TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, February 12, 2009
5:01 p.m. session
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
The original of this 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.
17:04:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
17:04:29 Roll call.
17:04:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
17:04:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
17:04:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
17:04:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
17:04:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
17:04:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 1 is a conned public
17:04:44 We are going to take our attorney Mr. Martin Shelby.
17:04:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Item number 1, Madam Chair, vice
17:04:54 chair, Madam Chair, members of council, it's a
17:04:57 continued public hearing on a citizen initiated text
17:05:02 The clerk has received and you have received a copy
17:05:04 from Ann Pollack of Mechanik Nuccio requesting that
17:05:08 this item be taken up at the July text amendment
17:05:14 This is set for a public hearing, so my suggestion
17:05:16 would be to remove this from the agenda by motion with
17:05:21 a direction to have it rescheduled and renoticed at
17:05:24 the appropriate time.
17:05:29 >> So moved.
17:05:30 >> Second.
17:05:30 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor signify by saying Aye.
17:05:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder and
17:05:36 Caetano being absent.
17:05:38 >>GWEN MILLER: I make a motion that we reschedule it
17:05:40 for July 26th.
17:05:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I don't know for the July
17:05:45 cycle it might come later than that.
17:05:48 >>> It will be moved to part of the July cycle.
17:05:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to the July cycle.
17:05:53 >> Second.
17:05:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.
17:05:57 Opposed same sign.
17:05:57 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder and
17:06:00 Caetano being absent.
17:06:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We stand in recess till 5:30.
17:06:08 (City Council meeting in recess)
17:31:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The City Council will come to order.
17:31:47 Roll call.
17:31:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
17:31:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
17:31:52 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
17:31:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
17:31:54 We'll proceed with item number 2.
17:31:58 On the chapter 27 comprehensive revision.
17:32:03 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
17:32:04 You have in front of you an ordinance which would
17:32:07 provide an opportunity in our code of ordinances for
17:32:10 transfer of development rights program for historic
17:32:14 And I do want to take a minute just to talk to you
17:32:18 where we are by way of background.
17:32:20 And then I know there's some folks here who want to
17:32:22 speak about it.
17:32:23 This is about -- this has been ongoing for some time,
17:32:26 we did a lot of jurisdictions how other jurisdictions
17:32:30 were handling it and we came to you in a workshop and
17:32:33 proposed an ordinance which would allow the
17:32:35 opportunity for property that had been designated as a
17:32:40 historic structure to take the existing property
17:32:43 rights and allow those to be transferred to other
17:32:46 areas of the city, specifically the CDB area, and I am
17:32:52 not going to get into all of that because I think
17:32:55 everybody is familiar with that.
17:32:56 As we were going through the process there was a lot
17:32:58 of conversation that came up as to whether or not this
17:33:00 program should only apply to those properties which
17:33:03 had previously been rehabbed and brought up to
17:33:07 Secretary of Interior standards, or whether or not it
17:33:09 should also be open to those properties which didn't
17:33:11 have the financial resources in order to bring the
17:33:15 properties up to the Secretary of Interior standards.
17:33:17 And this might be a funding mechanism.
17:33:21 And that was actually the last image in front of you
17:33:24 was continued to look at those issues.
17:33:28 I had an opportunity to have a special discussion
17:33:30 meeting, work with the folks from the heritage
17:33:34 committee, and propose some language that is in front
17:33:36 of you today which would allow the opportunity for
17:33:39 those properties which had not already been brought up
17:33:42 to Secretary of Interior standards, utilize this
17:33:46 program, with an agreement that would set forth the
17:33:48 mechanism of how any moneys could be spent in the
17:33:51 future to bring those properties up to those
17:33:55 We also had some discussion about whether or not there
17:33:58 should be an opportunity for that money to be held by
17:34:00 a third party escrow.
17:34:03 I did not feel comfortable specifically delineating
17:34:07 that for all properties within this ordinance, because
17:34:10 then we have to worry about staff time, we have to
17:34:13 worry about setting up those accounts, and it would be
17:34:16 open for everybody.
17:34:17 And that may be a good idea for the future.
17:34:19 But in terms of bringing this forward today, that
17:34:22 opportunity is on a case by case base us per
17:34:28 It is something the heritage committee did want to see
17:34:31 better delineated in this ordinance, but it's my
17:34:34 recommendation to allow the opportunity to go ahead
17:34:36 and get this ordinance today and that way the
17:34:41 opportunity is precluded and potentially if City
17:34:44 Council wants to continue to discuss the opportunity
17:34:48 to place standards for third party escrow agreements
17:34:50 and other standards in this code that we go ahead and
17:34:53 deal with that afterwards.
17:34:55 That's my recommendation to you today.
17:34:57 I again had many conversations, and I think the folks
17:35:00 from the AI heritage committee are comfortable with
17:35:03 this approach but you will want to hear from them on
17:35:05 Thank you.
17:35:08 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to compliment you, Julia,
17:35:10 because I spent hours listening and talking to you and
17:35:14 the historic preservation people about this, and that
17:35:17 was the best explanation and it kind of clicked for
17:35:23 So I think we will hear from them.
17:35:26 And go forward as you suggest, or at least I'm willing
17:35:32 to do that, and I had a problem before, only because I
17:35:35 wasn't sure that they were all behind it.
17:35:37 So thank you for all your work on this.
17:35:40 And you may not have to hear about it for awhile.
17:35:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: This is a continued public hearing.
17:35:45 Anyone wishing to address council may come forward,
17:35:47 state your name and address.
17:35:48 You have three minutes.
17:35:51 >> Laurel Lockett, 836 South Dakota.
17:36:00 I have been working with Julia through the workshop
17:36:02 process, actually it seems like awhile.
17:36:05 And I agree, I think this is the best we can do at
17:36:08 this point.
17:36:09 I think it is important to have a more defined
17:36:12 process, if the building has not been brought up to
17:36:16 standards, to allow someone to sell the development
17:36:18 rights and then have a mechanism where the city and
17:36:21 the preservation staff can be comfortable that the
17:36:24 building will in fact be preserved.
17:36:26 So I think what I would like to see is us to go
17:36:29 forward with this and then have council direct that we
17:36:32 come up with a practice which can be incorporated in a
17:36:35 subsequent revision to the code, and it doesn't have
17:36:39 to be a mandatory third party escrow agreement.
17:36:42 You all could decide that you want to be sort of the
17:36:46 But I think we need to have a practice.
17:36:48 It's more defined.
17:36:50 Kind of like a construction process.
17:36:54 Construction, just like that.
17:36:55 So that's where I think we are.
17:36:57 And I think that's where we need to go.
17:36:59 We would like to see that direction from council
17:37:03 Thank you.
17:37:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else?
17:37:08 >>> Stephani Ferrell.
17:37:11 I am the chairman of the AIA architectural heritage
17:37:15 committee and I am very happy to be here tonight and
17:37:17 hopefully to watch the results of the long hard work
17:37:22 on the part of many to see this adopted.
17:37:26 I would like to compliment the legal department, the
17:37:29 zoning staff, the historic preservation staff, and all
17:37:32 the volunteers who worked on this, because I think
17:37:35 it's been a very good and constructive effort.
17:37:38 And I would like to thank you all for knowing that
17:37:44 it's important, and for your support of historic
17:37:47 preservation generally, and if you have any questions,
17:37:49 I would certainly be happy to answer them.
17:37:50 Thank you.
17:37:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
17:37:55 Anyone else?
17:37:56 Councilwoman Saul-Sena, then Councilwoman Mulhern.
17:37:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
17:38:00 It great to be about to adopt a new carrot.
17:38:02 Hopefully the opportunity to have transfer development
17:38:05 rights is an incentive for people to rehab their
17:38:09 property and give them extra value, will result in
17:38:12 properties that hadn't quite had the financial value,
17:38:17 having enough to make it worthwhile for people to make
17:38:20 the investment.
17:38:20 It will give our community more historic buildings
17:38:25 intact and combined with our action on demolition by
17:38:28 neglect, I look forward to more buildings saved.
17:38:30 I want to thank everyone here, the city staff has
17:38:34 worked very hard, but the volunteers, the
17:38:37 professionals like Laurel Lockett who is an attorney,
17:38:40 like Stephani Ferrell, and professional architects who
17:38:44 have worked so hard on this, I really appreciate the
17:38:47 enormous effort.
17:38:48 I look forward to this beginning to save buildings in
17:38:51 our community.
17:38:52 And of course Dennis.
17:38:53 Thank you.
17:38:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
17:38:56 >>MARY MULHERN: Just move to close the public hearing.
17:38:59 >> Second.
17:38:59 (Motion carried).
17:39:02 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like --
17:39:05 We have a substitute.
17:39:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, we do?
17:39:09 >>> I apologize.
17:39:10 We do have an ordinance.
17:39:13 I went ahead and corrected it.
17:39:18 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm going to move the ordinance with
17:39:25 the additional -- I don't know if I add this to this
17:39:27 or make a separate motion.
17:39:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Separate motion.
17:39:30 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance of the city of
17:39:32 Tampa, Florida making comprehensive revisions to City
17:39:36 of Tampa code of ordinances chapter 27, zoning,
17:39:38 amending section 27-153, reserved, amending section
17:39:43 27-272, regulations, governing individual special
17:39:47 uses, amending section 27-437, district and
17:39:55 subdistricts established procedures for rezoning,
17:39:59 amending section 27-438, official schedule of
17:40:02 permitted principal, accessory and special uses,
17:40:05 repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
17:40:08 conflict therewith, providing for severability,
17:40:11 providing an effective date.
17:40:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded by
17:40:15 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
17:40:16 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
17:40:20 So moved.
17:40:20 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being
17:40:22 The second reading and adoption will be on February
17:40:25 5th at 9:30 a.m -- March 5th at 9:30 a.m.
17:40:31 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know, should when do this as a
17:40:35 motion to ask that staff revisit the language?
17:40:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
17:40:43 >> Regarding the escrow account, and to do this
17:40:46 before -- in time for the July cycle.
17:40:51 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
17:40:52 What I was going to recommend is if council does want
17:40:55 to explore this to maybe request that the
17:40:57 administration and the legal department working in
17:41:01 concert with the AI heritage committee explore that
17:41:06 and come back and you may want to do it as part of a
17:41:09 I was going to recommend the June workshop type frame.
17:41:13 I think everybody can figure out, I won't be here for
17:41:15 that, but I know Marty has been involved, and I'm sure
17:41:19 there's other folks in the legal department who can
17:41:22 take a look at that as well, and that way if there's
17:41:25 any language changes that you all feel comfortable
17:41:27 it's appropriate to move forward we can have those --
17:41:31 Would you like to make a motion?
17:41:34 >>MARY MULHERN: So moved.
17:41:35 And I'll bet you will be watching from home.
17:41:37 Put the baby to sleep.
17:41:42 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For purposes of the calendar, on June
17:41:44 18th you have a 9 a.m. commendation for police
17:41:47 Officer of the Month, a 9 a.m. budget workshop.
17:41:50 I suspect that will probably take some time.
17:41:52 Did you want to schedule this for 10 or 11:00 on the
17:41:55 18th of June?
17:41:56 >>> Yeah, maybe 11.
17:42:03 I don't even know if that's a budget workshop.
17:42:09 Yes, 11 is fine.
17:42:11 It might go a little longer but we can deal with that.
17:42:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's part of the motion?
17:42:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Part of the motion to schedule it on
17:42:21 June 18th.
17:42:25 >> Second.
17:42:26 (Motion carried).
17:42:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Why don't he would take up new
17:42:31 business at this point?
17:42:36 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
17:42:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
17:42:39 I will not be able to attend the special discussion
17:42:41 meeting of bicycle friendly communities scheduled for
17:42:46 next Thursday so my recommendation -- and my
17:42:50 recommendation is that we schedule that special
17:42:53 discussion meeting on bicycle friendly community to
17:42:55 Thursday, February 26th at 1:30.
17:43:02 >> Second.
17:43:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
17:43:03 (Motion carried).
17:43:05 >> I'll contact all the bicycle people who were here.
17:43:08 Thank you.
17:43:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano?
17:43:13 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: No.
17:43:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern?
17:43:16 >>MARY MULHERN: No.
17:43:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have two items.
17:43:26 On March 5th, we have a request from Patrick
17:43:34 Manteiga and Joe Capitano to address council on the HCC
17:43:38 new student centers in Ybor City as relates to the
17:43:41 historic district and told I would bring to council,
17:43:44 to put it on that 5th, allow 10 minutes, also
17:43:48 notify HCC that it will be on here as well, so they
17:43:51 can be here to address any issue or concerns.
17:43:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me, if I may, on that issue,
17:43:58 Mr. Chairman, on Saturdays, I have coffee with a bunch
17:44:06 of my friends and that building is coming off the
17:44:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Way off the ground.
17:44:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So what I'm saying is, what are we
17:44:13 going to discuss?
17:44:14 >> They requested to come before council, I'm pretty
17:44:17 much bringing it to council.
17:44:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If we ask the legal department --
17:44:21 and I'm with them.
17:44:24 Did we ask the legal department if they have an
17:44:27 exemption to the law?
17:44:28 I don't know all these things.
17:44:29 But that building, I don't think they are thinking of
17:44:36 tearing down.
17:44:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have been talking to Mr. Fletcher
17:44:38 about this.
17:44:39 I think that what they want to talk about is that
17:44:41 building specifically, more generally there will be
17:44:45 future buildings in Ybor City, and it's sort of the
17:44:48 principle of the thing about whether the rules of the
17:44:50 Barrio Latino apply to schools.
17:44:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can understand and appreciate
17:44:54 that very much.
17:44:55 But I want to make sure that we are playing in a
17:44:59 certain ballpark.
17:45:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have asked for legal counsel to be
17:45:04 here for that discussion, and also Mr. Fletcher on
17:45:07 this particular issue.
17:45:08 And there's a varying opinion between the two legal
17:45:12 counsels on that.
17:45:13 >>GWEN MILLER: When they call, if they want to speak
17:45:16 on that building or just speak in general?
17:45:19 >> I think they are talking about the BLC and what
17:45:23 goes on in that area in terms of historic buildings.
17:45:27 Talk about that building as well, yes.
17:45:31 >>GWEN MILLER: So that building is already almost up.
17:45:41 To have them tear it down and start all over again.
17:45:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to put this on the agenda.
17:45:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I already moved it.
17:45:47 >>GWEN MILLER: It needs a second.
17:45:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you say what time you want?
17:45:53 >> Put it with the time certain, with the staff
17:45:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you want 10:30 then under staff
17:46:01 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
17:46:02 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
17:46:03 Opposed, Nay.
17:46:06 (Motion carried).
17:46:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: One other thing is, administration,
17:46:09 Mr. Smith, asked that we have a workshop.
17:46:18 On the status of the Seminole Heights community plan.
17:46:20 And questioning March 26th, 2009.
17:46:26 >>GWEN MILLER: What time?
17:46:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That is a workshop day.
17:46:33 You have presentation of the police Officer of the
17:46:35 You don't have a time for the issues pertaining to the
17:46:38 alcohol beverage permitting.
17:46:39 You said March 26th?
17:46:41 That time is not set so council might want to do that.
17:46:44 You have a 9:00 workshop scheduled for issues
17:46:46 pertaining to the vendor ordinance.
17:46:50 So --
17:46:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 10:00?
17:46:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, we have 9:00.
17:46:56 We have the presentation by the police.
17:46:57 That takes about?
17:47:01 >>GWEN MILLER: About 10 minutes.
17:47:03 >>> 10 or 15 minutes.
17:47:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Take public comment.
17:47:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I didn't notice until now it looks
17:47:09 like it says there's no time set for the issues
17:47:12 pertaining to the alcoholic beverage permit.
17:47:14 So council might want to clean that up today, too, set
17:47:17 a time.
17:47:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, let's do this, staff is
17:47:20 requesting this.
17:47:20 Let's do this at 9:30 and the rest of them can follow
17:47:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 9:30.
17:47:27 So you wish to set the requests for 9:30 and then the
17:47:32 alcoholic beverage for, say, 10:00?
17:47:36 >> Yes.
17:47:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Those need to be separate motions.
17:47:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That will be fine.
17:47:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Why don't we vote on that?
17:47:43 The workshop.
17:47:44 All in favor of that motion say Aye.
17:47:45 Opposed, Nay.
17:47:47 Now we need a motion for alcoholic.
17:47:51 All in favor of that motion say Aye.
17:47:52 Opposed, Nay.
17:47:54 >>THE CLERK: Mr. Chairman, on the previous motion
17:47:56 could that be stated for the record?
17:47:57 I do not have a file number on that.
17:48:02 Is there a file number?
17:48:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I can give him a copy of that.
17:48:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm sorry, you didn't have a copy.
17:48:09 I apologize for that.
17:48:13 Yes, I'm sorry.
17:48:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to share with you all
17:48:17 that I had a chance to meet with Mrs. Stockhouse from
17:48:21 the solid waste department, because I want to
17:48:23 compliment her on what a suburb job their staff did on
17:48:27 the Gasparilla clean-up.
17:48:29 By Sunday morning all of the debris was cleaned up,
17:48:32 and it was an extraordinary effort.
17:48:34 And she said that last year they picked up 4.7-tons of
17:48:39 recycling and this year it was 10 tons of recycled
17:48:43 So I didn't know if anybody else had made a
17:48:47 recommendation to give solid waste a commendation on
17:48:52 the clean-up, but if nobody else has, I would like to
17:48:56 move that we write a recommendation.
17:48:58 And I would be happy to write it.
17:49:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I have somewhat of a recollection.
17:49:03 I can check with Mrs. Miller -- excuse me, Mrs.
17:49:06 Marshall when we come back and see if that's been
17:49:09 Do you know, Mr. Clerk?
17:49:10 Do you have a recollection?
17:49:12 >>CLERK: I'm sorry, could you repeat that?
17:49:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If they have done a commendation
17:49:17 for the solid waste department for the incredible job
17:49:19 that they did of cleaning up after Gasparilla.
17:49:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'll make an inquiry and have an
17:49:26 answer by 6:00.
17:49:27 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't think council has.
17:49:30 I don't -- we haven't done that.
17:49:37 This is the first meeting since Gasparilla, right?
17:49:40 THE CLERK: I think I remember a motion from last week.
17:49:43 I'll bring that back at 6:00 and check that out.
17:49:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We'll hold that in abeyance.
17:49:52 We stand in recess until 6:00.
17:49:54 Thank you.
17:49:56 (City Council in recess)
18:03:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council will now come to
18:04:20 We'll have roll call.
18:04:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
18:04:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
18:04:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
18:04:28 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
18:04:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
18:04:35 We will move to our evening hearing.
18:04:40 Item number 3 is a continued public hearing.
18:04:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you want to clear the agenda?
18:04:46 >> Yes, yes, okay.
18:04:50 Does someone from staff want to come?
18:04:59 >> Samantha Fenger, Land Development Coordination,
18:05:02 here for continuance.
18:05:04 This case has already been continued from December
18:05:07 Please note per section 27-3-93 it's to your
18:05:11 discretion to continue this case again, because they
18:05:19 will be exceeding 180 days if you grant them the
18:05:23 continuance to June.
18:05:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you want to take that up now?
18:05:29 Ms. Zelman?
18:05:30 Council, you received a letter from Ms. Zelman
18:05:33 representing petitioner regarding this continuance.
18:05:34 Just a reminder, under the statute 27-393, it requires
18:05:41 that council make a finding of extenuating
18:05:44 circumstances based on what the petitioner tells you
18:05:47 in order to be able to grant that continuance.
18:05:51 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: Fowler White, 501 East Kennedy here
18:05:55 on behalf of the applicant.
18:05:56 And, yes, we did request a longer continuance, citing
18:06:02 storied circumstances, and basically those
18:06:04 circumstances are the current state of the financial
18:06:08 real estate market.
18:06:09 As you are all aware, it's very. Did I to obtain
18:06:13 financing at this time.
18:06:13 It's also difficult to settle on a final site plan
18:06:17 with a mix of uses when it's not entirely clear what
18:06:20 the market will demand.
18:06:22 And so we are hoping that this continuance will enable
18:06:25 us to wait for some better times without having to
18:06:29 give up all the time and work that has gone into the
18:06:32 site plan.
18:06:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You think June you will have a better
18:06:37 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: That's what we are hoping.
18:06:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I was going to ask if anyone was
18:06:41 here to speak on this.
18:06:42 If not I was going to make a motion.
18:06:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone wish to speak to this
18:06:48 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: We did send a letter to the
18:06:50 neighborhood association.
18:06:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move a continuance to June
18:06:53 18th based on the facts we just received from Ms.
18:06:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Caetano.
18:07:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY: What was that date?
18:07:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: June 18th, on the agenda.
18:07:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Ms. Zellman, would you be renoticing
18:07:09 as a result of that date?
18:07:10 It's several months out.
18:07:11 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: If council directs us to.
18:07:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I would suggest you renotice it since
18:07:22 it's so far away.
18:07:23 We'll include in a that in the motion.
18:07:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Include that in the motion,
18:07:29 Mr. Chairman.
18:07:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
18:07:31 (Motion carried).
18:07:32 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: Thank you very much.
18:07:33 >>SAMANTHA FENGER: Item number 7 staff requests
18:07:37 continuance to February 26th, 2009 at 6 p.m.
18:07:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to open the public hearing.
18:07:42 >> Second.
18:07:45 (Motion carried).
18:07:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone wishing to address the
18:07:46 continuance on item number 7?
18:07:50 Anyone here to address council?
18:07:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to continue to February
18:08:00 26th, 2009.
18:08:04 >> Seconded by Councilwoman Mary Mulhern.
18:08:07 (Motion carried).
18:08:10 >> SAMANTHA FENGER: Item number 8, a letter from Ann
18:08:14 Pollack the petitioner's representative to the
18:08:18 26th at
18:08:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone wish to address council on this
18:08:25 continuance to March 26th, 2009?
18:08:29 89 move to continue to March 26th, 2009.
18:08:35 >> Seconded by councilman Miranda.
18:08:37 (Motion carried)
18:08:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, I would ask that all
18:08:51 public records that have been received for public
18:08:55 inspection in City Council's office be received and
18:08:57 filed by motion, please.
18:08:58 >>GWEN MILLER: So moved.
18:09:00 >> Second.
18:09:00 (Motion carried).
18:09:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If you are going to be speaking to
18:09:05 council or addressing council tonight, would you stand
18:09:07 and be sworn, please, if you are going to be
18:09:09 addressing council, giving any testimony tonight
18:09:11 before council, please be sworn.
18:09:15 (Oath administered by Clerk).
18:09:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 4.
18:09:26 >>CHAIRMAN: Move to open.
18:09:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
18:09:28 (Motion carried)
18:09:33 >> Samantha Fenger, Land Development Coordination.
18:09:53 I have been sworn.
18:09:54 Item 4, petition V-08-123 is here for 10701 north
18:10:01 15th street, currently zoned RS-60, to allow for a
18:10:06 daycare facility.
18:10:07 Petitioner is requesting a special use approval to
18:10:10 allow for a daycare up to 45 students on a 24 hour
18:10:17 It's located on single family district and boarded by
18:10:20 residential to the north, south, east and west.
18:10:22 The main building setbacks are as follows: North 22.6
18:10:26 feet, 34.2 feet, 15th street, 29.4 feet, and to
18:10:33 the east 21.4 feet.
18:10:35 The proposed use requires 3 parking spaces and three
18:10:39 spaces are being provided including one ADA space.
18:10:45 Tampa site is located here and is actually going to
18:10:58 have a one-way access with access only on 15th.
18:11:05 There's an aerial of the site.
18:11:14 This is the subject site looking east on 15th.
18:11:21 The subject site looking north on Charm.
18:11:31 Looking west on 15th.
18:11:33 Looking north on Charm.
18:11:40 This is looking south on Charm.
18:11:45 And this is looking east on 15th.
18:11:53 The petitioner is requesting only one waiver, and that
18:11:55 is to allow access to a local street which is Charm
18:12:00 The development review committee has found the
18:12:02 petition inconsistent with the City of Tampa land
18:12:03 development regulation.
18:12:05 However, if the applicant revises the site plan with
18:12:07 the required notes and site plan revisions, then the
18:12:10 DRC will amend its determination and find the site
18:12:13 plan consistent with the exception of the
18:12:15 transportation department which has an objection to,
18:12:21 located across both driveways.
18:12:25 Most of the items are technical in nature such as
18:12:28 amending the site plan notes and the requested
18:12:30 revision sheet has been submitted for the record.
18:12:32 I would like to bring your attention to the first
18:12:34 bullet point under Land Development Coordination
18:12:36 findings which has to do with the buffer waiver.
18:12:40 The petitioner has submitted a form and received
18:12:43 approval through the land development coordination
18:12:45 department for the buffer waiver.
18:12:48 The item will be removed.
18:12:54 >>SAMANTHA FENGER: This concludes my presentation.
18:13:00 I'm available if you have any questions.
18:13:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm looking at the residence and
18:13:04 looking at the waiver request and it says reduce
18:13:06 required buffer from 10 feet to 3 feet, and it appears
18:13:09 to me that the home is immediately adjacent to other
18:13:15 Why would the staff waive the buffer?
18:13:20 >>> The administrator, she was able to apply for the
18:13:28 waiver through our office administratively.
18:13:30 And Cathy Coyle, our zoning administrator, was able to
18:13:34 approve that waiver because if you look on the site
18:13:36 plan the petitioner is actually providing more than
18:13:38 what is required for the buffer waiver. In the buffer
18:13:42 waiver she's required to provide evergreen trees, and
18:13:44 she has committed to providing oak trees.
18:13:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I thought the point of the buffer
18:13:54 was to protect the neighbors -- and I'm saying this
18:13:58 because maybe I'm not reading it properly but I'm
18:14:01 looking at the site plan and looking at what's
18:14:04 And it appears to me that there is a proposed hedge.
18:14:13 >>> The petitioner -- has an existing fence on the
18:14:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You're saying 21 feet so that's
18:14:40 greater than the buffer?
18:14:41 I'll tell what you my concern is.
18:14:42 When I read this and added up the number of potential
18:14:45 children it sounded like there were going to be about
18:14:51 40 children in the afternoon and if I were the people
18:14:53 who lived immediately next door I would be concerned
18:14:56 about being adequately buffer of the happy sounds of
18:15:02 40 children next door.
18:15:03 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
18:15:21 I have been sworn.
18:15:22 As relates to the comprehensive plan, I would like to
18:15:25 provide the following information regarding this
18:15:27 particular request.
18:15:29 The site is located within the boundaries of the
18:15:33 universal square north Tampa civic association.
18:15:36 It is located south of Fowler Avenue and Copan park,
18:15:44 north 15th street, Charm Lane.
18:15:47 Charm is a local neighborhood street as are most of
18:15:48 the other streets, meanders east and west.
18:15:52 The north south, south street 15th street is a
18:15:56 collector road.
18:15:56 The request is for a daycare center which is a
18:15:58 neighborhood serving use, community serving use, that
18:16:01 would benefit the residents of the surrounding areas
18:16:05 that do have small children.
18:16:07 In these times as we know, to try where you have dual
18:16:11 income families, working families, where they are
18:16:14 going to be able to put smaller children to be
18:16:17 properly supervised.
18:16:18 That is why we allow, or the comp plan allows and the
18:16:21 code allows consideration of daycare facilities in
18:16:24 churches and residential 10, residential 20,
18:16:27 residential 35 land use categories.
18:16:29 The request as Ms. Fenger stated is going to provide
18:16:35 buffering and screening from the adjacent residential
18:16:38 Do you have duplexes tots west across the street,
18:16:42 across on 15th street, and you do have four
18:16:48 residences that do surround the site to the north, one
18:16:52 to the east, one to the south.
18:16:55 I can understand your concern, Mrs. Saul-Sena,
18:16:57 regarding this.
18:16:59 I am, though, relieved to know it is a community
18:17:03 serving use.
18:17:04 The hours they are going to have the 45 children is
18:17:08 restricted which is good.
18:17:09 I would much rather see something than this than a
18:17:14 high commercial use.
18:17:16 So at least I think the up side is that it is a good
18:17:19 community serving use, and they really are deficient
18:17:28 throughout the entire community as I'm sure you are
18:17:30 aware of.
18:17:31 The intent is good.
18:17:32 We hope that the applicant does her best to make sure
18:17:35 that -- that she is a good neighbor and doesn't impact
18:17:40 any of the adjacent residences.
18:17:42 Planning Commission staff found the proposed request
18:17:44 consistent with the comprehensive plan.
18:17:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions?
18:17:49 Thank you.
18:17:55 >>> I have been sworn in.
18:17:57 I'm here for any questions.
18:17:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: State your name and address for the
18:18:00 >>> I'm Annanora, north 15th street, Tampa,
18:18:05 Florida 33602.
18:18:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Did you hear the question raised by
18:18:09 Councilwoman Saul-Sena?
18:18:10 Did you hear the question?
18:18:12 >>> Oh, yes.
18:18:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think daycare is great.
18:18:15 And the question I have is the number of children that
18:18:17 will be here, and that it not drive the neighbors
18:18:21 Have you talked to the neighbors about what your
18:18:23 planning and have you told them about the number of
18:18:25 children that you are planning to accommodate?
18:18:27 >>> Absolutely.
18:18:28 They are in full support.
18:18:31 I actually have to submit in the record a petition.
18:18:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Ma'am, if you will speak on the
18:18:42 record, okay?
18:18:44 Into the mike.
18:18:46 >>> I'm sorry.
18:18:47 I submitted a petition from the neighborhood
18:18:49 association, in addition to a few signatures from my
18:18:53 neighbors indicating that they are in full support of
18:18:56 the daycare center.
18:19:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Just a question, it looks like --
18:19:05 you know, for a regular house, it's a pretty good
18:19:08 sized backyard.
18:19:09 But if you -- how large is the structure and how large
18:19:13 is the yard that you really think you can accommodate
18:19:17 all these children?
18:19:18 >>> Yes, I will be able to accommodate it.
18:19:20 I had a conference with licensing and they indicated
18:19:23 that I would have square footage inside and outside to
18:19:27 accommodate 45 children.
18:19:28 >> How many children?
18:19:29 >>> 45.
18:19:30 >> So Hillsborough County goes out and if they have
18:19:36 done that, the square footage based on her child that
18:19:40 she will have to meet, and she cannot exceed what they
18:19:43 recommend, what they put into licensing.
18:19:45 >>> That's correct.
18:19:46 >> And they will also look at all the surrounding and
18:19:50 make sure she has adequate buffering.
18:19:52 That's part of the license.
18:19:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I know in the West Tampa area,
18:19:55 there's various daycares, and it does a lot for the
18:19:59 community, with close relationships where the parents
18:20:04 live, and have full confidence in their neighbors.
18:20:08 There's one on Habana and Kathleen or something in
18:20:11 that area.
18:20:12 There's another one on Glen.
18:20:15 And there's various of them.
18:20:16 And they really work well.
18:20:19 I never had a complaint on any one of them.
18:20:21 That's not to say tomorrow something may not happen
18:20:26 but they blend in well, well run and well taken care
18:20:28 of and well managed.
18:20:30 And I don't know this lady, but I'm sure she will try
18:20:34 to do her best.
18:20:35 >>> Absolutely.
18:20:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
18:20:36 Councilman Dingfelder.
18:20:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
18:20:40 I see you had three signatures from the apartment on
18:20:44 15th street.
18:20:45 And my bigger concern would be your next door neighbor
18:20:49 immediately to your east on Charm, and the two
18:20:54 neighbors behind you.
18:21:00 I'm sorry.
18:21:00 Have you had a chance to specifically talk to them?
18:21:02 I nobody they got a notice letter.
18:21:05 Do they live there, do the owners live there?
18:21:07 Because the owner of the property would get a notice
18:21:09 letter, you know, that you sent out.
18:21:11 I don't know if that's the same people who actually
18:21:13 live there.
18:21:14 And have you talked to any of those three houses?
18:21:16 >>> I actually have.
18:21:19 Actually the three houses that are adjacent to my
18:21:21 property, the house to the north, unfortunately the
18:21:25 lady passed away, and now the house has been empty for
18:21:28 about two years now.
18:21:31 The house right behind mine to the east, they are
18:21:37 never really there.
18:21:39 Honestly, they visit that house maybe every once every
18:21:44 two months.
18:21:44 >> Is that on Charm or Tulsa?
18:21:46 >>> I'm sorry, that's Charm.
18:21:48 That's Charm.
18:21:48 And they are in full support of the daycare.
18:21:51 And then on Tulsa back to the, I guess, north, they
18:21:56 are in support as well.
18:22:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And the last question,
18:22:05 Mr. Chairman.
18:22:05 When I look at the yard, at the diagram that's been
18:22:09 drawn that you submitted and the yard, it's not
18:22:11 showing necessarily playground equipment and that sort
18:22:14 of thing.
18:22:15 You have got some little kids you are proposing 2, 3,
18:22:18 4, 5 years old, during the morning, and I'm not sure
18:22:21 what age in the afternoon.
18:22:25 So I guess they'll be playing outside, right?
18:22:30 >>> Correct.
18:22:31 Well, we'll have different curricula outside for the
18:22:40 children, licensing requires that you separate it by
18:22:43 age group.
18:22:44 So a portion of -- I don't have the background with me
18:22:49 but a portion of the yard will be sectioned off.
18:22:52 And then there's another portion of the yard that will
18:22:53 be further sectioned off.
18:22:57 That will be further sectioned off for the older kids.
18:22:59 And I'll be serving the after-school kids up to 12
18:23:03 years old.
18:23:04 >> And this driveway, is it already a circular drive?
18:23:09 >>> Yes, sir.
18:23:11 It was there when we moved in, yes.
18:23:13 >> I think the fact that it's a circular drive and I
18:23:15 guess you are the first house on the block, aren't
18:23:17 >>> Yes.
18:23:18 >> That's helpful for the traffic flow.
18:23:21 Because I guess most people will come in off of, what
18:23:23 is that, 15th street or whatever?
18:23:26 >>> Yes, sir.
18:23:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is anyone here in opposition to this
18:23:31 Anyone want to address council?
18:23:32 Are you in opposition to this petition?
18:23:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
18:23:36 >> Second.
18:23:36 (Motion carried).
18:23:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mrs. Miller.
18:23:41 >>GWEN MILLER: An ordinance approving a special use
18:23:45 permit S-2 approving a daycare facility in an RS-60
18:23:49 residential single-family zoning district in the
18:23:51 general vicinity of 10701 north 15th street in the
18:23:56 city of Tampa, Florida as more particularly described
18:23:58 in section 1 hereof approving waivers as set forth
18:24:02 herein, providing an effective date.
18:24:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: May I add the addition to V 08-123,
18:24:12 prior to second reading?
18:24:14 I would like to add that to Mrs. Miller's motion.
18:24:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
18:24:19 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
18:24:21 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
18:24:23 Second reading and adoption will be on March 5th at
18:24:30 9:30 a.m.
18:24:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to open item 5.
18:24:35 >> Second.
18:24:36 (Motion carried).
18:24:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 5.
18:24:55 >>SAMANTHA FENGER: Land Development Coordination.
18:24:57 I have been sworn.
18:24:58 Item number 5, petition number Z-08-64 is before you
18:25:03 tonight for 3109, 3111 and 3113 east 8th Avenue,
18:25:11 commercial intensive, to industrial general, for open
18:25:16 The site requirements forts industrial general zoning
18:25:19 are as follows, 5,000 square feet minimum lot size,
18:25:22 750-foot front yard width, setbacks 10 feet to the
18:25:25 front in the corner, zero foot to the side and rear
18:25:29 In the industrial zoning district the maximum building
18:25:31 height is 60 feet.
18:25:32 The development must be geared to all City of Tampa
18:25:35 land development regulations at the time of permitting
18:25:38 because this is a Euclidean rezoning request, there
18:25:40 are no waivers permitted.
18:25:53 The site is located here, commercial intensive right
18:25:58 You can see that industrial general is primarily
18:26:00 zoning along 7th Avenue.
18:26:10 There's an aerial of the site located on east 8th
18:26:15 between 32nd and 31st street.
18:26:31 This is looking east on 8th Avenue.
18:26:33 The site is located over here on the right.
18:26:39 It's looking north on 8th Avenue.
18:26:45 This is looking north on 8th Avenue.
18:26:51 This is the subject site looking southeast from
18:26:53 8th Avenue.
18:27:00 The subject site looking south from 8th.
18:27:05 This is the subject site looking east from 32nd
18:27:13 It's looking east on 7th Avenue.
18:27:19 This is looking west on 7th Avenue.
18:27:24 Looking east on 32nd street.
18:27:27 The development review committee reviewed the petition
18:27:33 and finds the request for rezoning consistent with the
18:27:36 applicable City of Tampa land development regulations.
18:27:40 For the petitioner information only please note the
18:27:43 current use of the property as noted by zoning staff
18:27:45 did not comply with the industrial general zoning
18:27:49 Also note that open storage as is being used on the
18:27:54 property right now does require that stack piles
18:27:56 cannot be higher than six feet, and as noted in the
18:28:01 pictures may be more than six feet.
18:28:03 That concludes staff's presentation and we are
18:28:08 available for any questions.
18:28:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I went out to look at this today
18:28:13 and it appears to me there's a real disconnect between
18:28:16 what areas are zoned and what the real uses are.
18:28:19 For example, across the street on the north side of
18:28:22 8th, the zoning is RM-16 which is a multifamily
18:28:26 zoning, but the reality is you have got single-family
18:28:29 homes all up and down 8th.
18:28:31 And on 7th, than the zoning is IG.
18:28:38 The reality is that you have got CG uses.
18:28:43 And if you were to like look at these that are there,
18:28:47 and come up with zoning that reflected the uses, it
18:28:49 would not be what the current zonings are.
18:28:52 So I think that this is a very strange case, because
18:28:56 if you were to just go by zoning you would say, well,
18:29:01 that's easy, everything from 8th to the south
18:29:03 should be IG and everything to the north should be
18:29:06 RM-16 but the reality isn't reflected in those zonings
18:29:10 so my question to you is, are we supposed to make this
18:29:13 consistent with reality?
18:29:14 Are we supposed to make this consistent with the very
18:29:16 abstract notations on this plan?
18:29:19 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
18:29:25 I think it's probably a legal question.
18:29:28 When you're looking at these issues, I mean, it can
18:29:33 get complicated when you have maybe a reality but it's
18:29:35 somewhat different with what you have from a zoning
18:29:38 But those properties that may currently have CG uses
18:29:43 on it could at any moment in time, with no ability for
18:29:46 us to do anything about it, change their uses, other
18:29:50 than the provisions -- really you need to look at it
18:29:56 in the context of what can be done if you are looking
18:29:58 at it as Euclidean rather than what is out there.
18:30:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But might not the other way to look
18:30:05 at it be to say what is there has been there for 60
18:30:09 years, so what is, is, and -- I mean --
18:30:14 >>JULIA COLE: I think the thing to do, if that's where
18:30:16 the concern of council is, would be to ask to go back
18:30:20 and do a study and look at the possibility of
18:30:22 down-zoning the properties surrounding it.
18:30:25 However, that's always a very risky thing to do, to go
18:30:29 and down zone property, with what things are currently
18:30:34 done, because I can give a whole long conversation
18:30:37 about why that's a problem but I would encourage to
18:30:39 you look at this in terms of see if there's an
18:30:43 existing land use on that parcel, which I understand
18:30:45 is -- land use classification is pretty consistent.
18:30:53 I think it's on the north side of the street.
18:30:57 I don't have the map in front of me.
18:30:59 And then you understand that there is residential --
18:31:02 I'm not sure it's a land use.
18:31:05 You really need to look at it in the context of land
18:31:08 use classification and the zoning classification.
18:31:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm just citing there's a real
18:31:13 disconnect between that and what's actually there.
18:31:18 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
18:31:19 I have been sworn.
18:31:22 I'm going to get into the specifics of the case and
18:31:24 I'm going to answer your question a little more
18:31:26 specifically as far as the City of Tampa in general.
18:31:30 As far as reality and what we'll get into that in a
18:31:36 There's two predominant land use classifications from
18:31:40 7th Avenue north, and that's the residential 20
18:31:42 land use classification already alluded to, this
18:31:46 allows and why you have existing zoning but the
18:31:51 existing uses are single-family detached uses.
18:31:53 You have light industrial over here.
18:31:55 Between 7th and 8th is really where you have
18:31:57 the light industrial, 7th, 8th, 6th, and
18:32:01 let's call it for lack of a better term departure from
18:32:04 this type of use, all the transitions, which is a
18:32:09 common theme in the City of Tampa in most of its
18:32:12 commercial corridors as you transition away from a
18:32:14 commercial corridor, industrial corridor, you really
18:32:18 It almost like coming off a cliff as far as transition
18:32:21 of intensity and density, in many areas of the City of
18:32:25 In this particular instance the reason for the request
18:32:28 was to bring this particular property which has been
18:32:30 operating into compliance.
18:32:33 They have been operating there for I understand
18:32:34 several years, and they are asking to go from CI to
18:32:41 There is existing IG to the site.
18:32:42 There are a lot of CI, CG, and IG uses on 7th
18:32:48 Avenue, between 7th and 8th.
18:32:50 When you get east of the railroad tracks which are
18:32:52 several blocks to the west of this site, and you are
18:32:55 going east of 40th Street, the character significantly
18:33:00 There are several pockets.
18:33:01 Let me go ahead and show you a little more.
18:33:05 But if we are looking at this scale, we can basically
18:33:08 see we have these uses over here, you have some
18:33:10 residential over here, you have all these commercial
18:33:13 intensive and light industrial uses over here.
18:33:17 When you start going a little further out, and you
18:33:20 look at the big picture, you can really see that you
18:33:23 have a little enclave over here of residential, and
18:33:26 you do have -- you can see there's a true point of
18:33:30 departure where industrial departs and residential
18:33:34 becomes a character, and that is 8th Avenue is
18:33:37 your line of demarcation.
18:33:39 Once you go north of 8th you have a this little
18:33:41 pocket over here of this little neighborhood.
18:33:43 But when you look at every place else, okay, do you
18:33:47 have significant nonresidential presence.
18:33:51 What's good about this particular site and what to do
18:33:54 with it, at least it's in close proximity to 7th
18:33:58 Avenue which bisects the entire Ybor City area, so
18:34:01 they are not going to have to encroach into
18:34:03 residential areas.
18:34:04 They can pop right out onto the street, come back on
18:34:07 7th Avenue, their option of going to 40th Street,
18:34:10 22nd street, to access be the interstate or any other
18:34:12 points that they want to go and access, without
18:34:15 encroaching or impacting the residential character
18:34:18 which does lie to the north of the site over here.
18:34:21 The big issue over here also is proper transition of
18:34:24 You have a light industrial going into a residential
18:34:26 use, so the big issue over here is you have seen the
18:34:32 It's unsightly to put it nicely.
18:34:35 It's unsightly.
18:34:36 But those are the type of uses that they are what they
18:34:40 So that's why you have buffering requirements in your
18:34:43 code for uses such as this, to provide a proper
18:34:45 transition of intensity and proper buffering and
18:34:49 screening to make sure that you have a logical
18:34:52 transition of intensity from industrial uses to
18:34:55 residential uses.
18:34:57 The issue over here is they are asking for Euclidean
18:35:00 zoning district, to determine whether or not you feel
18:35:02 that's the proper way to go, or if you need more
18:35:04 enforcement on the site.
18:35:06 That's entirely up to you.
18:35:07 This is a request that the applicant has been making
18:35:10 to you, if there are much more stringent requirements
18:35:13 coming with IG versus anything else.
18:35:16 So it will have to meet more stringent requirements of
18:35:19 Euclidean IG zoning district.
18:35:21 Based on what they are asking for, based on the rigid
18:35:24 screening and buffering requirements from the
18:35:26 residential, based on the character of what's between
18:35:30 7th and 8th Avenue from the railroad tracks
18:35:34 for five miles going east, which is really light
18:35:36 industrial and commercial intensive uses, Planning
18:35:41 Commission found the request consistent with the
18:35:43 comprehensive plan.
18:35:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Questions by council?
18:35:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Garcia.
18:35:55 Here's the thing.
18:35:56 And I realize this is sort of a transitional plat
18:35:59 face, as you describe.
18:36:01 And we'll get into some questions with Mr. Horner as
18:36:04 My concern is, because they are asking for Euclidean
18:36:06 zoning in the form of an IG category, and then go
18:36:12 further into the staff report, which describes what
18:36:16 they can do in Euclidean zoning.
18:36:19 They can do manufacturing, processing, assembling,
18:36:22 warehousing and related uses, right?
18:36:26 That's what I think I'm reading.
18:36:27 >>> There's about four or five more uses that they can
18:36:30 do as opposed to the CI which they currently are.
18:36:34 >> Might manufacturing, whole sealing, processing,
18:36:39 heavy equipment, other light industrial uses.
18:36:41 I don't know how that compares to the other one.
18:36:43 And then I go to the first page of the staff report
18:36:49 and it speaks to maximum building height of 60 feet,
18:36:52 okay, so they can put a 60-foot warehouse, 10 feet
18:36:55 from the front yard setback.
18:36:58 All right.
18:37:00 So I know that's not necessarily what this owner is
18:37:02 going to do but we always have to think in terms of
18:37:04 what the potential future use could be.
18:37:06 >>> Correct.
18:37:06 >> So now potentially looking at this property -- and
18:37:10 I guess is it all three lots we are talking about?
18:37:14 So we got probably 150-foot of potential 60-foot tall
18:37:20 warehouse, facing these two little houses across the
18:37:24 With a 10-foot front yard setback.
18:37:27 And then if you got warehouses, what do you have with
18:37:31 them, trucks, semis that come and go also?
18:37:35 I don't know why this isn't a PD, they just ask us to
18:37:38 allow for vehicular storage if that's what the real
18:37:41 issue is.
18:37:41 >>> That's in the body of my presentation to you.
18:37:46 Ask for the IG, it's this council's determination
18:37:48 whether or not they want more stringent enforcement on
18:37:50 the property.
18:37:51 By the way in response to the IG, many of the uses
18:37:54 that you already have stated and the scenarios you
18:37:57 have stated can also currently be done in the current
18:38:01 >> Well, I'll ask zoning staff if you are more
18:38:05 comfortable with it but I would like to know what
18:38:07 height building and what the setback is on the CI.
18:38:09 >>> They can give you that.
18:38:10 >> And how that relates to this -- I don't know how
18:38:14 that relates to this right now but that sort of jumps
18:38:16 out at me right now, that IG use.
18:38:19 And you are talking about, you know, light
18:38:24 manufacturing and that sort of thing.
18:38:26 Heavy equipment.
18:38:29 Heavy equipment, product processing and a 0-foot
18:38:32 potential building right across the street from
18:38:35 single-family residential.
18:38:35 >>> Those are good points, Mr. Dingfelder.
18:38:37 I did want to very quickly, if I may, just very
18:38:43 quickly go back into what Mrs. Saul-Sena stated
18:38:47 because very quickly, we are going to be going into
18:38:49 our new comp plan in a few months, and I wants to say
18:38:52 very quickly the categories, talking about what is
18:38:57 really there, and what's reality and what's underlying
18:39:00 uses, RM-16, R-20, that would really offer
18:39:04 You have single-family.
18:39:05 That's the case -- a lot of the historic sections of
18:39:10 So it's not just to this area.
18:39:12 There's parts of Hyde Park.
18:39:13 There's parts of lots of areas where you have
18:39:15 single-family detached homes in the R-20 and R-35 and
18:39:19 single-family homes there.
18:39:20 So that situation is not peculiar just to this area as
18:39:24 far as what reality is and what the underlying land
18:39:27 use classification for zoning districts are.
18:39:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA:
18:39:36 >> And that's why hopefully after we adopt our comp
18:39:38 plan we can go back and create a better congruity
18:39:42 between what's there and maybe move to form based
18:39:45 zoning which works better.
18:39:46 >>> We are going to work on it.
18:39:48 >> But the biggest concern I have is this parcel
18:39:50 doesn't appear to be connected to the parcel in
18:39:53 front -- to the south of it that fronts onto 7th
18:39:57 So this parcel access would be on 8th and 32nd.
18:40:01 And I wonder if our transportation staff could tell us
18:40:04 about the characteristics of 8th at -- I mean
18:40:09 8th and 32nd Avenue because when I drove it, it
18:40:12 appeared to be a relatively narrow, barely paved road.
18:40:18 >>TONY GARCIA: Any more questions for me?
18:40:21 Okay, thank you.
18:40:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I was asking transportation.
18:40:27 Because if this piece is being developed in
18:40:30 conjunction with the piece on 7th, well, 7th
18:40:33 is obviously a commercial corridor.
18:40:34 But my observation of 8th if it's 20 feet I'm
18:40:38 amazed and it's barely paved.
18:40:40 >>> LENROY MARTIN: You're right, it may not be 20
18:40:54 >> This is for the planning staff.
18:40:56 One of my understanding of a characteristic of, you
18:41:02 know, a heavy zone like the one that's being proposed,
18:41:04 is that it should be onto a Street that would be
18:41:08 appropriate, and 8th Avenue does not fit those
18:41:19 You don't have to respond.
18:41:21 Maybe --
18:41:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, let's hear from petitioner.
18:41:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And I want to point out I drove this
18:41:28 area in fact today after lunch as well.
18:41:31 8th is paved.
18:41:32 It don't have curb cuts.
18:41:36 It's the old style pavement.
18:41:37 But it does not have the curb cuts, okay?
18:41:42 Also, all around you look at it is warehouses and
18:41:45 industrial use.
18:41:51 >> Aren't those single family houses?
18:41:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: In front, yes.
18:41:55 Three single-family houses.
18:41:57 But you can't just look at that.
18:41:58 You have to look at the whole area.
18:41:59 When you have warehouses already adjacent all around
18:42:02 this area.
18:42:02 And it looked like construction is going on across the
18:42:05 street on the 31st street side.
18:42:08 There's a whole clearing like some kind of warehouse
18:42:11 over there.
18:42:12 I don't know, but it's being cleared.
18:42:15 So there's a lot of warehouses, a lot of heavy
18:42:19 In fact even on this lot there's a lot of heavy
18:42:21 equipment on this property today.
18:42:23 >> That's why they got in trouble.
18:42:27 That's why they are asking for this.
18:42:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
18:42:29 >>> Michael Horner, 14502 North Dale Mabry highway,
18:42:44 Tampa representing applicant owner Mr. Frank
18:42:46 McCannty and I have been sworn.
18:42:54 Mrs. Saul-Sena and Mr. Dingfelder, you are right,
18:42:56 there is a disconnect.
18:42:57 Unfortunately my client finds themselves in the middle
18:43:00 of that disconnect.
18:43:01 Truth be told, my clients purchased this property some
18:43:03 years ago assuming it was IG.
18:43:07 Every single lot in this entire block is zoned IG.
18:43:11 They purchased it.
18:43:12 They assumed it was IG.
18:43:15 They did not get that confirmed on the zoning atlas.
18:43:18 Everybody said zoned IG.
18:43:20 They purchased it.
18:43:22 It's been used for truck storage for quite some time,
18:43:26 produce, Valente, I think, produce truck had it for
18:43:30 It was vacant, I think, for about a year and a half.
18:43:33 I believe about 2004, my client leased it to a house
18:43:39 moving business, which is a bona fide business and
18:43:43 They took great concern about hearing it described as
18:43:47 a junk yard.
18:43:48 It's certainly not a junk yard.
18:43:50 I remember a commercial some years ago, said tires
18:43:53 ain't pretty.
18:43:54 Well, house moving isn't pretty.
18:43:56 And I'm not going to stand here and defend what it
18:43:59 We certainly hoped that we can make certain
18:44:02 concessions under the IG under some screening
18:44:07 mechanisms and some buffering opportunities.
18:44:09 But unless I hear discussion about an entire zoning
18:44:13 for this block, I feel somewhat that I'm sacrificing
18:44:18 my client's best interest for his acquisition, his
18:44:23 reliance on government, reliance on the comprehensive
18:44:25 plan, it was light industrial when they purchased it,
18:44:29 it happened to turn out to be CI, zoning, but clearly
18:44:33 everybody else had IG zoning
18:44:38 He's not my client specifically although he's the fee
18:44:41 owner, but the tenant was the source of the violation.
18:44:44 So we sought a zoning from the CI to the IG district
18:44:48 based upon the surrounding pattern.
18:44:50 And it's out on that site.
18:44:56 There's been lots of correspondence, council.
18:44:59 And we actually have a unique situation where, yes,
18:45:02 there is RM-16 zoning across the street and it is res
18:45:06 20 in the comp plan.
18:45:07 However, all these neighbors love our tenant because
18:45:12 he works with the neighborhood.
18:45:13 He helps them out.
18:45:15 He helps them do repairs.
18:45:16 In fact I was talking to Dave Riley before the hearing
18:45:19 and he said, gosh, I was out there today and I think
18:45:22 your neighbor on the north side is working on a car on
18:45:25 his property which is in the right-of-way.
18:45:27 My client was a little awkward in trying to kick him
18:45:32 off because they are good neighbors, and if they need
18:45:34 a piece of equipment he shares that.
18:45:36 In fact on a part-time employee basis when he has a
18:45:40 big house moving job he hires some of those residents.
18:45:43 These times are tough.
18:45:44 This is a difficult economy.
18:45:45 We looked through my client's tax payments.
18:45:48 He'd paid thousands and thousands based on the
18:45:51 reliance of that zoning.
18:45:52 Yes, the use on there is not a CI use.
18:45:54 He understands that.
18:45:56 Called code enforcement immediately and said how can
18:45:59 we reconcile this?
18:46:01 We have had ongoing discussion was Fran Cosentino.
18:46:05 Fran said it's a junk yard, I don't like it.
18:46:07 Sat down, discussed it.
18:46:09 Didn't realize it was a house moving business.
18:46:11 I thought the guy was just storing junk.
18:46:14 Truth be told, my client has about 18 structural
18:46:20 movings since about 2004.
18:46:22 The owner Patrick Knapp, he specialized in that
18:46:25 business, specialized in that service.
18:46:26 It's not an easy service to be in.
18:46:28 Very few people are qualified to do what he does.
18:46:31 He's well respected in the community.
18:46:34 He is retained by Polk County, Lake County for moving
18:46:37 portable classrooms.
18:46:38 He's been retained by FDOT for relocating historical
18:46:42 structures throughout Ybor City.
18:46:43 He's been retained by the city of Largo for portable
18:46:46 He employs six employees.
18:46:48 And it's an involved process.
18:46:50 If you look at that site, you have jacks, hydraulic
18:46:54 pumps, lifts, supports, large scale equipment.
18:46:59 When they go through a community they have to take
18:47:01 TECO lines down, they have to move poles, they have to
18:47:04 close streets.
18:47:05 So, yes, that site is full with a lot of stuff.
18:47:08 But it's not a junk yard.
18:47:10 It's not a salvage yard.
18:47:11 He doesn't sell.
18:47:14 He doesn't bring anything on consignment.
18:47:16 He doesn't have any relationship.
18:47:18 He has to have that equipment.
18:47:20 Now, could he be more efficient?
18:47:23 And that's what we are dealing with now with our
18:47:28 Just to go through a couple of graphics, council.
18:47:32 As Tony mentioned, there was a disconnect.
18:47:36 Actually, you mentioned this, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
18:47:38 There is a disconnect in the zoning.
18:47:40 We are right within this IG zoning.
18:47:44 Mr. Scott, you are correct, this is a large project.
18:47:48 That's the warehouse project right to the west of this
18:47:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: A warehouse project?
18:47:52 >>> A warehouse project.
18:47:54 And talk about the IG versus the CI district.
18:47:56 The CI district actually has a lower ratio.
18:48:01 The IG I think has a .75.
18:48:03 The CI district has a 1 to 1.5.
18:48:07 So almost twice the intensity or 40% the intensity.
18:48:12 In terms of the comp plan, again we have heavy
18:48:14 industrial south of 7th and the railroad tracks.
18:48:17 We are surrounded by the IG which extends on and on to
18:48:21 light industrial eastward.
18:48:22 As Tony mentioned.
18:48:23 And goes all the way up on the west side of 31st
18:48:31 On the map, we located right here.
18:48:35 If that guy decides to build an IG use, have zoned,
18:48:39 conformance with the comprehensive plan, my client
18:48:44 only has CI and this gentleman can absolutely build
18:48:46 large warehouse structure.
18:48:49 My client has no interest in building a structure, has
18:48:51 no interest in doing any kind of manufacturing
18:48:54 process, fabrication assembly.
18:48:56 He just wants to get his tenant out of violation.
18:48:59 The only district that was Euclidean that made sense
18:49:01 that it's surrounded by is the IG district.
18:49:06 So here's the block.
18:49:09 Here's 31st.
18:49:11 Here's 8th.
18:49:12 Every single lot is zoned IG with the exception of his
18:49:21 So we went to the neighborhood and said, how do you
18:49:29 We are here to talk to you.
18:49:30 We had a meeting.
18:49:31 We talked to the neighbors.
18:49:35 12 out of the surrounding lot owners.
18:49:48 Indicated they were completely in support.
18:49:52 And if I may ask to receive and file these 12
18:49:55 petitions in support.
18:49:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
18:49:59 So, yes, in RM-16 there are single-family homes.
18:50:09 My client knows all of them, by name, by Social
18:50:12 Security number.
18:50:13 They are good people.
18:50:16 It's a good relationship.
18:50:17 Yes, we wish they wouldn't take some of their stuff
18:50:19 and put it in the right-of-way in front because he's
18:50:20 got enough problems of his own.
18:50:22 But he's trying to be a good neighbor to them.
18:50:26 The parts of it that are not marked in yellow,
18:50:28 council, are people that we could not find readily
18:50:31 available and are available to sign but no letters of
18:50:37 We did receive an e-mail from Mrs. Cosentino.
18:50:42 I think she realizes now it's a bona fide business, if
18:50:45 you just screen and buffer we can live with it.
18:50:48 We are not in any designated neighborhood association.
18:50:51 That being said, clients -- clients?
18:50:55 Council, we have looked at some screening
18:50:58 My clients got an estimate for I think burlap
18:51:01 screening that was effectively used on a parcel we had
18:51:04 on Causeway Boulevard.
18:51:06 It does have some stacking issues, goes beyond the
18:51:11 fence, some pallets.
18:51:14 Yes, there are some trees on-site.
18:51:16 He probably has some encroachment on.
18:51:18 He certainly has the mechanism, the abilities to use
18:51:21 those railroad ties to establish supports around those
18:51:24 trees, and he doesn't have that continuous compaction
18:51:27 in his room systems but there aren't that many trees.
18:51:31 We need to have this business. These people need
18:51:33 their jobs.
18:51:33 He needs to stay in business.
18:51:35 He wants to get out of violation.
18:51:38 This guy, I think, has $200 a day of potential fine.
18:51:41 That's why we filed it.
18:51:42 There's not any parcel zoned PD within a square mile.
18:51:48 We think it's consistent with the plan and consistent
18:51:49 with zoning code.
18:51:50 Thank you.
18:51:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Councilwoman Mulhern, Saul-Sena, and
18:51:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Looking at the map it don't does look
18:51:58 reasonable that you would want to have the same zoning
18:51:59 that you are surrounded by.
18:52:02 I guess my question, and I don't know if anyone is
18:52:06 here, Fran or anyone from her association is here, but
18:52:13 you were in violation -- what were the violations?
18:52:18 You are asking for a zoning change because you were in
18:52:23 >>> Correct.
18:52:24 >>MARY MULHERN: What were you cited for?
18:52:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, I need to interrupt but I
18:52:30 don't believe that would be relevant.
18:52:32 >>MARY MULHERN: All right.
18:52:35 I take it back.
18:52:36 I hope that she's here to, you know, verify that they
18:52:41 are okay with it.
18:52:43 But it does seem odd to me.
18:52:45 How did this happen, land development, or Tony?
18:52:49 Why is this one little spot not industrial general
18:52:55 when everything else around is?
18:52:57 >>> Good question.
18:52:58 I don't have that answer, council.
18:53:09 >>SAMANTHA FENGER: Land Development Coordination.
18:53:11 To answer your question, commissioner Mulhern, what we
18:53:15 saw is that in the records, the site was rezoned for
18:53:19 zoning conformance back in 1987 from residential to
18:53:23 commercial, when the city underwent zoning
18:53:26 Those had the commercial intensive zoning.
18:53:30 >>MARY MULHERN: So the rest of it looks like it was
18:53:34 all rezoned together.
18:53:36 It just looks like an omission, a mistake.
18:53:43 I guess you don't have anyway to know why they didn't
18:53:46 just zone it with the other.
18:53:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
18:53:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
18:53:56 I have a question for Mr. Horner.
18:54:00 What I'm most interested in is protecting the
18:54:02 neighbors across the street to the north, to make
18:54:05 their lives better because of looking at something
18:54:08 that's more sightly.
18:54:09 Is your client's primary point of access onto 8th
18:54:13 or 32nd?
18:54:14 >>> Primary access is to 32nd.
18:54:18 Between gates.
18:54:19 There is access to 8th, though.
18:54:22 >> If you could put up some kind of pleasing buffer
18:54:29 along 8th Avenue to protect the neighbors to the
18:54:34 north from the visual impact, and really focus your
18:54:38 access onto 32nd street, that I think would make
18:54:42 everybody's lives a lot better.
18:54:43 And is the reason you are not asking for a PD, but to
18:54:48 know you are going to do that because nobody else
18:54:50 asked for a PD and it's more expensive to get a site
18:54:53 plan drawn or something?
18:54:54 >>> Well, it's a matter of those factors, Mrs.
18:54:57 At this time cost, the time frame, the fact you would
18:54:59 be setting a precedent and other people would have to
18:55:03 go through and give up some of those land use rights,
18:55:06 access, and I would remind council there's other IG
18:55:10 zoned that has access to 8th Avenue.
18:55:13 He wants to be fair.
18:55:14 He doesn't want any more than what anybody else.
18:55:16 He just wants entitlement as his neighbors.
18:55:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have to have say fellow council
18:55:22 members that this whole idea of zoning and down-zoning
18:55:25 is really strange because if you look at all the other
18:55:27 parcels next to this parcel to the west on 8th
18:55:31 Avenue, they look about the same as this, which is to
18:55:34 say there's not much going on except a bunch of cars
18:55:38 And I know this afternoon further down 8th Avenue
18:55:41 to the east, there's really nice residential use in
18:55:46 the next block and some of those residential uses to
18:55:48 the north are pretty nice.
18:55:49 And I just worry about this very heavy zoning that's
18:55:53 being proposed.
18:55:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
18:55:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Horner, I don't know if this
18:56:04 aerial that is part of our package -- do you have this
18:56:13 >>> I have a similar aerial, Mr. Dingfelder.
18:56:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay, point to the property.
18:56:21 >>> In the middle right there.
18:56:27 >> In your aerial showing the new house there, you are
18:56:31 a aerial is not showing that house.
18:56:33 >>> Yours is a little more dated than hours.
18:56:35 >> The chairman mentioned three houses and it shows a
18:56:40 lot of parked cars and your aerial is not.
18:56:46 >>> I think the city's GIS is 2008.
18:56:48 This is Googled 2009.
18:56:51 Well, late 2008.
18:56:53 >> So, staff, you think the one he's showing is more
18:56:57 >>> It has the house on it.
18:56:58 >> I guess you're right.
18:57:00 That's a good point.
18:57:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There were three houses when I went
18:57:03 there today.
18:57:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't think they would have torn
18:57:07 it down, I guess.
18:57:11 Does your client own any other parcels other than
18:57:14 those three?
18:57:16 >>> No.
18:57:17 I believe that's the only three he owns.
18:57:19 >> He just has three empty lots.
18:57:21 He leases it out to this company.
18:57:22 Do they have a building there?
18:57:23 Do they have --
18:57:26 >>> No structure.
18:57:26 >> What do they work out of?
18:57:30 >>> Well, that's where their equipment is placed.
18:57:33 I assume they have work done elsewhere but this is
18:57:37 where their house moving operation is.
18:57:38 >> There's no enclosed quarters.
18:57:44 >> I think your client would -- that he seems to be
18:57:48 the anomaly, because otherwise I couldn't support it.
18:57:51 But since he's the anomaly, I guess I don't really
18:57:54 have a whole lot of choice.
18:57:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?
18:57:57 Anyone from the public wish to address council on this
18:58:01 Anyone here wish to address council?
18:58:05 >> Move to close.
18:58:06 >> Second.
18:58:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question that Mr. Dingfelder
18:58:10 brought up.
18:58:11 So you can get industrial general or commercial
18:58:16 general zoning, but not have any structure?
18:58:23 Only if you have a PD, then you have to have --
18:58:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: A PD is a site planned controlled
18:58:29 This is Euclidean zoning.
18:58:32 >>MARY MULHERN: There's nothing to require you to
18:58:34 have --
18:58:36 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
18:58:37 That's correct.
18:58:38 Under Euclidean zoning classification, where your
18:58:41 standards are, your standards of the code and as you
18:58:44 go to develop --
18:58:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, that's not part of the standard,
18:58:48 to have any kind of structure.
18:58:49 >>JULIA COLE: We are not obligating people to
18:58:52 construct things on their property.
18:58:54 What you are obligating them to do is when they go to
18:58:56 develop their property, and they are Euclidean zoning,
18:58:59 they have to meet certain standards.
18:59:01 Even in the PD you are not obligated.
18:59:03 >>MARY MULHERN: I understand.
18:59:04 I understand that.
18:59:07 It just didn't occur tore me that could you have
18:59:09 industry happening without any kind of --
18:59:15 >>> Like an open storage type use.
18:59:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
18:59:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Ms. Cole, there are some great
18:59:22 looking trees on this property.
18:59:23 It's like the best thing about it.
18:59:25 If we grant this zoning, where the property owners
18:59:29 have to protect the trees?
18:59:30 >>> They will be obligated to comply with chapter 13.
18:59:33 >> But if they don't build anything will they be
18:59:36 required to put the ties that Michael Horner referred
18:59:41 to around the trees to protect it?
18:59:44 In other words, if they are not pulling any building
18:59:46 permits, why would they have to protect the trees?
18:59:50 >>> They would be obligated, because the code
18:59:52 enforcement question, they would be obligated to
18:59:54 protect those trees from whatever is being done on
18:59:56 that property.
18:59:57 Even if it is not the actual pulling of the permit and
19:00:01 constructing the building, and those part of the code
19:00:03 enforcement process.
19:00:04 So not withstanding whether or not they pull a
19:00:09 building permit or they just use their property in a
19:00:11 manner that doesn't necessity a building permit, they
19:00:14 still are obligated to under chapter 13 not do
19:00:17 anything to cause harm and cause potential removal of
19:00:25 those trees.
19:00:26 That's part of their obligation.
19:00:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If we don't grant this rezoning, do
19:00:31 they have to protect the trees?
19:00:33 >>> That's an issue that you has nothing to do with
19:00:36 the rezoning because that's an obligation under the
19:00:38 code whether or not this is IG, CI or residential
19:00:43 property, whatever it is, you are always obligated to
19:00:45 comply with our code.
19:00:46 And if you fail to comply with our code, which does
19:00:48 obligate that which you are doing anything on your
19:00:51 property, you don't do anything on your property which
19:00:53 causes harm and causes some problems to a tree, you
19:00:59 are going to be cited if that is discovered and known
19:01:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could Mr. Reilly come up?
19:01:05 Perhaps I see him in the audience.
19:01:07 He's our tree guy.
19:01:09 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to say, Linda, that they
19:01:11 need the shade.
19:01:12 They don't have a carport.
19:01:13 They don't have a roof.
19:01:18 >>> Dave Riley, parks and recreation.
19:01:20 I have been sworn.
19:01:21 As far as the trees being protected now, as Mrs. Cole
19:01:28 just stated if that's the case you would certainly
19:01:30 work with Mr. Horner and his clients to try to get
19:01:32 them into compliance.
19:01:35 And then, you know, if they could not meet that
19:01:38 compliance we would cross that bridge.
19:01:41 I guess the thing would be code enforcement.
19:01:47 Whatever works.
19:01:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you have to --
19:01:51 >>> I have not into measuring the trees.
19:01:57 I have seen them but I have not been measuring them.
19:02:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?
19:02:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
19:02:03 >> Second.
19:02:04 (Motion carried).
19:02:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
19:02:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Your Honor?
19:02:20 Mr. Chairman, I move an ordinance rezoning property in
19:02:22 the general advice interests of 3109, 3111, 3113 east
19:02:27 8th Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida and more
19:02:29 particularly described in section 1 from zoning
19:02:31 district classification CI commercial intensive to IG
19:02:35 industrial general, providing an effective date.
19:02:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Second.
19:02:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded by Councilwoman
19:02:43 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
19:02:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Nay.
19:02:48 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena voting no.
19:02:50 Second reading will be on March 5th at 9:30 a.m
19:02:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open public hearing number
19:02:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
19:03:00 (Motion carried).
19:03:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
19:03:18 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Land Development Coordination.
19:03:20 And I have been sworn.
19:03:21 The next item on tonight's agenda is petition number Z
19:03:25 For the property located at 4002 to 4004 east deLeuil
19:03:32 Avenue and 4003 east Powhatan Avenue, to allow for
19:03:37 commercial uses on-site.
19:03:38 The CG zoning requirement are a minimum lot size of
19:03:42 10,000 square feet.
19:03:43 This lot contains approximately 24,748 square feet
19:03:47 with 100 feet of frontage.
19:03:49 This is the Euclidean you zoning request.
19:03:52 Therefore it must comply with all City of Tampa land
19:03:54 development regulations at the time of permitting.
19:04:02 This is the zoning atlas for the area.
19:04:10 This is the site located in green with 40th Street
19:04:13 boarding to the west.
19:04:14 This is just north of Hillsborough Avenue.
19:04:18 As you can see running along 40th is mostly
19:04:21 commercial zoning, CG designation with RS-50 along the
19:04:28 west and to the east.
19:04:30 And this is an aerial of the property.
19:04:34 40th Street along the west.
19:04:45 This is a picture of the site on 40th Street.
19:04:53 Another view of the site.
19:04:58 That's from DELEUIL.
19:05:04 Another view from the south part of the property.
19:05:09 This is located south of the site.
19:05:12 This is located east of the site.
19:05:18 This is located east of the site on Powhatan.
19:05:25 That's located north of the site.
19:05:32 Another view north of the site.
19:05:41 This is north of the site also.
19:05:43 I'm sorry, that's the north side of the site.
19:05:46 It's on Powhatan.
19:05:49 So it is the site in question.
19:05:50 That's located northwest of the site.
19:05:57 This is west of the site on 40th Street.
19:06:02 And this is located southwest of the site on 40th
19:06:06 The development review committee has reviewed the
19:06:10 petition and finds it consistent with Land Development
19:06:15 And that concludes staff's presentation.
19:06:17 I'm available if you have any questions.
19:06:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions by council?
19:06:21 Planning Commission.
19:06:22 Mr. Garcia.
19:06:26 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
19:06:28 I have been sworn.
19:06:33 To get right to the part of the thing, this is a
19:06:37 restaurant, Mr. Dingfelder.
19:06:41 I thought I would get that out of the way.
19:06:53 This is Jones barbecue.
19:06:57 I had a couple of sandwiches there.
19:06:59 I think everybody has.
19:07:05 Most of the Hillsborough County probably had a
19:07:09 barbecue in this place.
19:07:10 It's located along 40th Street.
19:07:12 You can see on 40th Street is community mixed use 35
19:07:15 P.as one heads away from 40th Street corridor you can
19:07:19 see you have an established residential 10 is your
19:07:22 predominant land use residential land use category,
19:07:28 then residential 20 over here, increase of density and
19:07:31 intensity, commercial 24, because basically south of
19:07:35 Mohawk is Hillsborough Avenue, a major east-west
19:07:38 commercial corridor arterial road.
19:07:42 Let me show you an aerial which basically reflects,
19:07:46 but the uses on 40th Street are varied.
19:07:49 There are some institutional uses.
19:07:50 We have churches.
19:07:53 There will be some refill uses, some restaurants.
19:07:57 Many uses which basically had been in the 40th Street
19:08:00 area on the 40th Street corridor for a long, long time
19:08:03 and are essentially part of the fabric of the
19:08:06 With the expansion of 40th Street and the provision of
19:08:11 new structure improvements to the area, that's an
19:08:14 upside to it.
19:08:15 The down side is some of these are businesses that are
19:08:20 impacted so it's required if possible to try to
19:08:23 relocate them with as minimal impact as possible to
19:08:26 40th Street and the surrounding residential area.
19:08:29 As we have already shown you, CMU 35 goes back quite
19:08:34 The existing structure is on the school piece over
19:08:37 here as evidenced on the aerial.
19:08:41 The applicant, Euclidean, commercial general, and will
19:08:47 have the footprint of the building over here which is
19:08:49 also owned by the applicant to try to nestle some type
19:08:52 of structure in here association type of footprint
19:08:54 that won't be impacting any trees and will provide
19:08:56 proper ingress and egress, proper functionality of the
19:08:59 site for patrons and for access, and also provide
19:09:07 proper buffering and screening.
19:09:08 Again under the more stringent Euclidean zoning
19:09:10 district of the CG.
19:09:15 Based on the location, based on the underlying land
19:09:18 use request, more stringent requirements of the CG and
19:09:21 its relationship to the corridor itself, and to the
19:09:23 residential, Planning Commission staff found the
19:09:26 proposed request consistent with the comprehensive
19:09:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Garcia, any questions?
19:09:33 >> My name is Ethel Hammer, Englehart, Hammer and
19:09:41 associates, address 3001 north Rocky Point drive,
19:09:45 suite 300 Tampa 33607.
19:09:47 And I have been sworn.
19:09:49 I am here this evening representing big John Alabama
19:09:55 barbecue and with me this evening is Kerry Gaylord,
19:09:58 the attorney for the property owners, and Beth major
19:10:01 who is a representative of the family, who is here in
19:10:04 the event that there are any questions.
19:10:08 We are not here under what I would call normal
19:10:12 We are here because it has become a necessity, and
19:10:17 very strong desire on the part of this family to
19:10:19 rebuild their barbecue restaurant.
19:10:22 They have been at this location for over 40 years.
19:10:25 I know many of you I'm sure if not all of you have had
19:10:28 barbecue at this location.
19:10:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Regular.
19:10:32 >>> The property I think may be in our picture might
19:10:35 help a lot in understanding why we are here.
19:10:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Ms. Hammer, let me just raise the
19:10:45 Is anyone here in the public want to speak to council
19:10:47 on this petition in objection to this petition?
19:10:52 Are you in objection to this petition?
19:10:54 Go ahead, Ms. Hammer.
19:11:06 >>> If you look at this little diagram of the property
19:11:09 that is under their ownership, this area up in the
19:11:13 northwest corner, you can see it's where the
19:11:15 restaurant is presently located.
19:11:18 The area that I cross hatched is the area of the
19:11:21 right-of-way taking the 40th Street expansion.
19:11:25 So 95% of the building is in the right-of-way taking.
19:11:31 They own the rest of this property.
19:11:33 The white portion of the site is already zoned CG.
19:11:36 And I'll show that to you in a second.
19:11:39 The area that's in the pink is the area that is the
19:11:42 subject of our request.
19:11:44 The area that's in the white, that is the remainder of
19:11:46 what they own, is only about 40 feet deep.
19:11:49 So clearly that is not sufficient for them to rebuild
19:11:52 the restaurant.
19:11:54 So we are log to place it in this area which is
19:11:59 approximately a half acre, which will accommodate the
19:12:02 same restaurant that they have now.
19:12:04 They are looking to replace basically exactly what
19:12:07 they have now, same size restaurant, same type of
19:12:12 seating area and so forth.
19:12:16 I believe you have already seen that, but again this
19:12:20 will be the only portion of their site currently that
19:12:23 is commercial, and we are asking to extend this
19:12:25 commercial back into this which basically lines up
19:12:30 with the commercial on the south side of DELEUIL.
19:12:35 We are consistent with the comprehensive plan, as Tony
19:12:39 has pointed out to you.
19:12:40 We are in the CMU 35 portion of the comp plan.
19:12:43 The advantage of us rebuilding this restaurant is -- I
19:12:49 should say one advantage is certainly the fact that
19:12:52 upon rebuilding, it will have to comply with all the
19:12:55 current regulations of the city, parking, paved
19:12:59 parking, stormwater, landscaping, and all the things
19:13:02 that you would normally regulate for new development.
19:13:05 Right now, of course, the existing development does
19:13:09 not meet those requirement because it's grandfathered.
19:13:11 It been there, as I said, for over 40 years.
19:13:19 The buffering between this site and the sites, the
19:13:25 residential properties to the immediate east, will be
19:13:28 per code.
19:13:29 And what is required, just so the neighbors
19:13:31 understand, there's a 15-foot landscape buffer with a
19:13:34 6-foot masonry wall that will be required.
19:13:37 We have some very large trees near the property
19:13:40 Those will all be retained.
19:13:42 We have at least one grand tree on the site which will
19:13:44 not be touched.
19:13:46 Fortunately we do have this room on the property to
19:13:48 work around that.
19:13:50 I have four letters in support from some of the
19:13:52 neighbors which I am going to add into the record.
19:13:55 And all of the graphics in my package here I will
19:13:58 submit for the clerk's record.
19:14:00 So with that, I'll be available for any rebuttal.
19:14:03 Thank you.
19:14:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
19:14:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have one quick question.
19:14:10 Since you had the opportunity, your Clint has the
19:14:12 opportunity to rebuild from scratch, and since what's
19:14:15 going on to the south is commercial and to the north
19:14:18 is more residential in character, when you redesign
19:14:23 the new restaurant, can you place it closer to the
19:14:28 >>> That's exactly what we are doing.
19:14:30 This is a relatively flat piece of property.
19:14:33 So we are putting the retention on the in order end,
19:14:35 so that in and of itself will serve as a buffer to
19:14:38 the -- and there will be no access on how hat an
19:14:45 there. Will be access onto 40th Street and we are
19:14:47 currently asking for administrative approval for a
19:14:49 driveway across from the auto repair facility on
19:14:54 That will mean that the traffic can circulate through
19:14:56 the site and come out adjacent to commercial.
19:14:58 >> So, in other words, the residential uses to the
19:15:01 north will be much better protected under the new plan
19:15:05 than they are now, and you will have some kind of
19:15:08 screening or something?
19:15:09 >>> The code will require on the Powhatan side,
19:15:15 require a set landscape buffer, and then there will be
19:15:19 a wall on the east property boundary that isn't there
19:15:22 >> And the lighting will all be directed onto the
19:15:25 site, and --
19:15:27 >>> Correct.
19:15:27 It will be toward the front of the facility.
19:15:29 >> Thank you.
19:15:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
19:15:36 Sir, come on up.
19:15:38 Have you been sworn?
19:15:43 >>> I haven't been sworn.
19:15:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else?
19:15:46 Do you want to address us tonight?
19:15:48 Have you been sworn?
19:15:49 Anyone else that's going to address council, please
19:15:51 stand and be sworn.
19:15:53 (Oath administered by Clerk)
19:15:54 >>> Good evening, council members.
19:16:06 I understand she said the barbecue --
19:16:11 Could you state your name for the record, please?
19:16:13 >>> Sorry.
19:16:13 My name is Richard Pearson, I reside at 4006 east
19:16:18 Powhatan, Tampa, Florida.
19:16:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
19:16:23 >>> The barbecue place has been there about 40 years.
19:16:27 But I been there longer.
19:16:29 I had my home built in 1965.
19:16:35 And as I say, it was grandfathered in.
19:16:40 It's been there for 40 years.
19:16:42 I have to put up with the smoke and people coming in
19:16:48 buying their barbecue.
19:16:50 They sit and eat, blow up on my property.
19:16:57 I have to clean it up.
19:16:59 This garbage dumpster, sometimes it overflows.
19:17:03 So it stinks.
19:17:08 Not only that, the smoke, the barbecue smell.
19:17:15 And when my friend comes in my home he asks me where
19:17:19 are you barbecuing?
19:17:21 He said I smell like barbecue.
19:17:23 Not only that, my vehicle.
19:17:26 The grease and the smoke gets on my fence, my house,
19:17:32 my windshield.
19:17:35 When I drive, I can't see out of it.
19:17:38 And I don't know what to do about that.
19:17:43 And also, the barbecue, my family, the vehicle, they
19:18:07 urinate and that's unhealthy.
19:18:09 But I never had a beef with any of the family.
19:18:11 I have been good family.
19:18:14 When things went wrong always called Mr. Steenson or
19:18:25 Let them know there's something wrong.
19:18:27 But for 40 years that smoke and grease, I can't stand
19:18:30 it anymore.
19:18:34 So if they filter that smoke and get all the gross out
19:18:39 and so forth, I got some pictures.
19:18:43 Can I put my pictures up?
19:18:55 This is my corner.
19:19:01 Grease on the fence.
19:19:02 I have to pressure wash it and paint it.
19:19:09 The smoke has that grease in it.
19:19:10 Same thing to my house.
19:19:15 I have some more pictures here.
19:19:16 All of this is in my house.
19:19:21 The house sit directly across from the barbecue fence.
19:19:24 And they talk about moving.
19:19:27 They are going to be moving closer to me from my
19:19:31 They will be coming even closer.
19:19:35 And the dumpster, I don't know what they plan on
19:19:39 putting their dumpster because right now where it
19:19:42 sits, I have some pictures here.
19:19:44 I can show you.
19:19:45 (Bell sounds)
19:19:46 You see all that?
19:19:53 It come on the ground.
19:19:54 And every time I go out there and from that dumpster
19:19:59 all over my property, trash and stuff.
19:20:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
19:20:03 Mr. Pearson, your time is up.
19:20:07 Thank you, sir.
19:20:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Pierce?
19:20:13 >>> Yes.
19:20:14 >> Have you had a chance to speak directly with the
19:20:16 petitioner's representative about what their plan is
19:20:18 for where the dumpster is?
19:20:20 >>> No, I have not.
19:20:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Because I think you have been
19:20:25 really patient if this has been going on for 40 years.
19:20:28 >>> Right.
19:20:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And I don't know what we are going
19:20:31 to do but I certainly think that -- I mean, you
19:20:34 obviously keep your house up really beautifully.
19:20:37 And to try to maintain it with barbecue Greece
19:20:41 degrees, I don't know if they are going to put
19:20:42 additional scrubbers on their chimneys or what, but
19:20:45 you deserve to be protected.
19:20:47 >>> Yeah.
19:20:53 I been there 40 years.
19:21:11 >>> My name is Ona Pearson, 4006 south Powhatan.
19:21:17 I also have a letter from the neighbors directly
19:21:20 across the street from me.
19:21:26 They are petitioning the property, also.
19:21:28 My problem is that I have a handicapped son.
19:21:33 And he has like upper respiratory problems.
19:21:36 And I can't -- a lot of times I take him outside, and
19:21:42 he starts coughing really bad and his eyes start
19:21:45 running water and stuff.
19:21:48 So he kept getting bronchitis.
19:21:50 And because nobody smokes around him, okay.
19:21:54 So I mentioned it to the doctor one time, a couple of
19:21:57 times, and he said, is there any smoking in the home
19:22:01 or any type of strong chemicals that he's around that
19:22:04 will cause that?
19:22:06 No, other than just the barbecue place across the
19:22:09 street, and sometimes if the wind is blowing a certain
19:22:11 way, it blows directly over, you know, to my house,
19:22:17 and I also have allergies myself.
19:22:21 And it causes problems with that.
19:22:23 So we just stay in the house.
19:22:26 You know.
19:22:26 And like he said, you know, they have been really
19:22:31 nice, you know since we have been there.
19:22:35 But it's just that, you know, the smoke has become a
19:22:37 problem, you know. And like we have had to have the
19:22:41 house like painted, pressure washed, because of the
19:22:47 smoke with the grease, you know, that's in it.
19:22:50 Plus like when I was working like 6:00 to 2:30 and
19:22:55 would leave home about 5, 5:30 morning time it's dark,
19:23:00 and what happens, it's like it's raining or like the
19:23:03 whatever you want to call it is on the windshield,
19:23:06 it's grease.
19:23:07 It's like a grease film, you know.
19:23:09 And also if I have the trucks, my trucks washed or
19:23:13 whatever, the same thing happens, you know.
19:23:15 So that's why I'm petitioning, because the fact that,
19:23:19 you know, it's affecting my health.
19:23:22 And my son, you know.
19:23:23 So if there's anything they can kind of, you know, do
19:23:27 to -- I don't know.
19:23:33 Who do I give this to?
19:23:36 >>GWEN MILLER: The attorney.
19:23:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could somebody read it for us?
19:23:40 That's the neighbor's letter.
19:23:41 Could somebody read the neighbor's letter?
19:23:52 >> I'll make copies.
19:23:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Pass it around.
19:23:55 That's fine.
19:23:56 Does anybody else wish to address council on this
19:23:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for staff.
19:24:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
19:24:03 Go ahead.
19:24:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The request is for commercial
19:24:17 I mean, if it was not a barbecue restaurant, chances
19:24:22 are the neighbors wouldn't be having trouble with the
19:24:26 So my question is, I don't have a problem with the
19:24:34 request for a -- for the commercial zoning.
19:24:37 I have a problem with the additional impact of the
19:24:42 smoke on the residences.
19:24:46 Does our zoning code address these environmental
19:24:49 Or is this in any way identified?
19:24:53 Because, in a way, this is a lot more than a
19:24:56 commercial zoning.
19:24:57 I mean, because of the smoke, it's more almost
19:25:05 >>LaCHONE DOCK: What could happen is at the time of
19:25:07 permitting the building would have to be built to code
19:25:09 at that point.
19:25:10 At this level, for the rezoning, in this phase for the
19:25:15 request for the CG zoning we don't implement it at
19:25:19 that time.
19:25:19 It's Euclidean zoning, we cannot.
19:25:22 Put it as a condition.
19:25:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But I think it's a real
19:25:26 I mean, what we are supposed to do in our zoning is to
19:25:29 come up with land uses that are appropriate and
19:25:31 protect, you know, the surrounding land uses.
19:25:35 And while I certainly think that 40th Street is
19:25:37 appropriate for commercial use, what we are hearing
19:25:40 from the neighbors is substantive testimony that the
19:25:43 smoke from the barbecue is impacting their homes and
19:25:46 their health.
19:25:48 So I don't know what to do.
19:25:54 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
19:25:55 There's a couple of things to keep in mind.
19:25:58 First of all this was a building that was constructed
19:26:00 40 years ago and we have different building standard
19:26:02 now, use different standards that relate to, you know,
19:26:06 restaurant use annal, you have the health department,
19:26:08 restaurant obligations that were not in place 40 years
19:26:12 When this is reconstructed it will all have to come up
19:26:15 to code.
19:26:16 Second of all what these neighbors probably don't
19:26:18 understand that they have always had an opportunity to
19:26:19 do is contact the Environmental Protection Commission,
19:26:22 because they have standards as it relates to air
19:26:26 pollution, and those kinds of issues, and it's
19:26:28 probably that they didn't realize they had an
19:26:32 opportunity to have complained about, and that
19:26:33 opportunity is this.
19:26:36 So not withstanding the type of business it is.
19:26:39 I think the two things combined, the fact that with
19:26:42 this request, take 40th street in front of the
19:26:47 parcel, the fact that current code is going to have to
19:26:50 be complied with, you are going to have buffering that
19:26:53 was never there that's going to be there, you have a
19:26:56 wall that's going to have to be constructed that's not
19:26:58 there today, you have new health codes that will have
19:27:00 to be complied with in the construction of the
19:27:03 restaurant portion, and if there is still a problem,
19:27:07 you can make sure, and then be happy to give them my
19:27:10 information and they can -- it's not the city that
19:27:15 would be the enforcer of that but would be the
19:27:17 Environmental Protection Commission and you can make
19:27:19 sure they are aware of that.
19:27:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
19:27:25 >>MARY MULHERN: It's interesting that the EPC applies
19:27:28 to the city and -- do we have any kind of process in
19:27:33 rezoning where people are referred --
19:27:40 >>> If it were a planned development and there were
19:27:43 wetlands I think it's part of our DRC, but they have
19:27:46 general regulatory authority throughout the City of
19:27:48 Tampa and Hillsborough County as a special independent
19:27:53 So any type of complaints, any kind of complaint for
19:27:58 smoke, those types of issues, any citizen regardless
19:28:01 where they were located in the city or the county
19:28:03 would have opportunity to have that separate
19:28:05 regulatory environmental authority come out, check
19:28:07 that out, and cite under their authority.
19:28:13 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm just comparing it to the county
19:28:15 I think if you go for a rezoning in the county,
19:28:18 doesn't it automatically have to have EPC review?
19:28:24 >>JULIA COLE: Not necessarily.
19:28:25 Depends on what the request is.
19:28:27 Typically in the zoning, a wetland review, it's no
19:28:31 more operational item such as smoke, et cetera,
19:28:35 I mean, there are instances where the use maybe
19:28:40 As a general matter those are more enforcement
19:28:44 They have their own standards.
19:28:45 They have their own operation as to how they enforce
19:28:50 the regulation.
19:28:52 >> I think that's good to remember but it also sounds
19:28:54 like this is going to be better for your health
19:28:57 because of them having to come up to code and all the
19:28:59 regulations that have been put on restaurants and
19:29:03 industrial in the last 40 years.
19:29:06 So hopefully their air will, if they do build the
19:29:13 restaurant, your air will be cleaner.
19:29:15 And maybe we can hear from petitioner about what
19:29:18 specifically they are going to do about the smoke.
19:29:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Miller.
19:29:28 Councilman Caetano.
19:29:30 >>> Ethel Hammer again.
19:29:32 I did want to each fa size there are very strain
19:29:36 gentleman measures for air which this restaurant will
19:29:41 have to comply with.
19:29:42 The second thing I wanted to reemphasize is something
19:29:44 that Mrs. Saul-Sena brought up initially, which was,
19:29:47 we do have the piece of property that enables us to
19:29:50 put the restaurant actually farther away than it is
19:29:52 now by moving it onto the southern part of the
19:29:56 And so when we go in for permitting, we will certainly
19:29:59 look at how actually far to the south we can get that
19:30:03 structure and move it away from as many of the
19:30:10 neighbors as possible, and I know, for example, the
19:30:14 gentleman that came up with the fence, we will clearly
19:30:16 be farther away from him in what I'm going to call the
19:30:19 after-condition than we are now.
19:30:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The dumpster will be inside or
19:30:27 outside the property?
19:30:28 >>> The dumpster will be inside the property but
19:30:31 So that will also be better than the way it is
19:30:37 >>GWEN MILLER: It's been there 40 years, during that
19:30:41 time when it was built, the smoke was automatically
19:30:44 going to come out, but this time of day, they are
19:30:47 building what you call chimneys where the smoke comes
19:30:50 out with filters, and it does not have the smoke
19:30:52 blowing everywhere.
19:30:53 Am I right or wrong?
19:30:55 >>> You're correctly correct.
19:30:56 There are filters, and standards for emission that is
19:31:00 must be complied with.
19:31:02 >>GWEN MILLER: The dumpster on Powhatan is to the
19:31:10 >>> We haven't gotten to that level of detail yet.
19:31:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano.
19:31:14 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes, we have to remember the
19:31:16 technology has changed in 40 years.
19:31:18 They probably don't have any smoke screens there or
19:31:21 anything to catch that smoke.
19:31:23 And with the technology today, there are a lot of
19:31:25 barbecue place as round, and I'm sure it will not
19:31:29 infiltrate on the neighbors next door.
19:31:31 And as you say, they are going to be further away,
19:31:35 But I'm sure the technology is there, as our attorney
19:31:40 So I feel very comfortable with it.
19:31:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?
19:31:47 Do you want to add anything else?
19:31:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
19:31:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
19:31:53 (Motion carried).
19:31:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Ms. Miller.
19:31:59 Councilwoman Miller.
19:32:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
19:32:04 An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity
19:32:05 of 4002-4004 east deLeuil Avenue and 4003 east
19:32:14 Powhatan Avenue, more particularly described from
19:32:17 section classification RS-50 residential single-family
19:32:22 to CG commercial general providing an effective date.
19:32:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
19:32:28 I want to speak to the neighbors.
19:32:31 I feel terrible that you had to put up with what you
19:32:34 put up with for so long.
19:32:36 I truly think that what will be built in its place is
19:32:40 going to be a whole lot better.
19:32:41 I think in the interim, because God knows how long it
19:32:44 will take them to get going with the new thing, you
19:32:46 should complain tomorrow.
19:32:47 You should call the Environmental Protection
19:32:48 Commission tomorrow and have them go check it out.
19:32:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, may I suggest that perhaps
19:33:01 the public hearing be enclosed, that maybe Ms. Hammer
19:33:05 would like to address the issues, not now, unless you
19:33:08 wish to, Ms. Hammer, and reopen the public hearing.
19:33:11 Otherwise, perhaps you can get with the petitioner.
19:33:15 She's not hearing the direct concerns and representing
19:33:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
19:33:20 >>> If you like I can put on the record what the
19:33:24 timing of this situation is, if you will allow me to
19:33:26 speak to that.
19:33:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second to reopen.
19:33:31 >> Move to reopen.
19:33:33 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
19:33:36 Go ahead.
19:33:37 >>> Ethel Hammer again.
19:33:39 Under the terms of the order, the court order, we have
19:33:43 a enclosure date which means the structure is to be
19:33:45 removed March 31st.
19:33:49 We are on a short time frame here.
19:33:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
19:33:55 >> Second.
19:33:55 (Motion carried).
19:33:56 >>GWEN MILLER: I already read the motion.
19:34:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion.
19:34:02 Seconded by councilman Miranda.
19:34:04 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
19:34:06 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being
19:34:09 absent at vote.
19:34:10 Second reading and adoption will be on March 5th
19:34:13 at 9:30 a.m.
19:34:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to open item number 9.
19:34:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Last item.
19:34:20 >> Second.
19:34:22 (Motion carried)
19:34:34 >>GWEN MILLER: We are going to need you here.
19:34:35 Tie vote.
19:34:44 >>LaCHONE DOCK: Land Development Coordination.
19:34:46 The next item on tonight's agenda is petition Z 09-01
19:34:49 for property located at 404 east Hillsborough Avenue
19:34:53 and 4005 east Mohawk Avenue.
19:34:56 The request is to rezone the property from PD to PD to
19:34:59 allow an additional 594 square feet of restaurant use
19:35:04 The site contains .71 acres.
19:35:06 The proposed development is consistent with the
19:35:09 previous rezoning approval.
19:35:11 The site was previously approved in 2008 for 2,600
19:35:17 square foot restaurant use with associated waivers.
19:35:19 No additional waivers are requested.
19:35:21 The proposed PD setbacks will remain as previously
19:35:27 North 50 feet.
19:35:28 East 72 feet.
19:35:29 South 64 feet and west 50 feet.
19:35:33 The building height proposed is 28 feet.
19:35:36 Total of 19 parking spaces are required and 28 spaces
19:35:39 are being provided.
19:35:44 Council, before I put up the zoning atlas, I just
19:35:48 wanted to show on the site plan what is requested
19:35:54 tonight, the portion is what we previously approved
19:35:58 for the restaurant use.
19:35:59 The portion that is in yellow the additional square
19:36:02 And that is why the setbacks remain the same.
19:36:09 This is the zoning atlas for the site.
19:36:15 This is the site located in green but Mohawk to the
19:36:18 north, Hillsborough Avenue to the south, 40th Street
19:36:22 to the west.
19:36:23 The commercial zoning running along 40th Street,
19:36:27 zoning east of the -- CI east of the site, a couple of
19:36:31 PD zonings.
19:36:34 This is an aerial of the site.
19:36:39 And I have pictures.
19:36:56 It was very sunny.
19:36:57 I apologize.
19:36:58 This is on Hillsborough.
19:36:59 This is located south of the site on Hillsborough at
19:37:08 This is located east of the site.
19:37:09 This is north of the site on Mohawk.
19:37:15 Another view north of the site on Mohawk.
19:37:20 This is the northern part of the site on Mohawk.
19:37:26 This is the commercial business west of the site on
19:37:32 And this is another view west of the site on 40th
19:37:36 on the corner.
19:37:39 The development review committee has reviewed the
19:37:42 petition and find it consistent with City of Tampa
19:37:44 Land Development Code.
19:37:46 That concludes staff's presentation.
19:37:47 I'm available if you have any questions.
19:37:55 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission.
19:37:56 I have been sworn.
19:37:59 The land use designation is heavy commercial 24.
19:38:02 They are asking for some additional square footage.
19:38:04 They have already been approved for everything else
19:38:06 under Z 08-08.
19:38:09 Planning staff finds that consistent and maintains our
19:38:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That little building on the
19:38:16 southeast corner that you have got right here, what
19:38:18 was that?
19:38:20 >>> I have no clue.
19:38:21 >> The smallest Army recruiting center.
19:38:25 >>> Thank you very much.
19:38:34 >> State your name and address.
19:38:35 >>> My name J.D. Alsabbagh, Sycamore Engineering, 8370
19:38:40 West Hillsborough, Suite 205, Tampa, Florida 33615.
19:38:43 I am already sworn.
19:38:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir. Does anyone here want
19:38:49 to speak in objection -- opposition to this petition?
19:38:52 Anyone here?
19:38:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
19:38:57 (Motion carried).
19:39:00 Mr. Miranda?
19:39:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
19:39:04 Move an ordinance rezoning property in the general
19:39:06 vicinity of 4004 east Hillsborough Avenue and 4005
19:39:11 east Mohawk in the city of Tampa, Florida and more
19:39:13 particularly described in section 1 from zoning
19:39:15 district classification PD planned development,
19:39:17 restaurant, drive-in, to PD planned development,
19:39:19 restaurant, drive-in, providing an effective date.
19:39:23 >> Move approval.
19:39:24 >> Second.
19:39:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
19:39:30 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
19:39:32 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being
19:39:35 absent at vote.
19:39:36 Second reading and adoption will be on March 5th
19:39:39 at 9:30 a.m
19:39:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman.
19:39:49 I just wanted to follow up with the discussion about
19:39:51 that motion that was made.
19:39:55 Previously there was a motion that was made last week
19:39:57 by council member Dingfelder, seconded by councilman
19:40:02 Miranda, regarding commendations for clean cities,
19:40:07 solid waste and parks and recreation to be set at a
19:40:10 future date when Mr. Dingfelder would coordinate the
19:40:13 date for a workshop meeting.
19:40:15 I wanted to confirm that.
19:40:16 That was passed by council last week.
19:40:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
19:40:19 Let me also read and most of you may be aware, at
19:40:22 least for our viewing audience, that the DEP did deny
19:40:27 the permit, denied the permit for the class 1 landfill
19:40:31 in Pasco County.
19:40:32 So that is great news for us.
19:40:36 And so that's delightful to hear.
19:40:44 Motion to receive and file?
19:40:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
19:40:47 >> Second.
19:40:47 (Motion carried).
19:40:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anything else need to come before
19:40:51 We stand adjourned.
The preceding represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
The original of this 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.