Help & information    View the list of Transcripts








Tampa City Council

Thursday, February 25, 2016

5:30 p.m. session





DISCLAIMER:

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


05:31:43 [Sounding gavel]

05:31:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: Good evening.

05:31:47 I am going to call this meeting to order.

05:31:50 Roll call.

05:31:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

05:31:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

05:31:55 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

05:31:57 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Here.

05:31:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.

05:32:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

05:32:01 All right.

05:32:02 Need a motion to open the public hearing.

05:32:04 >> So moved.




05:32:05 >> I have a motion by Mr. Cohen.

05:32:07 Seconded by Mr. Maniscalco.

05:32:10 All in favor?

05:32:11 Opposed?

05:32:12 All right, staff, item number 1.

05:32:19 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

05:32:21 I am not presenting for item 1 but I want to preface it by

05:32:25 saying you have two amendments this evening, two small scale

05:32:28 amendment.

05:32:28 Actually there's three.

05:32:30 One is a companion to another.

05:32:32 So you do have three amendments before you for adoption,

05:32:34 consideration.

05:32:36 But we did have at our Planning Commission meeting several

05:32:40 weeks ago, we did have two additional plan amendments that

05:32:42 were -- because of additional circumstances, continued to

05:32:47 next month's meeting of the Planning Commission on March

05:32:50 14th.

05:32:51 That being said, I am making a formal request of council

05:32:54 this evening to consider making a motion to continue the

05:32:58 plan amendment 15-08 and 15-09 to the March 24th evening

05:33:04 hearing of Tampa City Council at 5:30 p.m.

05:33:07 >> So moved.

05:33:08 >> Second.

05:33:09 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Mr. Miranda.




05:33:11 Second by Mr. Cohen.

05:33:12 All in favor are? Opposed?

05:33:14 >> Without further ado, the first presentation on the first

05:33:19 two amendments.

05:33:19 >> Line heart, Planning Commission staff.

05:33:31 Presenting tonight on the future land use map amendment for

05:33:34 15-10-A.

05:33:37 The location of the project is in the central Tampa planning

05:33:41 district.

05:33:42 We are located near the I-4 corridor, the site represented

05:33:47 by this do it.

05:33:48 We are near north 50th street and Columbus Drive.

05:33:52 Both streets are listed in the comprehensive plan as transit

05:33:56 emphasis corridors as well as mixed use corridors, and as

05:33:59 such the comprehensive plan outlines those areas as suitable

05:34:03 for redevelopment and intensification.

05:34:11 This single-family private will you initiated.

05:34:13 It's small scale.

05:34:14 .56 acres in size.

05:34:16 And the future land use category is currently split between

05:34:21 residential 10 and community mixed use 35.

05:34:24 And the request would be to change that to community

05:34:26 commercial 35.

05:34:30 Here is an aerial of the site which is outlined in pink.

05:34:33 The site is currently comprised of three parcels.




05:34:38 On the north side of old Columbus Drive, just west of north

05:34:41 51st street.

05:34:47 They are located adjacent to the Fisher hydraulics business.

05:34:52 And they are actually the property owner of these three

05:34:54 parcels.

05:35:01 I want to mention as well, as Mr. Garcia mentioned

05:35:04 piggybacking on that, there is a companion plan amendment,

05:35:07 15-10 B that I will be discussing as the second agenda item.

05:35:12 When the presently initiated plan amendment came through to

05:35:15 us at the request, we wanted to look at the area

05:35:20 holistically, looking at -- making sure we were looking at

05:35:26 the area holistically and making good planning sense to kind

05:35:31 of reflect the area that's heavily commercial in nature and

05:35:34 also more of a high intensity corridor.

05:35:36 This is a picture of the -- one of the parcels looking north

05:35:40 into the subject site, old Columbus Drive.

05:35:43 Again currently vacant.

05:35:45 This is looking west from north 51st street.

05:35:48 You can see this is the I-4 corridor in the background.

05:35:51 There's a gas station here and the Burger King on the

05:35:54 corner.

05:35:59 This business I mentioned, Fisher hydraulics west of the

05:36:02 subject property adjacent to it.

05:36:05 And this gives some context.

05:36:08 This is the intersection of 50th street, I-4 and old




05:36:11 Columbus Drive.

05:36:13 To kind of give you just an overall view of what this area

05:36:17 is like at the present day.

05:36:21 The adopted future land use map showing those three parcels,

05:36:24 and their current land use designation -- this light orange

05:36:28 color on the north side, that represents the residential 10.

05:36:32 The pink color on the south end, that is the community --

05:36:36 the community mixed use 35.

05:36:38 And then the proposed future land use map outlines the

05:36:42 community commercial designation which is shown here in red.

05:36:45 The next slide goes through the development potential of the

05:36:45 site.

05:36:54 Currently the property in total, combining the three

05:36:56 parcels, they could be considered for 14 dwelling units or

05:36:59 34,346 square feet of nonresidential development.

05:37:04 With the potential land use change there is the potential of

05:37:08 21 dwelling units or 56,627 square feet of nonresidential.

05:37:14 And I should add with this new land use category, the

05:37:17 community commercial 35, the residential could be guided by

05:37:20 either density or floor area ratio, whichever is more

05:37:24 favorable to the development.

05:37:29 As usual the Planning Commission sends out agency summary

05:37:33 for review by the local agencies.

05:37:36 The school board is the only one that came back with a

05:37:39 little bit of concern about capacity.




05:37:42 Blake high school right now does not have capacity but they

05:37:45 do see the capacity within the next five years.

05:37:47 They mentioned 2019, 2024 years.

05:37:54 I am going to go over some of the policies that we outlined

05:37:57 in our report.

05:37:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Didn't you say it was for business

05:38:03 expansion?

05:38:04 >> Yes.

05:38:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So the school board comments would

05:38:06 not --

05:38:07 >> At some point down the road.

05:38:11 But residential.

05:38:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Got it.

05:38:16 The proposed amendment, the Planning Commission staff,

05:38:18 Planning Commission found it consistent with the following

05:38:22 objectives and policies.

05:38:24 Talking about compatibility, making sure developments in the

05:38:29 area is compatible with the character of the area.

05:38:32 Using land resources more efficiently, and also encouraging

05:38:35 in-fill development on vacant underutilized sites.

05:38:40 Another policy talking about developing commercial areas in

05:38:42 the manner that enhances the City of Tampa's character and

05:38:46 ambience.

05:38:48 Encouraging development of commercial uses that are in

05:38:51 character in general look and scale of the community.




05:38:53 And then lastly, providing for infrastructure and support

05:38:56 services for business in order to allow them to thrive and

05:39:01 expand.

05:39:04 That being said, Planning Commission recommends that the

05:39:07 proposed map amendment be found consistent with the goals,

05:39:10 objectives and policies of the City of Tampa comprehensive

05:39:14 plan.

05:39:14 I'm here for any questions if you have any.

05:39:17 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions by council?

05:39:18 Ms. Montelione.

05:39:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Looking at the existing land use map,

05:39:25 there are single-family residences very close to this site.

05:39:32 And there's one parcel that's excluded out that's on the

05:39:37 block.

05:39:38 >> Yes.

05:39:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Are those single-family residences or is

05:39:41 that vacant land?

05:39:43 >> It's vacant land, two parcels just to the east of the

05:39:46 subject site.

05:39:47 These are vacant parcels that are shown as residential 10 in

05:39:52 the comprehensive plan.

05:39:54 And when we discussed this, looking at this area

05:39:57 holistically at a staff level, the Planning Commission staff

05:40:00 talked about using those -- keeping those as residential

05:40:04 still as a buffer to those single-family to the east, and we




05:40:07 also pointed out -- we looked at this area, because it's on

05:40:11 the I-4 corridor at its major intersection, transit emphasis

05:40:16 corridor, mixed use corridor, looking at the intensity

05:40:19 that's here in this area, because this is already community

05:40:21 commercial 35, and looking at that transitioning, because as

05:40:25 you move eastward and south, you have the multifamily, you

05:40:28 have civic uses, the park.

05:40:32 And then transition to single-family.

05:40:34 But right here in this area, we felt that that was more of a

05:40:38 commercial corridor and this reflected that.

05:40:41 >>LISA MONTELIONE: The properties across the street, east

05:40:50 17th -- no, the other way.

05:40:53 I'm sorry.

05:40:54 North.

05:40:55 There you go.

05:40:55 Is that residentially zoned, multifamily?

05:40:58 What is that?

05:40:59 >> There is one home here, and these are vacant.

05:41:04 And this is a dead-end street.

05:41:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

05:41:12 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any other questions from council? Anything

05:41:16 else?

05:41:17 >> No, sir.

05:41:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay, thank you.

05:41:28 Anyone from the audience like to speak on item number 1?




05:41:31 Anyone from the public wish to speak on item number 1?

05:41:34 >> Good evening.

05:41:36 Thank you very much.

05:41:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: You can stand in front.

05:41:44 It will pick you up.

05:41:45 >> Thank you.

05:41:49 1001 Ashley, suite 900, here representing the property

05:41:53 owner, Fisher hydraulics.

05:41:56 And with that said, they own the properties to the east.

05:42:06 The intention is for planned development.

05:42:08 We will be going through a planned development to develop

05:42:10 the site at the business.

05:42:14 At this point, we don't have any design in place.

05:42:16 We don't have, you know, any information on, we don't know

05:42:22 where the retention ponds are going to go.

05:42:24 But what is going around us, especially those residents to

05:42:29 the north, there are two residents to the north at the

05:42:34 corner of the duplex, and next is single-family.

05:42:39 He developed those here.

05:42:40 So they have some concerns.

05:42:43 Of course, with vacant land being developed, in discussion

05:42:47 with them, and explain to them where we were in the process.

05:42:53 For one thing, we are not going to have access to the north.

05:42:56 This is really going to be oriented towards the south, and

05:43:03 that is also going through a comp plan amendment similar to




05:43:06 ours.

05:43:08 So we are looking forward to move on, and I'm here if you

05:43:12 have any questions.

05:43:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions from council?

05:43:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think you answered what I was going to

05:43:21 ask, so thank you.

05:43:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anyone else in the audience to speak on

05:43:24 item number 1?

05:43:25 >> Come to the mike.

05:43:31 >> My name is Dan Dorsch. First, I would like to actually

05:43:42 thank you folks for serving.

05:43:43 I know you are a longstanding member.

05:43:47 I have been here before.

05:43:50 Thank you very much.

05:43:51 I have this property just north of 17th Avenue.

05:43:55 And my concern was -- and I spoke to this fellow at the last

05:44:04 county meeting, and I was concerned about the drainage,

05:44:11 which is one of my concerns.

05:44:12 And the ditches fill up.

05:44:14 And I was worried about in that area, where it's just north

05:44:19 of Brocato's, between Brocato's and Greg -- he's the other

05:44:25 property owner -- the trees absorb a lot of water are in

05:44:28 there.

05:44:28 So it's not like a swamp area but it is a look-standing

05:44:31 area.




05:44:32 That's one of my concerns.

05:44:34 Also, I don't know if it was appropriate tore bring that up

05:44:37 at this point in time but I did want to mention that.

05:44:44 And I appreciate that buffer zone which -- with the two

05:44:51 houses actually opposing ours in the very corner.

05:44:55 We do very much appreciate that.

05:44:57 Greg has concern about the noise.

05:45:00 The other gentleman.

05:45:01 And he opted not to speak today.

05:45:03 And also possibly the lighting in the area.

05:45:07 So our concern would be if this goes through, and like I

05:45:13 said, I don't know what exactly the appropriate time to

05:45:16 bring it up is, but that's our concern.

05:45:18 We were hoping -- and might add, he's been a good neighbor,

05:45:24 but we are hoping to be fence and possibly landscape are if

05:45:29 all this goes through.

05:45:31 And that's all I have to say.

05:45:33 Thank you.

05:45:33 >>HARRY COHEN: I want to just say that based on what the

05:45:43 previous speaker said about they will most likely be coming

05:45:47 back to us with a planned development of some kind, most of

05:45:52 the concerns that you brought up, it would be appropriate to

05:45:55 address at that hearing.

05:45:58 Stormwater, buffering, lighting, landscaping, all of those

05:46:02 issues are things that we can appropriately deal with when




05:46:06 we look at whatever the proposed site plan is.

05:46:08 >> Thank you.

05:46:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: As Mr. Cohen just stated, when that

05:46:15 happens, sometime in the future, then that developer has the

05:46:20 responsibility under the law -- and I am not going to say

05:46:23 that it's alleges perfect because it's not -- to make sure

05:46:26 that any lighting only goes on their property, not into

05:46:29 yours, A.

05:46:30 And B, that whatever drainage they create, they have got to

05:46:34 maintain in their property.

05:46:36 Supposedly.

05:46:37 Not into yours or anyone else's.

05:46:39 >> It's kind of a convoluted area there because of the

05:46:42 interstate.

05:46:43 It's cut off.

05:46:44 >> I understand.

05:46:45 >> And the drainage, because we think it might flow, it

05:46:49 doesn't.

05:46:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You can always go to Brocato's.

05:46:56 Very good place.

05:46:56 >> Devil crabs and that sort.

05:47:00 Thank you.

05:47:01 Thank you so much.

05:47:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: Anybody else wishing to speak on item

05:47:05 number 1?




05:47:06 >> Move to close.

05:47:08 >> Second.

05:47:08 >> I have a motion by Mr. Cohen.

05:47:10 Seconded by Mrs. Montelione.

05:47:12 All in favor say aye.

05:47:13 Opposed?

05:47:15 All right.

05:47:15 We go to item number 2.

05:47:26 Oh, I overlooked the ordinance.

05:47:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move an ordinance being presented for

05:47:32 first reading consideration, an ordinance amending the Tampa

05:47:34 comprehensive plan, future use map for the property

05:47:38 generally located at 5011 and 5021 east 17th Avenue and

05:47:45 5018 east Columbus Drive from residential 10 and community

05:47:50 mixed use 35 to community commercial 35 providing for repeal

05:47:56 of all ordinances in conflict providing an effective date

05:47:59 providing for severability, providing an effective date.

05:48:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Second.

05:48:03 >>THE CLERK: Second reading and adoption will be on March

05:48:05 17th at 9:30 a.m.

05:48:08 >>FRANK REDDICK: Now item number 2.

05:48:09 >> Thank you.

05:48:10 Again, companion plan amendment to the one we just heard,

05:48:15 15-10-B.

05:48:17 It's adjacent to the previous property.




05:48:21 So the location map -- actually it's the same location map,

05:48:25 representing subject property, in the central planning

05:48:27 district near the intersections of north 50th street,

05:48:31 which is here, and then old Columbus Drive, which is there.

05:48:34 The request tonight is publicly initiated, and that is

05:48:37 initiated by Planning Commission staff.

05:48:39 As I mentioned in my previous presentation, when the

05:48:42 privately initiated portion of this companion amendment came

05:48:46 in, we wanted to look at the area holistically and thought

05:48:50 we would look beyond the three parcels submitted, look at

05:48:54 the road alignment that happened about ten years ago, the

05:48:56 parts that war affected by that, and then look at the future

05:48:59 land use categories and see that all fit in together with

05:49:02 the current development pattern and the current land uses in

05:49:05 the area.

05:49:07 The amendment is 2.86 acres and small scale, and residential

05:49:14 20 and community mixed use 35, and they would go to the same

05:49:19 one that I mentioned from the previous amendment, community

05:49:24 commercial 35.

05:49:25 Here is an aerial map of the amendment site.

05:49:27 So this is the previous site here on the north side of old

05:49:30 Columbus Drive.

05:49:31 This amendment is four parcels.

05:49:33 This one on the north side of old Columbus Drive is vacant,

05:49:37 as well as the larger parcel on the south side of old




05:49:40 Columbus Drive.

05:49:41 And then there are two other parcels here.

05:49:43 One houses the Brocato family restaurant and then one to the

05:49:48 south of that houses a single-family residence.

05:49:51 And all four are owned built Brocato family.

05:49:56 A few pictures of the subject property. Here we have the

05:49:57 restaurant.

05:49:58 And then the single-family home that I mentioned before.

05:50:02 And that's looking south from old Columbus Drive into the

05:50:04 subject site.

05:50:06 This is a photo of that larger parcel looking north from

05:50:11 east Columbus Drive into the site. This is the larger one.

05:50:14 The site currently is vacant, also utilized for overflow

05:50:19 parking for the restaurant and you can use this as an

05:50:22 entrance into the restaurant as well.

05:50:24 This is the parcel on the north side of old Columbus so it's

05:50:26 not contiguous with the other three. This is lag north into

05:50:31 the site. This one is vacant.

05:50:32 Also used for overflow parking as well.

05:50:38 Currently the future land use map showing those four

05:50:41 parcels.

05:50:42 In the pink we have community mixed use 35, future land use

05:50:45 designation.

05:50:46 To the south of that is the residential 20.

05:50:48 And again I mentioned that road realignment.




05:50:51 You can see here it's not well represented on that map

05:50:54 because the right-of-way is not showing up.

05:50:56 But you can see the realigned east Columbus Drive on the

05:51:00 south side of the property.

05:51:01 And then you can also see the vacated right-of-way in gray.

05:51:05 You can see how looking at this in a larger context made

05:51:08 more sense than isolating them out into two separate

05:51:14 sessions.

05:51:14 The proposed future land use map showing the red color

05:51:17 representing the community commercial 35 which is a future

05:51:21 land use designation being sought this evening.

05:51:25 And then again talking about the development impact.

05:51:28 Currently, this site in combination, the four parcels can be

05:51:31 considered for 71 dwelling units or 126 -- 126,323 square

05:51:40 feet of nonresidential.

05:51:41 With a proposed designation that will change to 99 dwelling

05:51:44 units or 249,162 square feet of nonresidential.

05:51:48 And again as I mentioned, the residential could be

05:51:51 calculated by either density or floor area ratio in that

05:51:57 plan category.

05:51:58 Because the sites are adjacent beef the T same comments from

05:52:01 the school board, again just a concern with existing

05:52:03 capacity, but residential development.

05:52:08 The next five years.

05:52:12 The proposed amendment is consistent with the following




05:52:14 policies of the comprehensive plan.

05:52:16 Talking about interconnectedness of assets and economic

05:52:20 engines, providing for greater variety of allowable

05:52:24 development patterns and a range of uses.

05:52:28 Making sure scale and massing of new development provides

05:52:32 for appropriate transition within that development.

05:52:35 And transforming major corridors to include a broader mix of

05:52:39 uses.

05:52:42 That being said, Planning Commission recommends that the

05:52:45 proposed map amendment be found consistent with the goals,

05:52:48 objectives and policies of the City of Tampa comprehensive

05:52:52 plan.

05:52:53 And I assume here to answer any questions that you have as

05:52:56 well.

05:52:58 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions?

05:53:04 [Off microphone.]

05:53:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.

05:53:07 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: An ordinance being presented for first

05:53:15 reading consideration, an ordinance amending the Tampa

05:53:17 comprehensive plan, future land use map for the property

05:53:20 generally located at 5019 and 50720 east Columbus Drive,

05:53:24 5021 east Columbus Drive and 2608 north -- 51st street

05:53:30 from residential 20, CMU 35 to community commercial 35, CC

05:53:36 35, providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,

05:53:39 providing for severability, providing an effective date.




05:53:41 >> Second.

05:53:44 >>FRANK REDDICK: [Off microphone.]

05:53:53 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.

05:53:55 Second reading and adoption will be on March 17th at

05:53:57 9:30 a.m.

05:54:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: Item number 3.

05:54:06 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff. This is going to

05:54:08 be the last of the three plan amendments before you this

05:54:10 evening.

05:54:18 This is future land use amendment 15-11.

05:54:21 This is a privately initiated request consisting of

05:54:24 approximately 0.72 acres.

05:54:26 The request is to go from residential 10 to community mixed

05:54:30 use 35.

05:54:33 The general location of the site is in the Westshore

05:54:35 planning district.

05:54:36 As you can see as evidenced by the star over here, it's

05:54:40 right on the north base of Kennedy Boulevard, several blocks

05:54:43 west of the intersection of Kennedy Boulevard and North Dale

05:54:45 Mabry.

05:54:51 Here is a picture of the subject site.

05:54:53 As already explained, giving you some general context, here

05:54:58 is the intersection of Kennedy Boulevard and Dale Mabry.

05:55:01 As one can see, there are a variety of uses, mostly

05:55:05 neighborhood-serving commercial uses and general commercial




05:55:08 uses scattered about Kennedy Boulevard.

05:55:09 As one goes east to west.

05:55:12 And then of course, as one leaves the major arterial of

05:55:16 Kennedy Boulevard, going to the more established

05:55:20 neighborhoods of Swann Estates to the south and North Bon

05:55:23 Air to the north.

05:55:27 The subject site consists of strip center presently.

05:55:35 Which is really reflective of a lot of character in the

05:55:38 surrounding area.

05:55:39 Here is a little bit of a different scale and perspective of

05:55:42 the subject site.

05:55:45 This is to the rear, which is to the north of the site.

05:55:51 As one can see -- let me go back real quick over here.

05:55:55 Here is the concrete masonry wall on the north face of the

05:55:59 property.

05:56:00 And basically what happens, you are transitioning

05:56:06 immediately from commercial, which we know along many of our

05:56:12 commercial corridors, really a drop-off in intensity to

05:56:16 residential.

05:56:17 So that's basically what you are seeing as the north Bon Air

05:56:20 residential single-family detached character.

05:56:22 Here is another picture reflective of -- reflective of that

05:56:26 single-family detached character.

05:56:28 And the site.

05:56:31 Just a couple other pictures of some of these general




05:56:35 commercial uses along Kennedy Boulevard.

05:56:41 Complementary and similar in use and character.

05:56:44 So as far as the land use is concerned, the land use along

05:56:48 Kennedy Boulevard is primarily urban mixed use 60 which is

05:56:51 your second most intensive mixed use category that you have

05:56:56 Bon Air future land use map.

05:56:58 And you can obviously see the drop-off in intensity right

05:57:01 down into residential 10.

05:57:03 North Bon Air is really the character of north Bon Air is

05:57:09 single-family detached residential.

05:57:10 When you cross Lois it changes dramatically.

05:57:14 On the west side you are in Westshore Palms.

05:57:16 Residential 20, residential 35.

05:57:19 Those of up that have seen this historically, we have had

05:57:22 several town home developments and apartment developments

05:57:25 that have been passed by this body over the last decade.

05:57:28 And that has been transitioning to a higher density west of

05:57:32 Lois, north of Kennedy Boulevard.

05:57:35 Of course, Beach Park to the south over here, south of Lois,

05:57:38 which is residential 10, your second lowest residential

05:57:42 category.

05:57:43 Residential 10 to the south over here.

05:57:45 Urban mixed 60, the request, it's an interesting kind of

05:57:49 request.

05:57:49 And with a little bit of problematic that we had to come up




05:57:52 with some creative ideas with what to do on this site.

05:57:56 So what we did is the land use category that we recommended

05:58:00 for them to go to, and the reasoning behind the category is

05:58:03 this.

05:58:05 The structure that I showed you is actually when you look at

05:58:08 the future land use map, split by two lanes.

05:58:10 So when you look at the aerial and the zoning district, you

05:58:15 will see that the building is actually split on zoning

05:58:18 category, which is RS 50 to the north and CG to the south.

05:58:23 The building is actually split that way.

05:58:26 Also the land use category.

05:58:27 So we are looking at over here the conveyance.

05:58:31 The current property owner from what I understand is trying

05:58:34 to sell the property.

05:58:35 And I believe in an abundance of caution they wanted to go

05:58:40 ahead and be sure even though the majority of the site is in

05:58:42 the general commercial zoning district, they wanted to get

05:58:45 that extra protection for them should anything happen to

05:58:47 their property to be able to rebuild it to what it currently

05:58:51 is, which is that strip center.

05:58:54 So that's the general commercial use.

05:58:57 So we are saying, well, to go with the urban mixed use 06 to

05:59:01 the rear is really going to be too high of intensity as far

05:59:03 as encroaching into the residential neighborhood.

05:59:06 There needs to be some transition, because based on some




05:59:08 history, you know, automotive sales tried to do something

05:59:14 similar to this about eight to ten years ago and it whats

05:59:17 not received well to try to go to a 60 north of A street

05:59:24 which is right here. This didn't work out very well at all

05:59:27 as far as trying to encroach into a residential

05:59:29 neighborhood.

05:59:29 These people are very vigilant and really know what's

05:59:32 happening here and are very fearful of commercial

05:59:35 encroachment into their residential neighborhood which is

05:59:37 well established.

05:59:38 That being the case, Planning Commission, in talking with

05:59:42 the applicant's representative, recommended that they go to

05:59:45 the lesser intense category for the northern piece of the

05:59:50 site, which would be community mixed use 35.

05:59:55 Community mixed use 35 does not allow commercial intensive

05:59:58 zoning, which will allow car lots.

06:00:00 So this only allows general commercial use.

06:00:04 Mixed use 60, which is the front part, the southern part of

06:00:07 the site, that already allows commercial intensive but it's

06:00:12 one transition away going north, you are only going to be

06:00:15 able to allow general commercial uses so it's going to

06:00:18 reflect the existing use on the site, which is -- I'm sure

06:00:23 Ms. Grimes will explain that to you in a little more

06:00:25 detail -- is what the intent is of the applicant, is to

06:00:29 probably modify but still retain the use of a commercial




06:00:34 strip on that particular site.

06:00:37 And of course the ample buffering that exists to the north

06:00:41 from the neighborhood, and the concrete masonry wall which

06:00:45 is there.

06:00:47 >>FRANK REDDICK: Do you have a question?

06:00:50 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes, excuse me.

06:00:51 The part that faces Kennedy, is that parking?

06:00:54 And part of the building -- the building splits between the

06:00:59 lavender and the pink.

06:01:00 >> Yes, that's the problem.

06:01:01 I was trying to articulate that.

06:01:03 >> Because the way it looks, it looks like it's divided

06:01:05 exactly --

06:01:07 >>TONY GARCIA: That's exactly correct.

06:01:09 >>YVONNE CAPIN: And the front would be parking and the back

06:01:11 of the building, and the back of it had some space for

06:01:15 parking.

06:01:15 >> Yes, I can show you that picture again.

06:01:18 There is an ample amount of buffering.

06:01:20 In the way of surface parking in the rear.

06:01:23 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I don't need to see it.

06:01:24 I understand.

06:01:26 Thank you.

06:01:28 >>TONY GARCIA: Impacts for the existing maximum potential

06:01:33 intensity and density because it's residential 10 would be 7




06:01:37 dwelling units or nonresidential potential of just under

06:01:39 11,000 square feet.

06:01:41 With the new recommendation for post-maximum potential

06:01:42 intensity and density would be 25 residential units and just

06:01:46 over 62,000 square feet of nonresidential use.

06:01:49 We did not receive any objections from any of the external

06:01:53 reviewing agencies during our process.

06:01:57 We did find it consistent with the plans such as objective

06:02:01 18.6 about developing commercial areas in a manner of the

06:02:05 area's character and ambience, 18.61 which talked about

06:02:09 commercial uses and character and/or scale.

06:02:12 This will be in scale.

06:02:13 It's going to remain what it is right now.

06:02:15 Just more of an adjustment to reflect the actual use that's

06:02:19 on the site.

06:02:21 Objective 21.4 which talks about existing and future land

06:02:25 use development regulations shall be made consistent with

06:02:27 the comprehensive plan and the final one 21.4.1 which talks

06:02:31 about developments shall not exceed the density and

06:02:33 intensity as defined by the land use plan categories.

06:02:37 We presented this to the Planning Commission, and they

06:02:40 unanimously approved staff's recommendation of consistency

06:02:43 to bring this forward for your consideration this evening.

06:02:47 Thank you.

06:02:48 >>FRANK REDDICK: Questions from council?




06:02:51 Anyone in the audience wish to speak on item number 3?

06:02:58 >>GINA GRIMES: Law firm of Hill, Ward, Henderson, 101 East

06:03:01 Kennedy Boulevard.

06:03:02 And I represent an entity that's comprised of several

06:03:06 members of the Brocato family and the Pathis family.

06:03:13 Tony did a great presentation and explained most of the

06:03:15 background to you on this.

06:03:17 I wanted to just show you a couple of things on the Elmo.

06:03:25 As he mentioned, this is the comp plan, R-10 in the back.

06:03:34 At the same time, here is the -- here is the building.

06:03:38 And what's interesting is somehow, the USU, the comp plan

06:03:44 line, follows these lot lines.

06:03:46 I don't know if you can actually see that.

06:03:49 But there's the lot line.

06:03:50 So you can see the comp plan line actually goes through the

06:03:53 middle of the building.

06:03:54 And here is an overlay of the comp plan over the building.

06:03:58 You can kind of see it underneath.

06:04:00 But even more specific is my color drawing here, which shows

06:04:06 you the green UMU, the back is the building in the middle

06:04:10 and then the blue is the REZ 10.

06:04:13 It does go right through the building.

06:04:14 But to complicate it even further, this is the zoning map.

06:04:19 And the zoning map you can see the line is different.

06:04:21 It doesn't go straight across.




06:04:23 It jogs up.

06:04:25 So you have CG over about three quarters of the property and

06:04:28 then you have RS-50 over this back corner of the property.

06:04:33 And then again to show you my color map you can kind of see

06:04:37 the green is the CG and the blue is the RS-50.

06:04:41 So why do we need this comp plan amendment?

06:04:44 Well, the owners want to renovate the existing building.

06:04:47 They actually want to keep that existing building but they

06:04:50 need it rezoned.

06:04:52 They can't rezone it all to CG unless we do a comp plan

06:04:56 amendment for this back half of the property.

06:04:59 That back half.

06:05:01 So we have to change the back half of the property to a

06:05:03 different comp plan category as Tony mentioned.

06:05:06 We are willing to go -- we were going to try to combine it

06:05:10 all under one comp plan category which would have been UMU

06:05:13 60.

06:05:13 But because he was concerned about that intensity, we agreed

06:05:17 to just keep the back half CMU 35.

06:05:30 The staff report recommends consistency and the Planning

06:05:32 Commission voted unanimously to recommend this plan

06:05:36 amendment for approval.

06:05:40 The project -- there are several different provisions in the

06:05:44 comprehensive plan, but I didn't hear Tony mention this when

06:05:47 it was cited in his report, and that's a policy that




06:05:50 encourages especially in these areas like a mixed use

06:05:54 corridor village, they encourage redevelopment of existing

06:05:57 commercial structure to do exactly what we are doing, and

06:05:59 that's enhance the exterior, do additional buffering, do

06:06:03 additional access management, encourage economic viability,

06:06:07 but the bottom line is the site will be brought up to code

06:06:10 and will be much improved over what's existing out there

06:06:12 today.

06:06:13 And we have already been in close contact with the

06:06:17 neighbors.

06:06:18 The neighborhood president, Richard, came to the Planning

06:06:22 Commission hearing.

06:06:23 I actually spoke to him again today.

06:06:25 He wasn't going to come tonight.

06:06:26 They are more interested in the plan development that we

06:06:29 plan to file on this.

06:06:30 But we of course will get into a lot of the specifics.

06:06:33 So Randy Coen, who is working with me on this project, he

06:06:37 and I will go out to the neighborhood in advance of the

06:06:41 hearings and meet with them and address their concerns.

06:06:45 A lot is aesthetics.

06:06:48 Some of it is traffic.

06:06:49 But we did commit to them to meet with them as we get the

06:06:52 planned development, site plan finalized, we'll go out and

06:06:56 meat with them and hopefully they will be able to support




06:06:58 the project and we can come back in front of you with a PD.

06:07:01 So with that we would ask for your approval of this plan

06:07:06 amendment.

06:07:09 >>FRANK REDDICK: None else wish to speak on item number 37?

06:07:15 Anyone else wish to speak on item 3?

06:07:18 >> Move to close.

06:07:19 >> Second.

06:07:20 >> Motion by Mrs. Montelione.

06:07:21 Second by Mrs. Capin.

06:07:22 All in favor of the motion say aye.

06:07:24 Opposed.

06:07:25 Mr. Cohen, would you kindly read it?

06:07:28 >>HARRY COHEN: I move an ordinance being presented for

06:07:30 first reading consideration, an ordinance amending the Tampa

06:07:33 Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Map, for the property

06:07:37 generally located at 4001 West Kennedy Boulevard, from

06:07:41 residential 10, R 10, to community mixed use 35, CMU 35,

06:07:47 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,

06:07:50 providing for severability, providing an effective date.

06:07:54 >>FRANK REDDICK: I have a motion by Mr. Cohen.

06:07:56 Second by Mr. Maniscalco.

06:07:58 All in favor?

06:07:59 Opposed?

06:08:00 Okay.

06:08:00 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.




06:08:03 Second reading and adoption will be on March 17th at

06:08:06 9:30 a.m.

06:08:08 >>FRANK REDDICK: We stand in recess till 6:30.

06:08:10 (Meeting in recess.)

06:30:06 >> Roll call.

06:33:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

06:33:31 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

06:33:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

06:33:38 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

06:33:39 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Here.

06:33:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open number 4 through 6.

06:33:45 >> Motion by Mr. Miranda.

06:33:47 Second by Mr. Cohen.

06:33:50 Anyone going to speak on 4 through 6, pleas stand to be

06:33:54 sworn.

06:33:54 (Oath administered by Clerk)

06:34:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: Item number 4.

06:34:05 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.

06:34:06 This is AB 2-16-08.

06:34:10 The property is located at 1719 and 1723 West Kennedy

06:34:15 Boulevard.

06:34:16 The property is currently CI.

06:34:20 And it is currently approved for alcohol beverage sales for

06:34:24 a restaurant.

06:34:26 The applicant before you wishes to change that to a small




06:34:31 venue, beer wine liquor on premises only.

06:34:35 The square footages stay the same for a total of 5,596

06:34:40 square feet.

06:34:42 In total AB sales area.

06:34:44 There are 79 available parking spaces.

06:34:47 The proposed hours of operation are again staying the same.

06:34:52 It's Sunday through Wednesday, 11 a.m. to 2 a.m.

06:34:56 Thursday, Friday -- Thursday through Saturday, 11 a.m. to 3

06:35:01 a.m.

06:35:03 Previously, they had been approved of the allowance to use

06:35:07 more compact space up to 85.

06:35:13 The request again is for a small venue.

06:35:17 And they are indicating on their site plan that they

06:35:20 continue to operate as a restaurant so the use is not

06:35:24 changing.

06:35:25 Their occupant level which is 186 persons is not changing.

06:35:31 Really, the only change is that they will not be reporting

06:35:36 51-49%.

06:35:38 This is for ducky's restaurant.

06:35:45 I have the aerial that shows the location on Kennedy.

06:35:48 They do have parking back to North "A."

06:35:55 I think most of you are probably familiar.

06:36:04 There is an office building on the same side here.

06:36:08 That's part of the address here.

06:36:10 And this is the view looking across the street on Kennedy.




06:36:17 Staff has no other comments.

06:36:19 There are some minor changes to the site plan just for

06:36:23 corrections that need to be made.

06:36:25 Otherwise, we have no objections.

06:36:28 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions from council?

06:36:31 Petitioner?

06:36:39 >>GINA GRIMES: Hill, Ward, Henderson, 101 East Kennedy

06:36:41 Boulevard.

06:36:42 And I have a presentation book that I believe Mr. Shelby

06:36:49 passed out.

06:36:55 Leave that up on the Elmo.

06:36:57 I represent Ducky's of South Tampa LLC, and with me this

06:37:00 evening is Keith Goan, who is the managing member of that

06:37:02 LLC, and as Gloria mentioned, this was first approved by

06:37:06 everybody on the board except for I believe Councilman

06:37:10 Maniscalco wasn't on the board at the time.

06:37:12 But all of you were on the board back at the time it was

06:37:15 approved back in 2013 and approved for beer wine and liquor

06:37:19 as a restaurant.

06:37:21 It began operation shortly thereafter in December, and as

06:37:24 you may know, it's very popular and very successful.

06:37:28 In fact it's been so successful that during part of last

06:37:31 year, part of the year, they exceeded the 51-49.

06:37:37 And, unfortunately, the state came in and filed an

06:37:44 administrative complaint.




06:37:46 And when Mr. Goan asked them, what can I could to resolve

06:37:51 this problem?

06:37:52 He was basically given two options.

06:37:55 He can either close, or you can get ab state license and

06:37:58 modify the local zoning.

06:38:00 Well, obviously closing wasn't an option for them.

06:38:03 They have invested a lot of money in this property, and it's

06:38:05 a very successful business.

06:38:08 And we didn't realize this.

06:38:11 They give you very little time to comply.

06:38:13 The question was raised, can we modify the menu to see if

06:38:17 that will increase the food sales and therefore decrease the

06:38:20 liquor sales, and you don't get any time.

06:38:26 Pretty stern options.

06:38:27 In these kind of instances, I think what some business

06:38:30 owners do, license holders, is they get engaged in creative

06:38:34 accounting, and adjust the 51-49.

06:38:41 Other members of this restaurant ownership did not want to

06:38:43 do anything like that.

06:38:44 Another option would be to increase maybe the fad prices, to

06:38:48 bring it up a little bit higher.

06:38:49 But actually in reality, he says that that's a risk to do

06:38:53 that.

06:38:54 And also think about it, if the food prices go up, then food

06:38:58 sales may end up going down and it doesn't readjust it.




06:39:02 So here we are before you today asking for you to permit up

06:39:06 to amend the local special use approval, not to change the

06:39:10 uses as a restaurant, but to give us the small venue

06:39:15 designation so that we do not -- are not restricted to the

06:39:18 51-49.

06:39:19 We want to emphasize that nothing about Ducky is changing at

06:39:23 all.

06:39:24 It's going to continue the operations that they have had

06:39:27 since 2013.

06:39:28 None of the conditions on the special use permit are

06:39:31 changing.

06:39:32 In fact, when I talked to Gloria about this and asked what

06:39:35 kind of assurance can I give council that we are not going

06:39:38 to change anything, she said what you could do is include on

06:39:41 the site plan, which I have, there's a note on the site

06:39:44 plan, the only change that we made to the site plan is to

06:39:47 add this note 17, which repeats or reiterates the definition

06:39:53 of a restaurant out of the zoning code.

06:39:55 And it's in your package of materials.

06:39:57 I think it's at tab 3.

06:39:59 Basically what it says is the AB sales area will continue to

06:40:03 operate the restaurant as defined in the city code, and the

06:40:09 principle business is the serving and selling of foods to

06:40:12 customers for immediate consumption on the premises and for

06:40:15 takeout.




06:40:16 Then this is important.

06:40:17 Food shall be continuously ready to be prepared, served and

06:40:20 sold during all business operational hours for restaurant

06:40:25 use.

06:40:25 So even though we won't have the 51-49, we will still commit

06:40:30 to continuing to operate as a restaurant.

06:40:35 And some reasons we think council should approve this

06:40:39 modification is first of all, it does meet all the special

06:40:42 use criteria.

06:40:43 We didn't ask for waivers are from any of the distance

06:40:46 separation requirements for a restaurant, nor do we need any

06:40:49 waivers from the distance separation requirements for a

06:40:52 small venue.

06:40:53 There are no other AB establishments or residential within

06:40:57 250 feet of the AB sales area.

06:41:01 The only waiver was we asked to increase the number of

06:41:05 compact spaces.

06:41:06 The Kennedy Boulevard address is their signature location,

06:41:10 and the good news about the success of this restaurant is it

06:41:16 is awarded or has agreed to be one of the new

06:41:20 concessionaires at the airport, so you know how they are

06:41:23 adding local restaurants.

06:41:24 That will be one of the local restaurants at the airport.

06:41:27 And in addition to that they are going to be a

06:41:29 concessionaire now at the Tropicana Field too as well.




06:41:32 So obviously this is a restaurant that is well known, very

06:41:36 popular, and it's expanding its signature and its venue.

06:41:42 Also, another reason we think it should be supported is TPD

06:41:46 has no objections to it.

06:41:47 There has not been any incidences related to alcohol.

06:41:52 They have operated with no issues with the neighborhood as

06:41:54 well.

06:41:55 And why is that?

06:41:56 Well, we believe one of the reasons is that in the rear,

06:41:59 there is a large parking area.

06:42:02 In fact, we did not need to waive the number of required

06:42:06 spaces.

06:42:07 And this is the parking area in the rear.

06:42:11 And as you can see, it borders North "A."

06:42:14 But what we agreed to do from the outside with the

06:42:17 neighborhood is we have a fence across the rear.

06:42:20 So there is no access out of the parking lot into the

06:42:23 neighborhood.

06:42:23 It comes in off of the alley, and either goes out to Kennedy

06:42:27 or goes down here to Howard.

06:42:29 So it's had little or no impact on the neighborhood.

06:42:32 I spoke to Wes Weisenberger who was here in 2013 on behalf

06:42:39 of the Hyde Park Civic Association.

06:42:40 I did not attend the neighborhood meeting.

06:42:42 He said I didn't need to.




06:42:45 What he told me was that ducky's has been cooperative, it's

06:42:49 an upward class establishment, those are his words, and we

06:42:54 operated it in the manner that we said we would.

06:42:57 So with that, if you have any questions, I'm available.

06:43:01 I don't know if you have any questions for him.

06:43:03 And we would request your support and your approval.

06:43:07 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions from council?

06:43:08 Mr. Suarez.

06:43:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.

06:43:10 Ms. Grimes, I got it now.

06:43:16 It would not be a land use hearing with you if we did not

06:43:20 receive a book, so thank you.

06:43:21 A couple questions.

06:43:23 You mentioned that the state said they did not meet the

06:43:27 requirement of 51-49.

06:43:29 What is it their percentage right now, if you don't mind my

06:43:33 asking?

06:43:33 >> It's between 57 and 58.

06:43:35 >> I'm sorry?

06:43:37 >> 57 and 58.

06:43:38 >> 57% liquor.

06:43:40 >> Alcohol, right.

06:43:43 And Keith is available to answer what he thinks is the

06:43:47 specific reason.

06:43:48 He will give you will some examples about why that happened




06:43:50 just recently.

06:43:52 They operated for 14 and most of 15 without any problems.

06:43:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And Mr. Goan, if you don't maned coming up

06:44:00 here and just real quick, state your name for the record and

06:44:03 I'll ask you act couple questions.

06:44:04 >> Keith Goan with Ducky's.

06:44:07 >> So you are at 57%, and that happens sometimes.

06:44:12 When you are running a restaurant, you know, and it becomes

06:44:15 popular, a lot of times the after-hours crowd may not be

06:44:20 eating and drinking only, especially since you have the

06:44:24 bowling, you might have a lot more people that are there

06:44:26 playing duck pin bowling and watching games.

06:44:30 I'm not sure that anybody has a reason or explanation as to

06:44:33 how these things sometime happen.

06:44:35 But you said 13 and 14, you all were within the 51-49 range?

06:44:40 >> Yes, sir.

06:44:40 When we first opened -- 13 we were only open for the month

06:44:43 of December.

06:44:44 And that month was kind of quirky because we were giving out

06:44:47 a lot of stuff and food and giving away a lot of alcohol.

06:44:51 But in 14 we were in compliance.

06:44:53 And then in 15, at the beginning of 15, I was personally

06:44:55 running some self-audits through our microsystem and we were

06:44:59 in compliance.

06:44:59 And then at one point that we weren't, we were falling out




06:45:03 of compliance, and we anticipated something how we were

06:45:07 going to fix that.

06:45:08 Weight didn't anticipate what ended up happening meaning we

06:45:11 ended up with a full audit by the state.

06:45:14 And one of the best examples I can use -- and when Ms.

06:45:19 Grimes said explain, why our food is competitively priced.

06:45:24 So I use one of the best examples.

06:45:26 If I come in and get a hamburger, one ever our ground cheese

06:45:30 burgers that we use, chuck, biscuit, we charge $12 for it.

06:45:35 If I get two craft beers I'm in violation because the beers

06:45:39 are $8.

06:45:40 So it's $16 and $12 for the burger.

06:45:43 I have now violated the 51-49.

06:45:45 It's an example that makes sense as to how this is

06:45:47 happening.

06:45:48 And then there's a bunch of different ways we can try to

06:45:50 correct it.

06:45:51 And some don't make any business sense.

06:45:53 And really what I wanted to let council members understand

06:45:56 is that we are a restaurant.

06:45:58 We are not a bar.

06:46:00 We are not a nightclub.

06:46:01 And that's of what we want to continue to be and we have an

06:46:05 executive chef that we pay a lot of money to on staff that

06:46:09 we want to make sure we stay a restaurant.




06:46:12 >> Did the insurance audit that is required now, or when you

06:46:15 first started out, did we have that in place?

06:46:19 This would have been either your first year, I believe would

06:46:21 have been the first year you would have been able to --

06:46:23 >> Yes.

06:46:25 This past year would have been the first audit.

06:46:28 Ms. Grimes --

06:46:30 >>GINA GRIMES: I filed and said we were coming in front of

06:46:33 you.

06:46:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Do you know what that number was?

06:46:36 Because they are pretty meticulous when they do those kind

06:46:40 of audits.

06:46:41 >> I think it wags actually 56.9 to 58.1, because when the

06:46:45 insurance comes in and does the audit, they do it based on

06:46:48 my system, my summary reports.

06:46:51 What the state does is they come and they take -- they want

06:46:54 actual receipts, but they really only take a small sample.

06:46:58 And I don't know quite frankly if the audit was completed

06:47:02 because I was very forthright with them when they called me

06:47:05 because I assumed that like everything else that if you were

06:47:08 in violation you would have time to cure.

06:47:09 And when I was told you can close, I thoughts was kind of

06:47:12 comical.

06:47:13 >> When were you first cited for the violation?

06:47:16 >> November.




06:47:17 >> November.

06:47:17 And then when did they say you had to comply?

06:47:19 >> Well, what happened --

06:47:21 >> Within six months?

06:47:22 >> Well, no, what happened, we actually are in the process

06:47:25 of seeking an administrative review if this doesn't -- this

06:47:31 was obviously -- but the real issue is even under

06:47:34 administrative reviews because they don't give you time to

06:47:37 cure, we already know that the numbers are how they are.

06:47:40 We aren't going to engage in anything to try to say that we

06:47:42 are in compliance.

06:47:44 We know we are in violation.

06:47:45 So the question would be then asking -- as Ms. Grimes can

06:47:49 tell you, we researched this to find out if they would allow

06:47:52 us a time to cure.

06:47:53 And that is a unique sanction as it relates to my research

06:47:58 pursuant to the sanctions that are levied. If they find

06:48:01 that we are in violation, which we already admittedly said

06:48:06 that, they are going to give us 15 days to relinquish your

06:48:09 license which means close.

06:48:11 So 65 full time employees.

06:48:13 We are trying to do the right thing here.

06:48:16 As council knows by now, the most of us are from Tampa, and

06:48:21 we are just trying to keep the brand going.

06:48:24 Again, we do all these festivals around town.




06:48:26 We never go with cocktails, I mean, we are a restaurant.

06:48:31 We want to stay that way.

06:48:32 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.

06:48:34 Ms. Moreda, I have a quick question for you.

06:48:38 The note that Ms. Grimes has mentioned about putting on some

06:48:41 site plan, is that enforceable in terms of any issue that

06:48:46 might come up later on?

06:48:48 I mean --

06:48:49 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Well, the approved small venue is going to

06:48:52 be for a restaurant use.

06:48:54 If that changes in the future, they would have to come back

06:48:57 in for any alcohol approval.

06:48:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Are you comfortable with the wording of it,

06:49:02 the one portion of it that I was just curious about, is

06:49:08 prepare food, not preparing food, and I just was curious

06:49:12 about that.

06:49:12 I believe seemed like a little bit of wiggle room.

06:49:15 >> That's a definition straight out of the zoning code.

06:49:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I wanted to make sure that's what it was,

06:49:20 not knowing if it was their verbiage or our verbiage.

06:49:26 >> No, I actually included -- the city code definition has

06:49:35 the same language.

06:49:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I want to make sure because I keep -- I just

06:49:45 want to make sure that that's what it was.

06:49:46 >> That gives me some comfort.




06:49:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I'm very happy that you put that on there,

06:49:54 because really the spirit of what the insurance audit was

06:49:57 supposed to do was to make sure that we did not get in these

06:50:00 type of situations and that folks are not trying to become

06:50:03 bars.

06:50:03 I'm not saying that your client is.

06:50:05 >> Right.

06:50:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: But how do you solve that?

06:50:09 I think you found a fairly elegant way of putting that and I

06:50:13 appreciate you going and being proactive about that.

06:50:16 >>GINA GRIMES: Thank you.

06:50:19 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Mr. Goan, the example that you gave, the

06:50:22 hamburger and the two beers, I made that argument two years

06:50:25 about this 51-49.

06:50:28 The other day I went to a restaurant.

06:50:29 I had a hamburger and two glasses of champagne.

06:50:35 It is what it is.

06:50:37 It was $16 each.

06:50:39 The hamburger -- there's no way.

06:50:42 I looked at it and I said, this is exactly what happens.

06:50:44 So we try to keep the 51 oat 49.

06:50:47 And if you are serving alcohol, and exactly wag you said

06:50:50 happened is the example that I gave two years ago of why --

06:50:55 it's almost absurd.

06:50:56 >> Very difficult.




06:50:57 >> It's very, very difficult for a restaurant to do the meet

06:51:03 that requirement.

06:51:04 Of course, I was in St. Pete so I don't know what --

06:51:08 (Laughter).

06:51:08 >> We understand the reason for it and the basis for that as

06:51:11 far as license.

06:51:12 A lot of times it saves the owner of the establishment from

06:51:15 purchasing very expensive license, which we already

06:51:20 purchased the license, by the way.

06:51:22 I own the license now to be placed there if all is well and

06:51:25 we are allowed to be do this because it's $125,000

06:51:28 investment for that license.

06:51:30 You know, something that obviously we weren't anticipating

06:51:34 this year.

06:51:36 But we had the opportunity to buy it.

06:51:38 So that's one of the things, you know, we are a restaurant.

06:51:42 And that's all I wanted to make sure everybody understands

06:51:44 it.

06:51:47 >>YVONNE CAPIN: So were so many others.

06:51:49 But still they have that issue, and they are grappling with

06:51:51 that reporting.

06:51:54 That is a fact out there that is happening to many business

06:51:57 people.

06:51:58 And we want to be business friendly.

06:52:00 So I just wanted to set an example which is exactly the




06:52:05 argument that I made two years ago.

06:52:06 Thank you for bringing your example forward.

06:52:08 >> Thank you.

06:52:09 I appreciate it.

06:52:10 Any other questions?

06:52:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: No, that's it.

06:52:14 I believe that's it.

06:52:16 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right, anyone else wish to speak on

06:52:18 item number 4?

06:52:20 Got a motion from Mr. Miranda, second by Mr. Maniscalco.

06:52:24 All in favor say aye.

06:52:26 Opposed?

06:52:27 All right.

06:52:29 Ms. Capin, would you read item number 4?

06:52:35 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

06:52:35 Thank you, Mr. Chair, with pleasure.

06:52:37 Ordinance being presented for first reading consideration,

06:52:39 an ordinance approving a special use permit S-2 for

06:52:43 alcoholic beverage sales, small venue, consumption on

06:52:46 premises only, and making lawful the sale of beverages

06:52:48 regardless of alcoholic content, beer, wine and liquor, on

06:52:52 that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 1719 and

06:52:56 1723 West Kennedy Boulevard, Tampa, Florida and 1712 and

06:53:02 1714 North "A" Street, Tampa, Florida, as more particularly

06:53:06 described in section 2, that all ordinances or parts of




06:53:10 ordinances in conflict are repealed, providing an effective

06:53:13 date.

06:53:13 >> Second.

06:53:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: I have a motion from Mrs. Capin, seconded

06:53:18 by Mr. Maniscalco.

06:53:19 All in favor of the motion say aye.

06:53:20 Opposed?

06:53:21 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.

06:53:24 Second reading and adoption will be on March 17th at

06:53:26 9:30 a.m.

06:53:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.

06:53:30 Item number 5.

06:53:33 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.

06:53:34 This is AB 2-16-09.

06:53:40 If property is zoned PD.

06:53:43 It is the Westshore plaza. The address 253 Westshore Plaza.

06:53:51 And this is going to be in space C-39.

06:53:54 The proposal is for a small venue, beer, wine, liquor on

06:54:00 premises consumption only, inside totals 2,733 square feet,

06:54:07 outside is 185 square feet for a total of 2,918 square feet.

06:54:15 There is over 5,000 parking spaces at the mall.

06:54:19 And the proposed hours of operation for this use will be

06:54:23 from 12 p.m. to 3 a.m., 7 days a week.

06:54:31 There are no waivers requested as part of this petition.

06:54:35 The request is for a restaurant.




06:54:37 It's for an Irish 31.

06:54:41 The occupant load of the restaurant is going to be

06:54:45 approximately 130.

06:54:47 >> You are saying that the hours to 3 a.m. on here.

06:54:59 AB sales hours are complying with chapter 14.

06:55:02 >>GLORIA MOREDA: The site plan indicates their hours of

06:55:04 operation will be 12 p.m. to 3 a.m.

06:55:14 I think the agenda was wrong.

06:55:22 The Westshore mall, I think everybody knows where Westshore

06:55:25 is.

06:55:25 They are actually going in right next to where PF Chang is,

06:55:31 and right next door to it.

06:55:36 There are some minor changes to the site plan that need to

06:55:40 be made.

06:55:41 I want to emphasize this proposed use is for a restaurant as

06:55:44 well as defined in the zoning code.

06:55:48 And they are satisfying all the distance separations.

06:55:54 Staff has no objections.

06:55:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions from council?

06:55:58 All right, petitioner.

06:55:59 >> Grace Yang, Gray Robinson, 401 East Jackson Street, suite

06:56:10 2700 Tampa, Florida.

06:56:12 It's my pleasure to be here tonight open behalf of the

06:56:14 applicant.

06:56:16 31 Westshore and I have been sworn.




06:56:18 With me in the audience is Jay Mize of Irish 31.

06:56:23 As Ms. Moreda said this is at the Westshore plaza mall, it

06:56:27 is no space next to PF Chang.

06:56:29 It used to be a pink Berry restaurant, pink Berry yogurt and

06:56:35 okay jewelers space.

06:56:36 That Irish 31 is trying to build out at the mall.

06:56:40 On the site plan, you do see that we had originally said 3

06:56:47 a.m.

06:56:48 However, I did want to tell council that in addition to the

06:56:51 modifications between first and second reading that are

06:56:53 listed in the staff report, we are willing and won agree to

06:56:57 changing those hours of operation to reflect that they are

06:57:01 compliant with chapter 14.

06:57:03 Instead of listing the noon to 3 a.m. hours.

06:57:08 So I did want to mention that.

06:57:09 I did discuss it with Mr. Mize, and we are agreeable to

06:57:12 changing that to be compliant with chapter 14.

06:57:16 At the mall, no distance separation waiver is required, and

06:57:20 it's consistent with the code.

06:57:22 We would be glad to answer any additional questions you

06:57:24 might have.

06:57:26 >>FRANK REDDICK: Any questions from council?

06:57:29 Anyone in the audience wish to speak on item number 5?

06:57:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.

06:57:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: Got a motion from Mr. Miranda.




06:57:36 Second by Mr. Maniscalco.

06:57:38 All in favor of the motion say yay.

06:57:39 Opposed?

06:57:41 Mr. Suarez, would you be kind enough to read number 5?

06:57:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I present an ordinance for first reading

06:57:47 consideration, an ordinance approving a special using permit

06:57:49 S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales, special restaurant,

06:57:54 consumption on premises only, and making lawful the sale of

06:57:56 beverages regardless of alcoholic content, beer wine and

06:58:00 liquor, on that certain lot, plot or tract of land located

06:58:03 at 253 Westshore plaza, space number C-39 Tampa, Florida as

06:58:08 more particularly described in section 2, that all

06:58:11 ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict are repealed,

06:58:14 providing an effective date.

06:58:14 >> Second.

06:58:15 >>FRANK REDDICK: Got a motion from Mr. Suarez --

06:58:18 >> And including the changes mentioned by the applicant

06:58:21 between first and second reading.

06:58:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: Got a motion from Mr. Suarez.

06:58:25 Seconded by Mr. Maniscalco.

06:58:28 Discussion on the motion?

06:58:28 All in favor of the motion say aye.

06:58:30 Opposed?

06:58:32 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Montelione absent at vote.

06:58:35 Second reading and adoption will be on March 17th at




06:58:38 9:30 a.m.

06:58:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.

06:58:40 We go to the final item of the night.

06:58:42 Item number 6.

06:58:45 >>GLORIA MOREDA: This is application AB 2-15-19 it involves

06:58:49 Tampa Theatre which is address at 707 through 711 North

06:58:55 Franklin Street and 702 North Florida Avenue.

06:58:59 The property is in the central business district 1.

06:59:06 The proposal is for large venue beer, wine, liquor on

06:59:09 premises consumption.

06:59:10 The proposal is for inside area of 31,754 square feet.

06:59:18 There is a 611 square feet of outside area for a total

06:59:22 32,365 square feet.

06:59:28 There are no off-street parking spaces at Tampa Theatre.

06:59:33 The application is saying that they will be saying with

06:59:37 consistent with chapter 14 hours of operation.

06:59:40 They are asking for a reduction of distance separations from

06:59:45 250 feet to 190 for residential uses, and the 250 seat to 1

06:59:55 foot for other AB establishments.

07:00:02 I think most of you are familiar with Tampa Theatre.

07:00:07 Located on Franklin Street.

07:00:13 I have the photograph showing the front of the theater and

07:00:17 it does extend all the way to Polk street.

07:00:20 When I went out there, they were doing renovations to it.

07:00:30 Staff is finding this request inconsistent.




07:00:33 There are some minor changes to the site plan that need to

07:00:38 happen if council is inclined to approve it.

07:00:44 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Mr. Chair, I should disclose that hi serve

07:00:47 on the board of the Tampa Theatre.

07:00:54 But I have in a conflict in voting.

07:00:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is it clearly disclosed that you have no

07:01:05 financial interest in this?

07:01:07 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Right.

07:01:07 Thank you.

07:01:07 >>MARK BENTLEY: 201 North Franklin Street.

07:01:14 I represent the Tampa Theater who is operated by the Tampa

07:01:17 Theatre Foundation. With me in attendance tonight is the

07:01:21 foundation CEO Mr. John Bell.

07:01:25 I think a lot of you know John.

07:01:27 Currently the theater has a 2(COP-X) from City Council in

07:01:32 1987.

07:01:33 However, it's very limited with respect to the type of sales

07:01:38 in the area where alcoholic beverages can be sold.

07:01:41 So it's 2(COP), and primarily the lobby area.

07:01:47 So what the theater is seeking tonight is, number one, the

07:01:51 ability to add a liquor component, and secondarily, to

07:01:54 increase the area between the theater where you can sell and

07:01:58 consume.

07:01:59 The way your wet zoning ordinance is applied is not only

07:02:05 where you sell, it's where you consume.




07:02:06 So just you buy something in one place, I guess you call it

07:02:12 wet zoning in that other area.

07:02:14 So that's what this is about.

07:02:16 The theater hosts about 50 special events per year besides

07:02:22 the typical film screening.

07:02:25 These are corporate events, weddings, receptions, parties,

07:02:28 businesses rented out for meetings, private film screenings,

07:02:34 et cetera.

07:02:34 A lot of these customers request the full range of alcoholic

07:02:39 beverages, which obviously they can't fulfill.

07:02:42 So consequently, the theater is missing a lot of existing

07:02:47 opportunity in allowing the sale of beer, wine and liquor in

07:02:51 the entire theater block actually increase the opportunity

07:02:54 as well, which is very important because it's a nonprofit

07:02:58 and relies solely on grants and charitable donation.

07:03:01 So every dollar really counts.

07:03:06 I would like to address two issues which caused the staff to

07:03:11 find the plan inconsistent, besides a couple of little

07:03:15 typographical errors which we'll clean up in the next two

07:03:18 weeks.

07:03:19 Number one, the separation requirement.

07:03:22 First of all with respect to other ABs, obviously the

07:03:25 public policy is to prevent undue concentration of

07:03:29 establishments selling alcohol to prevent adverse secondary

07:03:33 impact on a community.




07:03:35 In this case there are only two other ABs.

07:03:37 One is the Si-am Restaurant a foot away, and that's an "R."

07:03:42 And then the second is The Hub.

07:03:44 That's 42 feet away.

07:03:46 And we are pretty compatible with the hub.

07:03:49 We aren't going to have any adverse impact on the hub.

07:03:52 Also bear in mind of that we actually beat those two

07:03:57 establishments to the punch.

07:03:58 Our wet zoning was in 87 and they came after us.

07:04:01 We are just kind of modifying the wet zoning.

07:04:03 So we don't think there's any problem there.

07:04:06 The second is separation from residential to the extent of

07:04:09 any residential at 250 feet.

07:04:12 That would be the Element high rise down the street and

07:04:18 clearly we aren't going to have any adverse impact on the

07:04:21 element.

07:04:22 The way we are operating now we are going to continue to

07:04:24 operate whether we have 50, 60 events or whether we have a

07:04:27 liquor component in the theater.

07:04:30 The second issue was the noise attenuation.

07:04:33 There's a requirement in your code that if you are a large

07:04:36 venue that you have some noise attenuation plan in place.

07:04:41 And I kind of lived through that and really the intent was

07:04:45 to get some of these bars in Ybor City under control, Mr.

07:04:49 Miranda, in the 90s.




07:04:51 That's you've the enhanced security and noise attenuation

07:04:54 plan.

07:04:55 It really wasn't contemplated that you apply it to like an

07:04:58 assembly venue or a theater situation.

07:05:01 So we put on the plan that we would comply with the city

07:05:05 noise ordinance, even though that's redundant.

07:05:08 It goes without saying.

07:05:09 So we don't think there's any issue with respect to noise.

07:05:14 And then secondarily, there are three locations within the

07:05:18 geographic boundaries of the city.

07:05:20 There are a lot of enhanced notification limitations that

07:05:23 would be downtown, Channelside, Ybor City.

07:05:27 And you all will hear probably from Channelside.

07:05:31 Buff in our situation until 3 in the morning, that generates

07:05:39 85 DBA, 87 at the property line, versus in the city which is

07:05:44 55 DBA, 65 DBC.

07:05:46 So without getting too technical, in downtown, you are

07:05:50 allowed to generate approximately six times more noise than

07:05:53 you would in another area of the city.

07:05:56 So we don't think noise is an issue with respect to the

07:05:59 theater, especially when all the activities are

07:06:01 self-contained.

07:06:04 So that being said, we respectfully request the council's

07:06:08 approval of our application tonight.

07:06:10 And if you have any questions, certainly I'll try or Mr.




07:06:14 Bell is available to answer any questions.

07:06:17 >> Any questions from council?

07:06:19 Anyone in the public wish to speak on item number 6?

07:06:23 >> Move to close.

07:06:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Mr. Miranda.

07:06:25 Seconded by Mr. Maniscalco.

07:06:27 All in favor of that motion?

07:06:28 Opposed?

07:06:29 All right.

07:06:30 Mr. Miranda.

07:06:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, before I read the

07:06:33 ordinance, I just want to thank, 38 years ago Mayor Poe,

07:06:37 councilmember Lee Duncan, councilmember Cathy Barger,

07:06:41 councilmember Charlie Spicola, allowed this to happen, and

07:06:43 that's why Mr. Bell, with the great job he's doing along

07:06:47 with his board, has kept this beautiful gem in the City of

07:06:52 Tampa operating.

07:06:53 We want to thank all of you.

07:06:55 With that in mind, an ordinance for consideration on file AB

07:06:58 2-15-19, an ordinance repealing ordinance number 7929-A

07:07:03 approving a special use permit S-U for alcoholic beverage

07:07:07 sales large venue, consumption on premises only, and making

07:07:10 lawful the sale of beverages regardless of alcoholic content

07:07:13 beer wine and liquor on that certain lot, plot or tract of

07:07:17 land at 707-711 North Franklin Street and 702 North Florida




07:07:21 Avenue Tampa, Florida, more particularly described in

07:07:24 section 3 from all ordinances or parts of ordinances in

07:07:27 conflicts are repealed, providing an effective date.

07:07:28 >> Second.

07:07:30 >>FRANK REDDICK: Got a motion from Mr. Miranda.

07:07:32 Seconded by Mr. Suarez.

07:07:33 All in favor of the motion say aye.

07:07:35 Opposed?

07:07:36 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.

07:07:39 Second reading and adoption will be on March 17th at

07:07:41 9:30 a.m.

07:07:42 >>MARK BENTLEY: Thank you very much.

07:07:47 >>FRANK REDDICK: All right.

07:07:49 Ms. Montelione, any information?

07:07:51 New business?

07:07:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No, sir.

07:07:54 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Maniscalco.

07:07:55 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: No, sir.

07:07:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Cohen?

07:07:58 >>HARRY COHEN: Just one item, Mr. Chair.

07:08:00 This morning, we had a ceremonial activity scheduled.

07:08:04 It was item number 2.

07:08:06 And I would like to make a motion that we reschedule that

07:08:09 for 9:00 a.m. on March 24th.

07:08:12 >> Second.




07:08:13 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion by Mr. Cohen.

07:08:19 Seconded by Mr. Miranda.

07:08:20 All in favor?

07:08:21 Opposed?

07:08:24 Mrs. Capin.

07:08:25 >>YVONNE CAPIN: (Off microphone.) Yes, I do. We have El

07:08:26 Galeon, which is docked today.

07:08:32 It should have arrived today, and tomorrow there is a

07:08:34 ceremony welcoming this tall ship, which is a replica of a

07:08:39 16th century El Galeon, and it's a one-to-one replica.

07:08:46 The Spanish galeons that for three century linked Asia,

07:08:50 America, and Spain.

07:08:51 They ruled the navigation through the oceans of the world

07:08:55 and became the only commercial cultural vehicle between

07:08:58 continents, being responsible for the first worldwide

07:09:01 globalization.

07:09:02 And by that, the Spanish galeons were bought by other

07:09:08 countries and by private.

07:09:10 And Magellan sailed the first around the world circumference

07:09:17 in using one of these tall ships.

07:09:19 And that's when he discovered the straits that were named

07:09:23 after him, and also the Philippines.

07:09:26 This galeon will be docked at Curtis Hixon park as of today

07:09:31 through May -- March 6th.

07:09:36 So if anyone wants to visit it.




07:09:39 They seem to be very beautiful.

07:09:40 So the motion is to present a commendation to the crew and

07:09:47 captain tomorrow at the event.

07:09:48 >> Second.

07:09:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: Motion from Ms. Capin, seconded by Mr.

07:09:54 Maniscalco.

07:09:54 All in favor say aye.

07:09:56 Opposed?

07:09:57 All right.

07:09:58 Thank you.

07:10:10 Mr. Suarez.

07:10:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: They used to have guns on it, too.

07:10:16 No, sir, I have no new business.

07:10:18 Thank you.

07:10:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: None, sir.

07:10:20 >> Motion to receive and file.

07:10:23 >> So moved.

07:10:24 >> Motion by Mr. Miranda.

07:10:26 Seconded by Mr. Maniscalco.

07:10:28 Opposed?

07:10:29 All right.

07:10:29 We stand adjourned.

07:10:32



DISCLAIMER:




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