:13 That goes along, thank you, Mr. Dingfelder with, the

22:41:19 petition for special use waiver that was given in
22:41:21 exhibit B and all those things that are written must
22:41:27 be adhered to.
22:41:28 In fact, I know the neighborhood very well.
22:41:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded.
22:41:36 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
22:41:38 (Motion carried).
22:41:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: November to open number 17.
22:41:42 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
22:41:43 Second reading and adoption will be on October 2nd
22:41:46 at 9:30 a.m.
22:41:48 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor?
22:41:51 Opposes?
22:41:51 Okay.
22:41:52 >>ABBYE FEELEY: The next item on your agenda, Z-08-55,
22:42:14 2115 LaSalle Avenue.
22:42:18 This is the Berriman factory.
22:42:20 Many of you are familiar with the site.
22:42:22 Petitioner is requesting to rezone from PD planned
22:42:24 development, business, professional office, walk-in
22:42:27 bank, medical office, pharmacy, specialty retail and
22:42:29 residential, to PD, planned development,

22:42:32 business-professional office, walk-in bank, medical
22:42:35 office, pharmacy, specialty retail, residential,
22:42:38 school, business, trade, vocational, college and
22:42:41 university.
22:42:45 There are eight waivers associated with the request
22:42:47 this evening.
22:42:48 The first to reduce required parking from 150 spaces
22:42:51 to 79 spaces, 47% reduction, access to a local street,
22:43:00 three, to reduce the backout width from 7 feet to 5
22:43:03 feet, four, to reduce the required 15-foot landscape
22:43:06 buffer to 2 feet with a 6-foot masonry wall, this
22:43:10 waiver needs to be revised on the plan.
22:43:19 Five, to replace from 76 to 36, to be paid into the
22:43:24 tree trust fund at the time of certificate of
22:43:26 occupancy, six, to waive the pavement.
22:43:31 Tree trust fund which staffer has indicated to the
22:43:33 petitioner cannot be waived and are asking for that
22:43:36 waiver to be removed in between first and second
22:43:39 reading.
22:43:40 Seven, to reduce the required vehicle use area buffer
22:43:42 from 8 feet to 5 fate with pavement of fee in lieu.
22:43:45 And lastly aware of green space of 178 square feet.

22:43:56 I will go ahead and show you some pictures.
22:43:58 Of the site.
22:44:15 Start with the zoning atlas.
22:44:17 You can see here Howard Avenue to the west of the
22:44:19 site, predominantly CI uses along Howard.
22:44:22 Of course now everyone is familiar with the I-275
22:44:26 expansion that's taking place there.
22:44:29 I-275 now comes in right north of the property.
22:44:32 The PD is shown in green.
22:44:35 The prior PD was a little bit shorter.
22:44:37 This PD is incorporated.
22:44:39 These two additional residential properties, 50 by 100
22:44:44 to provide additional parking on the site.
22:44:52 Here is an aerial of the site.
22:44:54 Howard Avenue to the west, LaSalle to the south.
22:44:58 A little bit of Laurel to the north.
22:45:02 It's under construction right now.
22:45:15 I had some other pictures.
22:45:16 Kind of got out of order.
22:45:18 I apologize.
22:45:35 I had another stack of pictures.
22:45:39 This is a little further south.

22:45:43 This is on the site looking toward the east.
22:45:49 This is in the back of the site looking back toward
22:45:51 Howard.
22:45:56 I'm sorry.
22:45:57 I had a whole new set of pictures for you, and --
22:46:03 >> That's okay.
22:46:03 >>> I think Dennis might have some other ones for
22:46:09 historic preservation.
22:46:11 Sorry about that.
22:46:16 I would like to go through.
22:46:18 Staff has found the application for rezoning
22:46:23 consistent for a couple reasons.
22:46:24 I would like to let you know because this is a
22:46:26 landmark building it was reviewed by the architectural
22:46:29 review commission on August 4th, and they did
22:46:32 recommend for approval with a condition that the
22:46:36 location of the funds be limited to extending no
22:46:39 further west than the west facade of the building
22:46:43 because the fence as it is currently placed and being
22:46:47 proposed diminishes the historic setting of the
22:46:49 building and compromise it is historic viability and
22:46:57 can be effectively addressed through other means.

22:46:59 I would like to go through land development.
22:47:03 Findings very briefly.
22:47:05 I mention the two waivers that need to be revised and
22:47:10 one removed.
22:47:10 I have spoken with Mr. Jamal concerning that and he is
22:47:13 going to take care of those between first and second
22:47:15 reading.
22:47:15 He had some other revisions to the table that need to
22:47:19 be corrected.
22:47:20 I think the main point of contention on this case
22:47:23 right now is the fence that has been placed on the
22:47:26 front of the western facade of the building, the
22:47:28 western property line.
22:47:31 And Dennis is going to speak further to that.
22:47:33 In addition, when this case was rezoned back in '03, Z
22:47:39 03-129 it requested a 35% parking waiver, Land
22:47:42 Development Coordination objected at that time feeling
22:47:45 that 35% was excessive, given the proposed uses that
22:47:49 could possibly be located on the site, and that it
22:47:51 could result in on street parking and parking
22:47:53 throughout the neighborhood.
22:47:54 The parking waiver before you tonight is at 47%.

22:47:58 So again staff is going to carry that objection we
22:48:01 previously had forward and object to the amount of
22:48:03 parking.
22:48:04 There are some intensive uses that are being proposed
22:48:07 on the site.
22:48:08 Mr. Jamal is looking to limit those uses to certain
22:48:10 amount of square footages.
22:48:13 The most intensive is the 300 students associated with
22:48:17 a school use which is the new use before you tonight.
22:48:20 That requires 150 parking spaces, and there are only
22:48:23 79 parking spaces on-site.
22:48:25 That's where this 47% waiver comes in.
22:48:31 And you can read in relation to the PD criteria under
22:48:35 findings of fact in the staff report.
22:48:40 Mary also had a finding of inconsistency related to
22:48:43 the tree replacement.
22:48:44 However, Mr. Jamal is going to pay the fee in lieu for
22:48:49 the deficit, 40 inches, that he cannot provide
22:48:51 on-site, so Mary was okay with that.
22:48:56 Dennis Fernandez is here to speak for historic
22:48:59 preservation, and transportation also an objection to
22:49:03 the excessive amount of parking waiver.

22:49:05 Staff is available for any questions.
22:49:08 I'm really sorry about the pictures.
22:49:11 >>> Dennis Fernandez, historic preservation manager.
22:49:22 As you heard Abbye reviewing the motion of the
22:49:25 architectural review commission and its recommendation
22:49:27 for the PD, I do want to express that the board as a
22:49:32 whole supports the planned development.
22:49:35 There does need to be a certain amount of
22:49:37 consideration, historic property, and reviewing these
22:49:40 waivers, and they did spend a lot of time carefully
22:49:43 reviewing this.
22:49:44 I did agree with the vast majority of the plan.
22:49:47 The one issue that was a new element to the PD which
22:49:52 was not originally on the existing PD was the
22:49:57 installation of the fence across the front of the
22:50:01 building, which historically changes really the
22:50:04 context of the building.
22:50:06 Because if you look at entrances of cigar factories
22:50:09 primarily, the ceremonial entrance is something that
22:50:13 is really architecturally significant to these
22:50:16 buildings.
22:50:18 I spent a little time driving around West Tampa and

22:50:20 looking at the other cigar factories.
22:50:22 None of them have a fence that extend around the front
22:50:24 of the building.
22:50:25 And essentially what the architectural review
22:50:28 commission and the staff agreed upon was not that
22:50:31 there couldn't be a fence on the property, just that
22:50:33 the fence in back, the front setback of the building.
22:50:37 In reviewing that, I also spoke with Wilson Stair, who
22:50:41 normally reviews this area under the West Tampa
22:50:44 overlay district, and there's also -- everyone if this
22:50:48 building wasn't a landmark and the, architectural
22:50:51 review commission didn't review it, under the overlay
22:50:54 district there is a caveat of having unobstructed
22:50:57 pedestrian access.
22:50:58 So he would have had a concern about this even if it
22:51:01 were not a landmark building.
22:51:03 So in your review we would hope that we could come up
22:51:06 with a solution, adjusting the fence location so that
22:51:11 the PD can proceed.
22:51:13 Thank you.
22:51:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Planning Commission?
22:51:15 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff.

22:51:22 I have been sworn in.
22:51:25 The Tampa comprehensive plan strongly supports the
22:51:29 reuse of our historic structures.
22:51:33 We are also very supportive of the continued renewal
22:51:38 of West Tampa as an urban village.
22:51:41 This is petition, we find to be supportive of those
22:51:45 two very strong directives and we are recommending
22:51:49 finding consistency in the provisions of the Tampa
22:51:52 comprehensive plan.
22:51:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner?
22:51:58 >>> My name is Gus parish, 7908 San Miguel.
22:52:19 I have been sworn in.
22:52:21 Nick Jammal will also be speaking.
22:52:25 I don't believe that Nick has been sworn.
22:52:27 >>> No, I haven't been sworn in and I would like for
22:52:30 gusto speak on my behalf.
22:52:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else that hasn't been sworn?
22:52:33 Will you please stand, if you have not been sworn, if
22:52:36 you want to address council, please stand.
22:52:39 (Oath administered by Clerk).
22:52:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here opposing this project?
22:52:54 Anyone here opposing this project?

22:52:56 Okay.
22:52:56 And we are going to get down and deal with a couple
22:53:01 issues, if you don't mind.
22:53:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to say that I read the
22:53:07 letter that you wrote.
22:53:12 The person standing before us served as the chair of
22:53:15 the ARC for seven years.
22:53:18 >>> Yes, ma'am, for search.
22:53:19 >> You wrote the most beautiful letter.
22:53:23 You win the most beautiful letter of the night award
22:53:26 in behalf of this project, talking about the
22:53:28 architectural integrity, and expressing your support
22:53:32 for the -- and saying that the fence, in your opinion,
22:53:39 is perfectly fine.
22:53:41 I have traditionally always supported the staff
22:53:45 recommendations about architectural issues, but in
22:53:47 this case I defer to your recommendation, Mr. Parish.
22:53:51 I think Mr. Jammal has done a most extraordinary job
22:53:55 of taking your building that was at, you know, right
22:53:57 there at the point of potential demolition, and the
22:54:03 most beautiful renovation, and to me the letter from
22:54:05 the policeman who said you needed to do this to keep

22:54:08 the building safe, your position that there are no
22:54:13 preclusions to having fencing in front of the
22:54:17 structure, I am fine with it.
22:54:19 So I would be fine adopting all of the staff's stuff
22:54:23 except be the fencing prohibition and moving ahead.
22:54:27 >>> Thank you very much.
22:54:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Could I see the picture of the
22:54:32 fence again?
22:54:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On the south edge of that fence,
22:54:52 does it just stop at the two-foot wall?
22:54:56 >>> On the south edge of the fence?
22:54:57 >> as I'm looking at it here.
22:55:01 It's a six-foot fence.
22:55:03 As you go to the south --
22:55:04 >>> No.
22:55:05 It continues around to the side, and then back.
22:55:08 Along the side.
22:55:09 >> What does it do, jump over the two-foot wall?
22:55:14 How does it work?
22:55:15 >>> Yes.
22:55:15 >> And obviously there was some money put into the
22:55:24 fence.

22:55:24 Was it built with permits, without permits?
22:55:26 How did it get built?
22:55:28 >>> The majority of the fence was built as a result of
22:55:32 the 2007 PD approval.
22:55:36 That approval gave Mr. Jammal the right to build the
22:55:41 entire fence along the east property line and along
22:55:44 south property line.
22:55:46 At the time, as you recall, staff was able to approve
22:55:53 fences.
22:55:54 That has since changed.
22:55:56 In discussion was staff, that was discussed, but never
22:56:01 documented.
22:56:01 And so Mr. Jammal built the fence along the front.
22:56:06 And he had approval to build fence from the face of
22:56:10 the building back, that there was some
22:56:13 misunderstanding about the front.
22:56:15 And that was built in that way.
22:56:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have just got to say I hadn't
22:56:21 noticed maybe because of the construction and
22:56:23 everything.
22:56:23 I'm not really looking at the building very much as
22:56:25 I'm driving because of all the construction.

22:56:27 But --
22:56:30 >> I think that's one of the things that happens, is
22:56:32 that the fence is very transparent.
22:56:35 >> Yes, but like I say I'm not really looking to the
22:56:38 right there. I'm looking straight to make sure I
22:56:40 don't hit construction people.
22:56:42 But, anyway, I hate to see it.
22:56:44 You have done a great job on the building but the
22:56:46 fence looks horrific.
22:56:48 I mean, I don't know.
22:56:50 From the other angle I didn't like it and from this
22:56:52 angle it even looks worse.
22:57:03 And I don't understand how it -- if a kid wants to
22:57:09 throw a rock he's going to be able to break the
22:57:11 windows from the street.
22:57:12 How is this functioning any better than the two-foot
22:57:15 wall?
22:57:16 >>> Well, it's keeping all of the traffic -- from the
22:57:33 local establishment down the street to the interstate,
22:57:37 it's keeping that traffic from going up and sweeping
22:57:40 on the porch and going up and vandalizing the front of
22:57:42 the building, and protecting not only the building,

22:57:47 because that's one of the requirements of historic
22:57:50 preservation, but also the occupants.
22:57:53 >> But now we are talking about a permanent --
22:57:56 permanent approval for a permanent fence.
22:57:59 I mean, maybe the condition is just temporary.
22:58:01 Maybe when you get occupants in there, it's not going
22:58:04 to be as big a problem.
22:58:05 Maybe when the construction is done and that sort of
22:58:08 thing.
22:58:09 I mean, I understand in the temporary condition, I
22:58:12 just think it's almost sinful.
22:58:16 And listen, I admire all the work you have done in
22:58:18 historic preservation and I admire what Nick has done
22:58:21 on this building.
22:58:22 But I don't know.
22:58:23 If you go back to the other picture for a second.
22:58:29 Dennis, what did the ARC -- I mean, they said they
22:58:34 think that you can address the security otherwise.
22:58:37 What kind of thoughts did the ARC have in that regard?
22:58:41 Because I want to be sensitive to the security.
22:58:43 But at the same time, and the city has big investment
22:58:45 in this, too.

22:58:47 You know, the city has put money into this.
22:58:49 We guaranteed loans on this project, too.
22:58:52 So we are not just -- this is not just a private
22:58:56 property issue, this is public.
22:58:57 >>> The issue that we viewed very consistently in
22:59:04 historic preservation is try to have the fence beyond
22:59:06 the front setback of the building.
22:59:08 So what we were discussing with the ARC is that the
22:59:12 fence would be back in the very front setback on both
22:59:16 sides and historic front entryway would be left open.
22:59:19 You can see the lower level which goes up probably
22:59:22 about six feet, or in that area of six feet.
22:59:27 There are metal shutters that cover the windows.
22:59:30 It would be opened.
22:59:31 These windows are very high.
22:59:32 However, there's other solutions.
22:59:34 There's laminate glass.
22:59:35 There could be shutters installed here.
22:59:37 There's other solutions that we could have
22:59:39 investigated.
22:59:40 We never had the opportunity, the certificate of
22:59:43 appropriateness was never requested on the building.

22:59:46 Also on the doors, there's other solutions, shutters
22:59:48 if that were necessary.
22:59:51 You know, this has traditionally been the front of the
22:59:54 building.
22:59:55 What's of concern in the preservation sense sentence
22:59:57 it's now becoming the back of the building.
22:59:59 You know, the parking lot would serve as the front of
23:00:01 the building, with people entering through the rear of
23:00:03 the building and then this becomes sort of a relic of
23:00:08 what was there.
23:00:09 The fence is just reinforcing that.
23:00:12 We understand the context of the neighborhood has
23:00:13 changed somewhat.
23:00:14 But as you said earlier, what's good for the goose is
23:00:18 good for the gander and there's a lot of other cigar
23:00:20 factories we are dealing with right now who are going
23:00:22 to be coming in for redevelopment, and this is the
23:00:24 first one that is erecting a fence of this type to
23:00:30 change the way, the function of the building has
23:00:33 occurred historically.
23:00:34 >> And as that fence sits there today, on this side,
23:00:38 on the west side, it's not legal, right?

23:00:41 I mean, it wasn't permitted that way, right?
23:00:46 >>> The fence is under violation for being erected
23:00:49 without a certificate of appropriateness.
23:00:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano.
23:00:57 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (that fence.
23:01:03 >> County connect to the front corner.
23:01:06 You still get the security that he needs so if people
23:01:11 are there late at night and going to their cars it
23:01:13 would be secure.
23:01:15 All we are talking about is the front of the building.
23:01:17 And so it's moving it back.
23:01:20 I don't have a site plan.
23:01:21 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: My question is how close to the
23:01:26 building do you want?
23:01:27 >>> The pole would terminate at the front corner of
23:01:30 the building.
23:01:33 Right back here.
23:01:34 At the corner of the building.
23:01:35 >> You are going to put the fence up close to the
23:01:38 building, give the opportunity for somebody to climb
23:01:41 the fence and get through one of those windows there.
23:01:44 Then you have a security problem.

23:01:45 >>> Well, you can climb this wall and jump the fence
23:01:48 right now.
23:01:48 >> You are giving them more opportunity by putting
23:01:51 that.
23:01:53 Now you say you are working on other cigar factories.
23:01:55 You have another cigar factory down the road.
23:01:57 >>> That's right.
23:01:59 >> I what's the problem with that?
23:02:01 Why is that taking so long?
23:02:03 >>> I believe --
23:02:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I hate to interrupt, Mr. Caetano,
23:02:10 but --
23:02:11 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: He mentioned other cigar
23:02:13 factories.
23:02:13 One -- other one is right down the road and I don't
23:02:16 think it's improper for me to ask that.
23:02:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Relative to the sense for security
23:02:21 that would be relevant.
23:02:22 I understand that.
23:02:23 >>> It's not a very safe area.
23:02:25 Okay.
23:02:25 Myself, I would not invest the money that the city

23:02:29 invested there and Mr. Jammal put all his work.
23:02:33 And if it weren't for him, we would have another Gary
23:02:38 school going down with demolition.
23:02:40 And I think -- that's my opinion.
23:02:45 >>> We appreciate the work that Mr. Jammal has done on
23:02:49 the building.
23:02:49 We partnered with him by providing a number of loans
23:02:51 to the property.
23:02:53 However, the effort that was made doesn't negate the
23:02:58 responsibility we have with these other issues.
23:02:59 >> In order to pay us back.
23:03:03 And it may not get paid.
23:03:06 >>> I understand.
23:03:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
23:03:09 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question either for Mr. Paris
23:03:11 or Mr. Jammal.
23:03:12 Is it possible that after your construction is
23:03:17 finished, you might be more amenable to moving the
23:03:21 fence back?
23:03:22 Because I know that that's a big security risk of
23:03:26 having people stealing materials and breaking in while
23:03:32 construction is ongoing.

23:03:37 >>> Obviously, the fence is there because of the
23:03:39 situation as it is at the present time.
23:03:43 The Secretary of Interior standards doesn't take into
23:03:46 account safety.
23:03:48 Even though it talks about the responsibilities to
23:03:52 protect the building, it talks about protection from
23:03:55 rain and things of that nature.
23:03:57 But there's also an ongoing threat to the front of
23:04:00 this building from vandalism, from graffiti, from all
23:04:05 sorts of attacks upon the building.
23:04:08 And, therefore, this fence acts as a security measure
23:04:14 now.
23:04:14 To answer your question specifically, I think as time
23:04:17 goes by, and as this area becomes a better area,
23:04:20 certainly, the fence may not need to be there.
23:04:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I just like to point out, because this
23:04:27 is a beautiful building, and he's done an incredible
23:04:30 amount of work.
23:04:31 But in other cities where everything hasn't been torn
23:04:34 down, and in Chicago where I lived there were blocks
23:04:38 and blocks and blocks of historic buildings like this,
23:04:41 brownstone houses, I mean, the whole city looks like

23:04:44 this.
23:04:45 And in the neighborhood where people aren't safe
23:04:47 because there's a lot of crime, everybody has fences.
23:04:50 Because that's what you do to, you know, keep your
23:04:53 house safe.
23:04:55 And also in Tampa, I have learned recently that the
23:04:57 school district doesn't have to comply with historic
23:05:01 preservation standards.
23:05:02 But all the schools that have been preserved, gory
23:05:08 school, Wilson, plant, all the parents are raising
23:05:13 tons of money to put up nice-looking wrought iron
23:05:17 fences like this.
23:05:18 So I know it doesn't look like the other cigar
23:05:20 factories.
23:05:21 And also lake to point out it's interesting that the
23:05:23 Tampa Museum of Art collection is in a cigar factory
23:05:27 without any security, which isn't so great, but I
23:05:32 think that, you know, in a perfect world, it would be
23:05:35 nice not to have to have that.
23:05:37 But I can understand, you know, the idea that we have
23:05:41 it there until you feel safe.
23:05:43 And if this really is just because of the construction

23:05:47 and not so much because you are worried about
23:05:51 break-ins or vandalism, maybe could you move it after
23:05:57 your building is finished and occupied?
23:06:01 >>> As I said, I think it's a response to the security
23:06:07 needs at the present moment.
23:06:08 And certainly Mr. Jammal has expressed his adherence
23:06:15 to historic principles, and if the area justified the
23:06:20 fence could be removed.
23:06:21 It has been designed as per the secretary of superior
23:06:25 standards so it could be removed without doing any
23:06:28 harm to any of the historic elements.
23:06:31 So it is designed as a temporary element and let me
23:06:37 point out that there are no specific prohibitions in
23:06:42 the Secretary of Interior standards specifically
23:06:45 against front yard fences.
23:06:47 And that's where when fall into this, that certain
23:06:51 guidelines, for example, the Hyde Park guidelines, say
23:06:55 there shall be no front yard fences, period.
23:06:59 Unfortunately, we came after the hearing of the ARC
23:07:03 where they were doing front yard fencing in Hyde Park.
23:07:06 But in this case the Secretary of Interior standards
23:07:10 clearly distinguishes between historical landscape

23:07:14 elements and industrial properties, and had this is
23:07:18 much closer to an industrial property than it is a
23:07:21 historic landscape.
23:07:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
23:07:28 All these things here, there's various cigar factories
23:07:31 in this area, location within a mile and a half of all
23:07:34 of them.
23:07:34 And if you look at them, the one that I know was on
23:07:39 cypress and Howard, that's been vandalized many times,
23:07:44 and it doesn't have a fence.
23:07:45 And I remember the owner really well.
23:07:48 I used to buy my clothes there.
23:07:50 Yes, sir, I do.
23:07:53 I can double talk but I can't talk that well.
23:08:03 And when you look at the other cigar factory down the
23:08:05 street, they are much smaller, in an area already
23:08:09 being developed and you look at the one on Kathleen
23:08:14 and Armenia, that's a big cigar factory, and it's
23:08:17 still got a lot of activity there.
23:08:19 It's got a fence on the northern portion of the
23:08:22 building, not on the southern portion of the building.
23:08:25 So all of them have a reference why, to have or not to

23:08:30 have, and right here, if we were to pull a police
23:08:32 report on incidents within a two-block area of each
23:08:37 factory, I would imagine this one here would have one
23:08:39 of the highest activities of police calls.
23:08:42 That's just my summation of the area.
23:08:50 >>> Council, if I may, we had 20 letters from
23:08:53 residents in the area, and we also have one from the
23:08:56 policeman that has been on that beat for 22 years, and
23:09:01 he describes succinctly all of the vandalism that has
23:09:05 occurred, and we would like to place that into the
23:09:08 record.
23:09:10 I would also like to say that as you go up and down
23:09:13 Howard Avenue, what you see is buildings that are
23:09:17 attempting to have some security of security measure,
23:09:20 and they nail up plywood and put burglar bars, and in
23:09:27 fact at an ARC meeting somebody suggested, why don't
23:09:30 you put up burglar bars?
23:09:32 Well corks that be any worse?
23:09:33 So it seems to me that this is a good solution for the
23:09:39 problem that has existed at this moment, to preserve
23:09:44 the investment that's been made in this building, and
23:09:47 I think that as we go forward, if the fence is not

23:09:51 needed, I am sure that Mr. Jammal will remove the
23:09:55 fence.
23:10:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How about this as a potential
23:10:06 compromise?
23:10:07 Because I think we are all in the same plane.
23:10:12 And I was asking Ms. Cole if there's some way we can
23:10:15 format this.
23:10:16 It's a little unusual.
23:10:17 But what if we said, with agreement from Mr. Jammal
23:10:21 who has been working with the city on this throughout,
23:10:24 said perhaps if when do it for five years.
23:10:26 Okay?
23:10:27 And then in five years, this very minor aspect of the
23:10:32 PD would expire, come back to the next council and
23:10:37 revisit that issue.
23:10:38 Well, first go to the ARC obviously and then come back
23:10:41 to the council.
23:10:42 Five years from now I'm very hopeful that the
23:10:44 neighborhood is going to be turning, that the property
23:10:47 will be done and occupied, and like you said a second
23:10:51 ago, maybe the fence won't be necessary.
23:10:53 If Mr. Jammal and you or whoever think that it is

23:10:58 necessary five years from now, then you just come back
23:11:00 and do it again.
23:11:01 But I think it's a reasonable compromise and something
23:11:04 I could live with and feel comfortable with.
23:11:12 >>> Okay.
23:11:12 I mean, this is not a matter of compromise whether we
23:11:16 want ton compromise or not compromise.
23:11:17 This is a matter, it goes down to two issues.
23:11:20 The first issue, whether this fence as it exists now
23:11:26 meets the Secretary of the Interior standards, whether
23:11:29 it's historically appropriate.
23:11:31 That's item number one.
23:11:32 And it does.
23:11:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But the best recommendation on that
23:11:36 issue, the ARC says no.
23:11:39 Okay.
23:11:39 So I don't want to argue with you.
23:11:41 >>> Okay, the ARC says no.
23:11:44 >> Nick, I am not going to argue with you.
23:11:46 I am looking for a compromise that I can feel
23:11:47 comfortable with because I'm looking at a picture that
23:11:50 I think is -- I won't argue with you.

23:11:52 >>> A fence is not the issue whether it's sightly or
23:11:55 not.
23:11:56 Issue is a matter of whether it's historically
23:11:59 appropriate or not.
23:11:59 That's number one.
23:12:00 The other issue is a security issue, yes.
23:12:04 A security issue.
23:12:05 This is the most historically appropriate fence --
23:12:10 He's not answering the question.
23:12:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So do you understand my suggestion?
23:12:13 >>> I understand your suggestion.
23:12:14 >> What's wrong with five years?
23:12:16 >>> We are consistently and constantly looking for
23:12:19 appropriate solutions as we go throughout this
23:12:22 project.
23:12:22 I want this fence to be more appropriate --
23:12:26 >> So tell me you are rejecting my suggestion of five
23:12:28 years.
23:12:28 >>> Not necessarily.
23:12:29 >> Well, that's what I'm asking and it's getting late.
23:12:36 >> I would like to make a motion that we accept it.
23:12:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have a concern.

23:12:45 I haven't said anything.
23:12:46 I sort of waited.
23:12:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I get an answer top my question
23:12:50 which I never got?
23:12:51 >>> Four years ago when I came before you, if you
23:12:56 remember, okay, and at that time things have changed
23:13:00 for the last four years.
23:13:01 I'm not going to stand here and tell you that I'm
23:13:04 going to commit to removing the fence in five years.
23:13:10 >> What I said was just come back five years from now
23:13:13 and either remove it or petition again for the same
23:13:17 thing.
23:13:17 That's what I'm saying.
23:13:18 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
23:13:22 We haven't heard from Mr. Jammal yet but let me
23:13:25 explain why -- where I think a note can be legally
23:13:28 supportable.
23:13:30 A specifically note on the site plan that indicates
23:13:33 within five years the fence would have to come down.
23:13:37 If that is something he wanted to continue, that would
23:13:39 be considered a council condition which understand the
23:13:42 process would require him to come back.

23:13:45 It gets you to the same place that's the way the note
23:13:48 would have to be written snored to be enforceable and
23:13:51 as you heard me say, the petitioner indicate whether
23:13:54 or not they are agreeable to a note under those
23:13:57 circumstances.
23:13:59 >>> Mr. Dingfelder --
23:14:05 >> Can I get an answer from him first?
23:14:09 >>> Councilman Dingfelder, I cannot committee commit
23:14:12 to that.
23:14:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Enough said.
23:14:14 Thank you.
23:14:14 Listen, we got to get out of here.
23:14:16 >>MARY MULHERN: I second the motion.
23:14:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just --
23:14:22 >> The motion is to approve it.
23:14:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Let me say this.
23:14:26 This is historically appropriate.
23:14:28 It looks exactly right.
23:14:30 Could you walk by there and think you are in
23:14:33 Manhattan.
23:14:34 So I think that we -- we have a problem with people
23:14:41 wanting that are buildings and neighborhoods -- the

23:14:50 onerous burden when put on anybody who wants to
23:14:52 restore something historically really is
23:14:56 counterproductive because people can't afford to do
23:14:58 it, they don't want to have to keep coming back here
23:15:01 in five years to tell you, no, they are not going to
23:15:05 take down their fence because it's still not a great
23:15:07 neighborhood.
23:15:08 This may be a precedent and maybe that's a good thing.
23:15:11 Just maybe we need to have security.
23:15:14 Around buildings.
23:15:15 I mean, it's a city.
23:15:17 We live in a city.
23:15:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have a question.
23:15:21 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Dingfelder, he may get some
23:15:30 tenants in there and they are going to find out in
23:15:32 five years the fence is going to come down.
23:15:34 Oh, no, we want the fence for security.
23:15:36 I mean, if I owned that building, I'd put a fence up
23:15:39 20 feet high, believe me.
23:15:41 It's not a safe neighborhood.
23:15:46 Wait a minute, Charlie, you were born in St. Josephs.
23:15:50 [ Laughter ]

23:15:54 I have been in the building.
23:15:58 I looked at it.
23:15:58 I have seen pictures before and after.
23:16:00 At least we don't have another Gary school.
23:16:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, thank you.
23:16:06 Mr. Fernandez.
23:16:09 You all can be seated.
23:16:11 Thank you.
23:16:15 How many of these buildings do we have on the street?
23:16:20 I know we have in that area, we have urban league
23:16:24 building.
23:16:25 I'm going down -- how many do we have there?
23:16:27 >>> There's three cigar factories on the south side of
23:16:30 the interstate.
23:16:31 And several more buildings have setbacks on the north
23:16:34 side going northward.
23:16:36 >> How many of them have fence all around the front?
23:16:39 >>> This would be the first one.
23:16:40 >>MARY MULHERN: How many --
23:16:45 Let me finish.
23:16:46 I have the floor, okay?
23:16:48 Now, so in essence, this would be the first one.

23:16:51 We would be setting a precedent, is that right?
23:16:53 >>> I believe we set precedence when we make
23:16:56 decisions.
23:16:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: How many of those other buildings now
23:16:59 have graffiti on the front of them?
23:17:04 >>> I can't testify.
23:17:06 There's buildings of this nature that are damaged.
23:17:12 Most of those are unoccupied.
23:17:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
23:17:21 Anyone jumping over the fence can put graffiti on it?
23:17:27 >>> I can't answer that.
23:17:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Rhetorical question.
23:17:32 A rhetorical question.
23:17:33 Okay.
23:17:35 I am going to concur with councilman Dingfelder.
23:17:37 I think that our option is five years to come down, or
23:17:44 go with the ARC recommendation.
23:17:46 I have one vote.
23:17:47 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a question.
23:17:49 Mr. Fernandez, can you suggest that in the front take
23:17:53 the fence down and people walk in the front door?
23:17:56 Is that one of your suggestions?

23:17:57 >>> I'm sorry, can you restate ha.
23:18:00 >> Are you suggesting they open the front, take the
23:18:02 part out in the front so they can have it open?
23:18:04 >>> Well, our suggestion was that they move the entire
23:18:07 fence back and eliminate the gate.
23:18:09 If you take the front gate out, then actually that's a
23:18:14 breach of security because there's actually no
23:18:16 security in the front.
23:18:17 At least in the ARC's recommendation there would be
23:18:21 security from the front setback all the way to the
23:18:23 rear of the property.
23:18:23 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: So the stairs would be open?
23:18:28 >>> Stairs would be open snoop that's not right.
23:18:30 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, I just want to point out that no
23:18:34 other cigar factory -- and I think Mr. Fernandez, you
23:18:42 can confirm this but I don't think anyone has been
23:18:44 even begun to be restored to the condition that Mr.
23:18:48 Jammal is doing.
23:18:51 >>> We have approved plans for the cigar factory to
23:18:54 the south, they have received their certificate of
23:18:58 appropriateness.
23:18:59 >> I think what the point is, first of all, if those

23:19:01 people could afford to put up a fence like that, they
23:19:04 would.
23:19:05 And that's the reality.
23:19:06 He's put so much into this.
23:19:09 That's a very expensive fence.
23:19:12 It's not like it's going to -- you know, I'm saying it
23:19:15 would set a precedent which I wouldn't mind
23:19:17 personally.
23:19:18 But the reality is, I wouldn't worry about a lot of
23:19:21 fences going up because people can't -- if they could
23:19:24 afford it they would be doing that.
23:19:28 >>CHAIRMAN: And you might not want a fence around it.
23:19:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think in an effort to move this
23:19:34 conversation along, I think we should vote.
23:19:36 I would like to move to close the public hearing.
23:19:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, we have to --
23:19:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Oh, the public.
23:19:43 Sorry.
23:19:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Come on down.
23:19:49 >>> Jeff freeman.
23:19:54 I live at 2301 north Albany.
23:19:58 I'm one of the cigar owner buildings.

23:20:03 And I have been watching this for years what goes on
23:20:06 here.
23:20:08 And it doesn't get any better.
23:20:10 He has put so much time and effort.
23:20:14 I've got graffiti on my building right now.
23:20:18 You know, if somebody wants to jump the fence and
23:20:20 spray paint your building they will do it but at least
23:20:23 it offers a little resistance.
23:20:25 It doesn't make it easy to walk up there and look
23:20:27 around, run up, and you can't -- this is not painted
23:20:31 concrete block or wood.
23:20:34 This is brick you can't clean spray paint off of.
23:20:38 You know, and the whole idea is preservation.
23:20:42 And he's preserved this building.
23:20:47 At some time, at his discretion, he may take that
23:20:50 fence down.
23:20:51 But I don't think you should make that, you know, for
23:20:55 his approval.
23:20:56 He has to come back here in five years.
23:20:59 Look at the interest and everything he's done.
23:21:02 And this city should be encouraging people to do this
23:21:08 for their building.

23:21:09 It's like me.
23:21:10 I'm afraid to get called down here.
23:21:11 I don't want to come down here.
23:21:13 You're not helping me.
23:21:14 Every time I get the idea in my mind, maybe it's time
23:21:17 to start.
23:21:19 First thing I would want before I got is a fence so
23:21:24 that as I developed it and preserved it and brought it
23:21:28 back, I could protect the work that I have done.
23:21:31 Maybe some day, you won't need that.
23:21:34 But right now you do.
23:21:35 And nobody is coming down and cleaning graffiti off
23:21:39 the sidewalk, off my old historic wall.
23:21:45 So I hope that you let him keep the fence, and just
23:21:50 promote -- tray to help people preserve these
23:21:54 buildings and bring them back and keep them.
23:21:57 Thank you.
23:21:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I hope if you decide to put up a fence
23:22:02 you will come down and get permission from the city
23:22:04 and don't do it illegally.
23:22:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll wait till we close.
23:22:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is there anyone else?

23:22:13 >> Anyone else want to speak?
23:22:15 Okay.
23:22:16 All right, then, we will have the final remarks on
23:22:19 rebuttal from the applicant, five minutes.
23:22:23 >>> Councilman Scott, I think you asked Mr. Fernandez
23:22:27 if he's familiar with any cigar factory building that
23:22:31 has fences across the front.
23:22:36 Irv very, very intimate with West Tampa for the last
23:22:39 four years.
23:22:40 I have spent some percent of my life till about 10,
23:22:47 10:30, 11.
23:22:48 And I am familiar with each one of those buildings.
23:22:55 Here is a building that's about -- the at the corner,
23:23:01 I believe.
23:23:01 Spruce is on the south side and chestnut is on the
23:23:04 south side, and Spruce is on the north side.
23:23:07 And they have a fence going across.
23:23:10 If you look through the support letters, one of them
23:23:14 came from Angel Aleva.
23:23:16 Angel Aleva described on tape that he's had people
23:23:23 banging on his doors, urinating all over the front
23:23:26 doors trying to get in.

23:23:28 And if he could put the fence, if his fairway did not
23:23:34 butt to the right-of-way he would do the same.
23:23:36 There is nothing.
23:23:38 There's nothing inappropriate about this fence.
23:23:39 I researched it and researched it and I have talked to
23:23:42 experts.
23:23:42 And I spent a lot of money and came up with this
23:23:46 design to come up with the most appropriate.
23:23:48 And I will continue to always come up with more
23:23:51 appropriate solutions as time goes by.
23:23:54 Another cigar factory that Gus just explained to you,
23:24:04 Mr. Bubba Ellis had written a letter as well.
23:24:07 So we got Aleva, Jeff, and Bubba Ellis.
23:24:16 Those are within the immediate vicinity.
23:24:18 The other cigar factory that's down the street from
23:24:20 me, they haven't even thought about a fence yet.
23:24:25 They haven't had the break-ins.
23:24:28 They haven't had the graffiti.
23:24:31 They haven't had any of the vandalism.
23:24:36 There's a police officer that wrote a letter, if you
23:24:39 look through his letter.
23:24:45 So when we considered this, every aspect of this

23:24:48 building has been considered from a historic
23:24:52 preservation standpoint first, and then -- the
23:24:59 Secretary of the Interior requires a property owner of
23:25:01 an historical building to protect that building.
23:25:05 That's a requirement.
23:25:06 Putting the fence back to the -- of the building does
23:25:14 not protect the building and is not appropriate as a
23:25:16 solution that we have, because historical photographs
23:25:20 show the fence around the perimeter of the property
23:25:24 and not along the face of the building.
23:25:33 Thank you.
23:25:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
23:25:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The cigar factory at mill creek and
23:25:41 the artists there are doing very well.
23:25:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
23:25:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question of Dennis.
23:25:48 Is than fence approved?
23:25:51 Is that legal?
23:25:52 Is that a historic building?
23:25:53 >>> It's not a designated building.
23:25:55 I mean, it wouldn't come before --
23:25:57 >> So it's not designated so nobody has reviewed that.

23:26:01 >>> No.
23:26:02 >> Okay.
23:26:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion to close.
23:26:06 >> So moved.
23:26:07 >> Second.
23:26:07 (Motion carried)
23:26:08 >> Okay.
23:26:10 Yes.
23:26:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Chairman, fellow council
23:26:15 members, I have spent more time working for the goal
23:26:19 of preservation of any elected official I know, and
23:26:24 honest to goodness, I am so happy with the beautiful
23:26:26 job Mr. Jammal has done, and I feel like if this fence
23:26:30 protects this building, it's part of the package.
23:26:34 And it is such a small -- and it's well done.
23:26:38 I think it meets the Secretary of Interior standards.
23:26:41 I think that we should approve this rezoning.
23:26:46 And the eclectic -- eclectic group of letters from
23:26:51 policemen to neighbors to fellow cigar factory owners
23:26:54 to attorneys, just people throughout the community
23:26:57 supporting this effort, supporting the fence, I think
23:27:01 that it's pretty compelling evidence.

23:27:02 So I'd like to move for approval.
23:27:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder?
23:27:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think there was a reasonable
23:27:11 compromise that was offered because this is a
23:27:12 temporary problem.
23:27:14 We have -- the security issues that pop up around
23:27:19 town, you know, like vacating alleys, people say I
23:27:23 have a security problem, I have a security problem in
23:27:25 my alley, got to vacate the alley and you and I often
23:27:29 vote against those because we say, temporary
23:27:32 situation, hopefully it will get better.
23:27:33 You also started off a year and a half ago with a very
23:27:37 bold statement and you said I am not going to go for
23:27:39 mediocrity and I think the fence in front of that
23:27:41 building and the building we are looking at, I think
23:27:44 it's mediocre.
23:27:46 That's mediocre and the other one is equally mediocre
23:27:49 because you know that's not the way those buildings
23:27:51 are supposed to be.
23:27:52 They are supposed to be inviting from the street.
23:27:54 They are supposed to walk around the sidewalk and walk
23:27:56 up to the front entrance.

23:27:57 Now, the compromise sentence until that neighborhood
23:27:59 improves, you know, five years, come back five years
23:28:02 from now and do it.
23:28:05 Obviously the gentleman dug his heels in the podium
23:28:08 and wasn't the least bit interested in that
23:28:11 compromise.
23:28:13 The historic buildings aren't supposed to be museum
23:28:16 things, to be able to drive by and gaze at and say, a
23:28:21 little piece of art behind a fence or a glass wall or
23:28:26 something like that.
23:28:27 It's supposed to be things that we interact with,
23:28:29 things that we use day in and day out.
23:28:32 And you are saying put a fence up there.
23:28:34 It seems very inconsistent in you.
23:28:37 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: buildings have to be protected.
23:28:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just say that I agree with
23:28:44 councilman Dingfelder.
23:28:46 I think he offered a reasonable compromise for five
23:28:49 years, and the petitioner refused to accept that.
23:28:55 He said no.
23:29:00 It's illegally up there anyway.
23:29:03 I'm not going to support it.

23:29:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Read the ordinance.
23:29:09 >> Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
23:29:11 vicinity of 1403 North Howard Avenue in the city of
23:29:14 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in
23:29:16 section 1 from zoning district classification PD
23:29:19 planned development, business professional office,
23:29:22 walk-in bank, medical office, pharmacy, specialty
23:29:25 retail, residential, to PD, planned development,
23:29:27 business professional office, walk-in bank, medical
23:29:30 office, pharmacy, specialty retail, residential,
23:29:33 school, business, trade, vocational, college,
23:29:36 university, providing an effective date.
23:29:38 And I believe we need to add the addendum which talked
23:29:43 about the waivers, excluding the fence line.
23:29:47 That's my motion.
23:29:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
23:29:51 It's been moved and seconded.
23:29:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I am going to support the motion.
23:29:55 But we got lost in the fence and really didn't address
23:29:58 the parking.
23:30:00 Which is the biggest issue of all.
23:30:03 I mean, there's 150 places required.

23:30:06 There's a 47% reduction.
23:30:07 There's 300 students coming in.
23:30:09 I'm glad to see them there.
23:30:11 They will be doing some good things in the
23:30:12 neighborhood.
23:30:14 No?
23:30:16 I'm just speaking to MO, Larry, curly and Albert.
23:30:22 And when we do these things, we got so involved in the
23:30:27 fence that we forgot, or someone, I forgot anyway, to
23:30:31 look at the scope of the operation that we had hear
23:30:34 before us.
23:30:35 So I'm not asking to reopen the hearing.
23:30:37 I'm just bringing it out, that we never really
23:30:40 addressed the scope of the project.
23:30:44 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: It's going to be a neighborhood
23:30:45 school where they walk to school.
23:30:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion on the floor.
23:30:48 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
23:30:51 Opposes?
23:30:54 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder, Miller
23:30:55 and Scott voting no.
23:30:56 >>GWEN MILLER: No.

23:31:02 >>> Correction, motion carried with Dingfelder and
23:31:03 Scott voting no.
23:31:06 Second reading and adoption will be on October 2nd
23:31:08 at 9:30 a.m.
23:31:10 >>> Thank you very much.
23:31:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 18 and 19 actually go together..
23:31:27 >> Move to open 18.
23:31:46 >>JAMES COOK: Jim Cook.
23:31:49 All lying south of 14th Avenue east of 65th
23:31:56 Street and north of CSX railroad.
23:32:00 The two alleys running north and south, portion of
23:32:04 drew Avenue here, 64th street, 10th Avenue,
23:32:11 66th street.
23:32:13 A shot of 64th street will go south of jewel.
23:32:19 The alleyway looking south of jewel.
23:32:22 Jewel is here.
23:32:28 This is a shot of 10th Avenue looking west.
23:32:34 A shot of 65th street toward the dead-end.
23:32:39 I have a couple of shots of the petitioner's property.
23:32:42 This is looking west from 10th Avenue.
23:32:47 Property looking north vacating 10th Avenue.
23:32:52 A shot of petitioner's property looking east from

23:32:54 64th street.
23:32:57 Petitioner's property looking west from 4th
23:33:00 street.
23:33:01 And going back to the aerial.
23:33:03 Staff has no objections, as long as the following
23:33:06 conditions are met.
23:33:07 The street reserved for stormwater, TECO, people's gas
23:33:11 and water department.
23:33:13 Pater construct add turn-around which is located hear,
23:33:20 ante end of 66th street.
23:33:23 And also the petitioner reduced the vacating to
23:33:25 eliminate the two alleyways, as you can see by the
23:33:28 photograph.
23:33:31 The alleyways are being used as a drain system.
23:33:34 They are open ditches.
23:33:36 The stormwater reduced.
23:33:40 And also stormwater is requesting a condition that no
23:33:46 pond improvements take place, the drainage system
23:33:49 meets the stormwater specks.
23:33:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman, if I could.
23:33:53 The long, skinny yellow --
23:33:57 >> These are two alleys.

23:33:59 >> So we are not going to vacate those.
23:34:01 Just the other three?
23:34:03 >>> This portion of jewel, 64th street, 10th
23:34:06 --
23:34:07 >> Oh, four pieces.
23:34:08 >> And just point out this portion of 66th street,
23:34:11 we had documentation doing the current title.
23:34:16 >> So before there's going to be vacating really
23:34:20 completely subsumed within the petitioner's property.
23:34:23 >>> That's correct, yes, sir.
23:34:26 And that's reflected in the ordinance.
23:34:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, if I could inquire of
23:34:31 Mr. Cook.
23:34:31 The representations made regarding the alley on that
23:34:34 side by the drain drainage system, has that been
23:34:38 redacted from the ordinance that's before council
23:34:40 today?
23:34:40 >>> Yes, sir.
23:34:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
23:34:44 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
23:34:46 Just for the purposes of the record, I did provide the
23:34:50 clerk with a substitute ordinance.

23:35:23 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
23:35:24 Still doesn't beat my record of 2:50 or 2:45 or
23:35:28 something like that.
23:35:33 This zoning petition Z 08-35 and the vacating located
23:35:36 at 6503 and 6505 jewel Avenue, 2002, 2003, 2007, 2008,
23:35:46 2010 north 64th street. This case was before you
23:35:49 last year.
23:35:50 Jill Finney brought it under Z 07-62, I believe.
23:35:54 And what they are doing is adding additional land,
23:35:57 adding some RS-50.
23:36:01 I'll show you later in the presentation.
23:36:03 And they also own the IG land to the south and this be
23:36:10 is going to be the offices and truck scale and shower
23:36:13 facility and some research facilities that will
23:36:16 support that use to the south.
23:36:18 So let me quickly give a little presentation on that.
23:36:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Any opposition, Mr. Chairman?
23:36:26 >> Thank you.
23:36:27 Anyone here in opposition to this?
23:36:30 Petition?
23:36:30 Anyone here in opposition?
23:36:31 Anyone want to say anything?

23:36:35 [ Laughter ]
23:36:36 Okay.
23:36:39 Let's hear from Planning Commission.
23:36:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sorry, Abbye.
23:36:46 >>> No problem.
23:36:47 I just wanted to say that staff finds this consistent
23:36:50 and there's no changes required -- no, that's not
23:36:54 true.
23:36:55 There are changes.
23:36:56 [ Laughter ]
23:36:58 And they are on a little sheet here that I will bring
23:37:00 up and pass out so that you can see them and include
23:37:02 them in your motion.
23:37:03 Thank you.
23:37:09 >>MICHELE OGILVIE: Planning Commission staff.
23:37:10 I have been sworn in.
23:37:12 Planning Commission staff finds the request to be
23:37:14 consistent with provisions in the comprehensive plan
23:37:17 that are included in your package and are part of the
23:37:22 public record.
23:37:22 >> Michelle, Ms. Ogilvie, since you have been sworn,
23:37:25 can you tell me that you really enjoy coming here?

23:37:30 You're under oath.
23:37:32 [ Laughter ]
23:37:33 >>> You know, yes, I have.
23:37:34 >> Well, I hope you come back every month.
23:37:37 >>> No.
23:37:38 [ Laughter ]
23:37:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
23:37:45 Anything else?
23:37:49 Okay.
23:37:52 Petitioner?
23:37:53 >> Dick La Rosa, Hamilton engineering.
23:38:02 I have been sworn.
23:38:03 I concur with the staff requirement.
23:38:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And revised conditions and all that.
23:38:10 >>> Yes.
23:38:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion to close.
23:38:12 >> So moved.
23:38:12 >> Second.
23:38:13 (Motion carried).
23:38:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Read the ordinance?
23:38:26 Mr. Chairman, I have a substitute ordinance for
23:38:27 closure.

23:38:28 An ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing,
23:38:31 abandoning a certain right-of-way a portion of Jewel,
23:38:34 Tampa Avenue, 10th Avenue, 64th street,
23:38:40 6th street and alleyways, east of 67th street,
23:38:44 west of 65th street and north of right-of-way
23:38:50 Usitia Gardens, city of Tampa, Florida and more fully
23:38:55 described in section 2 providing an effective date.
23:39:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and second.
23:39:02 Second by Councilwoman Mulhern.
23:39:03 (Motion carried).
23:39:05 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
23:39:08 Second reading and adoption will be on October 2nd
23:39:11 at 9:30 a.m.
23:39:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern, would you read
23:39:17 the other one with the attached, number 19 with, those
23:39:21 revised?
23:39:26 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance rezoning property
23:39:28 in the general vicinity of 6503 and 6505 jewel Avenue
23:39:33 and 2002, 2003, 2007, 2008, 2010 north 65th street
23:39:39 in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
23:39:41 described in section 1 from zoning district
23:39:44 classifications RS-50 residential single-family and PD

23:39:48 planned development, office, business/professional, to
23:39:51 PD, planned development, office, business
23:39:54 professional, research facility, laboratory, public
23:39:56 use facility, transportation service facility, truck
23:40:01 scale, providing an effective date.
23:40:03 And including the site plan changes listed in this
23:40:11 attachment.
23:40:12 Do I need to read them?
23:40:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded.
23:40:17 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
23:40:19 Opposes?
23:40:20 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
23:40:22 Second reading and adoption October 2nd at 9:30
23:40:26 a.m.
23:40:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mrs. Saul-Sena had a quarterback
23:40:29 earlier.
23:40:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for remembering, Mr.
23:40:32 Miranda.
23:40:33 It was about getting code enforcement to go out to the
23:40:36 site on Henderson to check for standing water and
23:40:42 piled rubbish.
23:40:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.

23:40:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion made by Councilwoman Saul-Sena,
23:40:47 seconded by councilman Miranda.
23:40:49 All in favor.
23:40:51 >>> Read the address into the record.
23:40:54 I believe those properties are located at 3320 and
23:40:57 3324 Henderson Boulevard.
23:40:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Shelby.
23:41:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify but saying Aye.
23:41:03 Opposed same sign.
23:41:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: In all fairness to everybody -- and
23:41:06 this is not about me or anybody else but when we do
23:41:09 calculations traffic they don't take into
23:41:12 consideration the real facts around that street or
23:41:14 anywhere else.
23:41:15 There's traffic patterns that are certainly different
23:41:18 in May and June than they are in November and
23:41:20 December, January, February.
23:41:22 And I'm talking specifically about around the stadium
23:41:26 and around all the events.
23:41:27 Those calculations are -- although they are truthful
23:41:32 they are not correct because they are done at their
23:41:33 leisure time when they choose to do it, at the time

23:41:36 when there is no traffic.
23:41:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
23:41:43 New business.
23:41:44 New business.
23:41:45 Any new business?
23:41:47 Seeing none, I have one thing here from the
23:41:48 administration to request a one hour workshop on
23:41:54 September 25th for the July 8th text amendment
23:41:58 cycle.
23:42:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
23:42:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll second that because I'll be in
23:42:06 Orlando.
23:42:08 >> A workshop day?
23:42:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You have a 10:00 workshop to discuss
23:42:13 addresses of front doors that face the street.
23:42:15 I don't suspect that should take much time.
23:42:18 Would council consider this at 10:30?
23:42:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 10:30.
23:42:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 10:15.
23:42:23 Okay.
23:42:26 There's a motion?
23:42:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.

23:42:28 >> Second.
23:42:28 (Motion carried).
23:42:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
23:42:32 Receive and file?
23:42:33 >> So moved.
23:42:34 >> Second.
23:42:34 (Motion carried).
23:42:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We stand adjourned.
23:42:37 (City Council meeting adjourned)
23:42:42

DISCLAIMER:
The preceding represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this 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.