TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, June 23, 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.
05:34:02 [Banging Gavel]
05:34:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Tampa City Council is now called to order.
05:34:06 Roll call please.
05:34:07 [Roll Call]
05:34:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
05:34:10 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
05:34:13 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
05:34:14 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Here.
05:34:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
05:34:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay, we're starting with item number one.
05:34:19 If I could have the staff come on up.
05:34:23 Mr. Garcia that's right.
05:34:28 We need to open items one and two.
05:34:30 Got a motion from Mr. Miranda, second from Mr. Reddick.
05:34:33 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
05:34:35 aye.
05:34:46 >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of Council.
05:34:48 Tony Garcia, Planning Commission staff.
05:34:50 I would be presenting to you this evening one text
05:34:55 amendment that will require as your only action this
05:34:58 evening to consider transmittal of this for state and
05:35:01 regional review.
05:35:02 This was not an adoption hearing.
05:35:03 The adoption hearing has yet to be set before this body.
05:35:08 I will ask that the Council consider making a motion at
05:35:14 the conclusion of your motion, or your action on this
05:35:19 transmittal to set a hearing date.
05:35:21 I've already checked with your counsel and I have
05:35:24 requested a date of August 25th at 5:30 for that if it
05:35:33 would be your pleasure.
05:35:34 And you may take into consideration an action at the
05:35:37 conclusion of your action this evening on this particular
05:35:40 item.
05:35:40 This is Tampa comprehensive plan future land use text
05:35:43 amendment 1602.
05:35:45 How do I zoom out?
05:36:08 Okay.
05:36:20 So let me give you general context.
05:36:22 This text amendment consists an objective and series of
05:36:25 policy that is were developed approximately a decade ago.
05:36:28 Text amendment is a part of the February 2016 cycle.
05:36:32 This site that we're talking about is located in the
05:36:34 South Tampa planning district.
05:36:36 This is again policy language that's specific to
05:36:39 Rattlesnake Point.
05:36:40 General location as you can see is evidenced by the star
05:36:43 on the map here.
05:36:44 This is located just south of the intersection of
05:36:48 Westshore and Gandy Boulevard.
05:36:49 The purpose and intent of the text amendment is to remove
05:36:55 the current prohibition on residential development while
05:36:58 heavy industrial uses are still present.
05:37:01 Also the removal of the requirement for a transition plan
05:37:05 to be developed prior to any residential development
05:37:07 being permitted.
05:37:08 To give you some history on wrath the snake point.
05:37:14 This is Rattlesnake Point on the left in 1941 and
05:37:17 rattlesnake in 2015.
05:37:19 Can you see there was quite a bit of dredging that
05:37:21 occurred within the 1940 and 2015 to create what's
05:37:24 currently identified as Rattlesnake Point.
05:37:26 Rattlesnake Point was primarily all designated heavy
05:37:30 industrial.
05:37:32 Going to go ahead and show you a future land use map as
05:37:34 it exists today.
05:37:35 So all this land here that is CMU-35, was designated
05:37:41 CMU-35 around that 2007-2008 timeframe as a result of the
05:37:46 agreement that was put together in the form of that
05:37:48 objective policies that are before you this evening.
05:37:51 So do you have a land use designation on the tip of this
05:37:55 point of CMU 35.
05:37:57 However, those policies prohibit CMU 35 uses that are
05:38:03 specific to the category itself as a lot of these uses
05:38:07 still are exhibiting heavy industrial or light industrial
05:38:10 uses.
05:38:10 The black color directly to the right of the CMU 35 is
05:38:14 heavy industrial and that basically was the character of
05:38:16 the entire point prior to the designation in 2007, 2008.
05:38:27 >>HARRY COHEN: I just want to clarify what you just said.
05:38:30 So it's CMU 35 but certain of the uses that are permitted
05:38:33 under that zoning classification are prohibited because
05:38:37 of what's next to it?
05:38:40 >> Well, that's not exactly what I said.
05:38:42 >>HARRY COHEN: Then clarify the difference between what
05:38:44 you said and way just said.
05:38:46 >> There's a series -- there's one objective.
05:38:49 My pleasure.
05:38:50 There's one objective in a series of policy that is
05:38:53 basically stipulate that certain conditions must be met
05:38:57 before the lands that have been designated CMU 35 can
05:39:02 actually request CMU 35 uses, specifically residential
05:39:05 uses because as you all know, in heavy industrial
05:39:08 residential is prohibited.
05:39:10 There's still existing heavy industrial uses on some of
05:39:13 these sites, warehousing, ship building, things of that
05:39:17 nature.
05:39:17 So the policies, if you read the policies, it says until
05:39:20 all these heavy industrial uses are gone or unless, until
05:39:24 there's a development of a transition plan.
05:39:27 These lands that are designated CMU-35 will not be able
05:39:31 to specifically go to those specific uses until all these
05:39:35 other things have occurred.
05:39:36 That's outlined within those object -- within those
05:39:40 policies under that objective.
05:39:42 So that's the long and short of it.
05:39:43 Is that clear for you, sir?
05:39:45 >>HARRY COHEN: A little bit.
05:39:46 But I guess -- I'm not really understanding who is
05:39:51 supposed to enforce all this.
05:39:53 I guess it's us.
05:39:56 >> It refuses to a transition plan which was supposed to
05:39:59 be developed by the city which to this date has not been
05:40:03 developed.
05:40:03 It refuses to that in one of the policies.
05:40:06 But if you'll read -- there's a hot of things that have
05:40:10 occurred in the decade.
05:40:11 I'll probably get to that.
05:40:13 >>HARRY COHEN: I'll go ahead and reserve any more
05:40:15 questions till you're finished.
05:40:16 >> I also wanted to give you a little bit of history of
05:40:19 this area.
05:40:19 This was known as the Gandy gateway corridor a couple
05:40:22 decades ago.
05:40:23 Most of the land uses that you see there with the
05:40:27 exception of what's south of, of this particular street,
05:40:32 okay, everything south of here used to be heavy
05:40:35 industrial.
05:40:35 This is where the west being house site used to be.
05:40:38 Now it's the Westshore golf and country club.
05:40:40 This was changed around 2002, 2001 so this was changed to
05:40:44 CMU 35 and subsequently another companion amendment aloud
05:40:48 CMU 35 from heavy industrial to occur over here also
05:40:51 because all this land fronts Westshore Boulevard.
05:40:54 That's its primary access point.
05:40:56 All the land to the north over here, only thing that had
05:40:59 been done over this, there's one small piece, one small
05:41:03 tiny piece over here that was changed to urban to
05:41:07 coincide with all this property which already had land
05:41:11 use designation of urban mixed use.
05:41:15 Pretty much all the activity that has occurred as far as
05:41:19 future land use changes on this particular parcel.
05:41:21 There has not been any future land use change on this
05:41:25 site west of Westshore since the Rattlesnake Point
05:41:30 amendment was done.
05:41:31 There have been no other map amendments to the west of
05:41:34 Westshore.
05:41:34 This is just an existing land use map to show you what
05:41:43 the existing uses are.
05:41:45 There's a lot of light industrial and heavy industrial
05:41:47 uses on Rattlesnake Point.
05:41:49 As far as the agency review, the City of Tampa did have
05:41:55 numerous objections to the proposed text language because
05:41:58 I'm sure as you see you have representation here from the
05:42:01 City of Tampa and they will be making their case to you
05:42:04 this evening regarding those objections.
05:42:06 Regarding impacts to properties that are not part of this
05:42:09 application, the creation of potentially dangerous
05:42:11 conditions, the removal of the requirement for the
05:42:13 transition plan and changes to transportation mitigation
05:42:17 procedures.
05:42:17 As far as the planning issues, the particular site in
05:42:22 question is one singular property that's being requested
05:42:24 by one property owner this evening as the applicant.
05:42:28 There were numerous applicants when this was initiated a
05:42:31 decade ago.
05:42:32 You have one applicant making that request tonight to
05:42:35 make these changes.
05:42:36 Because there has been change of ownership since that
05:42:39 time, two properties on Rattlesnake Point that were not,
05:42:43 so those people that are the owners of some of these
05:42:46 properties today were not part of the original applicants
05:42:48 when this was changed in 2007, 2008.
05:42:51 So, the access, you have access limited to one way on and
05:42:58 off the peninsula.
05:42:59 The property in question this evening is at the terminus
05:43:01 of the street on Rattlesnake Point.
05:43:04 Residential uses are discouraged, located within
05:43:08 proximity to heavy industrial use also there is a
05:43:11 significant heavy industrial use, Chemical Formulators
05:43:14 directly east of the site.
05:43:16 Directly adjacent to the site.
05:43:17 Not 600 feet away.
05:43:19 Not 1,000 feet away.
05:43:21 Directly adjacent to the site.
05:43:23 The only way anyone can get from this parcel that's at
05:43:29 the tip to get across to Westshore, they have to cross
05:43:34 this particular site.
05:43:35 Which could create an issue should there be any kind of
05:43:40 event on that site in the future.
05:43:42 That's something to take into consideration.
05:43:45 So, there is a lack of required transition study that has
05:43:50 been done.
05:43:51 You have a letter from the Planning Commission before you
05:43:54 in your packet that talks about entertaining the notion
05:43:58 of reconsidering the objective and policies that are in
05:44:01 there, because of some of the circumstances I've told you
05:44:07 about this evening and do you have different property
05:44:09 ownership on the site an conditions have changed in the
05:44:11 last decade.
05:44:12 So that is one of the, one of the comments that the
05:44:17 Planning Commissioners had that they would like to you
05:44:23 take into intersection, that the City of Tampa staff
05:44:25 potentially take into consideration possibly modifying
05:44:29 what you have as far as the existing objective and
05:44:31 policies to potentially facilitate an individual
05:44:37 application through the plan policy which currently
05:44:39 doesn't exist.
05:44:40 The issue that they had that evening as I said before was
05:44:43 that you had only one property owner coming in and making
05:44:47 a request that's going to impact all of Rattlesnake Point
05:44:50 and there was one other applicant and not an applicant
05:44:54 but one other property owner that was one of the original
05:44:56 property owners, Old Dutch that was there.
05:44:59 I'm sure their representative is here to speak.
05:45:02 There's one applicant and there's one other original
05:45:05 applicant that's not part of this application that's in
05:45:08 support of what the applicant is asking this evening.
05:45:11 So, but the other two, one is under different property
05:45:15 ownership and they are maintaining a heavy industrial
05:45:17 slash light industrial use on there.
05:45:20 I think they're doing some ship building on their site.
05:45:23 But that has been acquired by a different property owner
05:45:25 and they are continuing to operate industrial uses on
05:45:29 that site.
05:45:30 The other planning use, final bullet point on my slide
05:45:35 here is that residential uses may negatively affect
05:45:39 established industrial uses which kind of dovetails into
05:45:43 what I told you do have, new property owners on the site
05:45:45 that are perfectly content in operating on the point as
05:45:49 an industrial use.
05:45:49 Planning Commission, their review found the proposed
05:45:56 request inconsistent with the following comprehensive
05:45:59 plan of future land use objectives and policies, that it
05:46:02 conflicts with the area context, policies 13.1.3, 1832
05:46:06 and 18.1.5, also to preserve industrial areas, policies
05:46:11 19.92, 19.93 and 19.10.4.
05:46:17 Also as it deals with residential development and
05:46:19 redevelopment, policies 18.4.4 and 26.2.4.
05:46:23 And also related uses, policy 41.6.1.
05:46:28 So, our recommendation was the Planning Commission find
05:46:33 the proposed request inconsistent with the goals.
05:46:36 It was -- the Planning Commission did concur with staff's
05:46:40 recommendation.
05:46:41 It was not a unanimous vote.
05:46:42 But it was on the majority side of finding with staff's
05:46:46 recommendation of inconsistency.
05:46:48 That concludes my presentation.
05:46:50 If you have any questions, if I haven't explained
05:46:53 anything a little bit more into detail, I'll be more than
05:46:57 happy to do that.
05:46:58 >> What was the vote?
05:46:58 >> I think it was 6-4, 6-3.
05:47:01 Because we didn't have a full board that night.
05:47:03 I think it was 6-3.
05:47:05 The resolution is in your packet.
05:47:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions of Mr. Garcia at this time?
05:47:09 Mr. Garcia, I have one quick question.
05:47:12 You had put on here and probably about four slides back,
05:47:17 about dangerous conditions.
05:47:18 I don't want to paraphrase what you had in the, in your
05:47:25 report, but you said it was dangerous conditions.
05:47:28 It's dangerous because it's already industrial use or
05:47:31 light industrial use to that effect, meaning chemical
05:47:35 moving, correct?
05:47:36 >> That's correct.
05:47:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Are there any other times that we zone
05:47:39 things that are near or close to or in proximate use of
05:47:45 dangerous uses?
05:47:48 >> That's a very general and vague question.
05:47:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That's why they pay me the big bucks up
05:47:53 here.
05:47:53 You understand what I'm saying, there are times that we
05:47:56 do zone things that are still near, not only industrial
05:47:59 but actually potentially adverse conditions.
05:48:02 >> That's correct.
05:48:03 You're supposed to mitigate for those impacts.
05:48:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I'll give you an example one that can be a
05:48:08 potential dangerous situation.
05:48:10 We zone now, we have been zoning probably over the last
05:48:13 few months properties that are, are right next to
05:48:17 MacDill air force base.
05:48:18 Now MacDill Air Force Base, can you look at as a shield
05:48:22 or a sword.
05:48:23 A lot of times is it more dangerous to be next to an air
05:48:26 force base or is it less dangerous during a war on
05:48:28 terror?
05:48:29 Could be either one.
05:48:30 My point is, is that there are conditions that happen all
05:48:33 the time in which we are near or next to or adjacent to
05:48:38 dangerous conditions.
05:48:39 Same thing with some of the industrial uses, whether they
05:48:42 were in Drew Park or in Davis Island or other placings,
05:48:46 there are places that are approximately close or closer
05:48:49 to some dangerous conditions.
05:48:51 And we still zone, we still allow people to use it if
05:48:54 they want to use it in a certain way.
05:48:56 So my question is, you know, we don't get this from
05:49:00 Planning Commission very often about dangerous
05:49:02 conditions.
05:49:03 So, I kind of -- I'm asking you because that's kind of a
05:49:08 vague -- throwing it back at you.
05:49:11 It's vague to say it's dangerous conditions.
05:49:13 Aren't we always involved with exposure to all kinds of
05:49:16 different conditions regardless of where you live?
05:49:19 >> The circumstances here were in a couple things, couple
05:49:22 of things to take into consideration.
05:49:25 Number one you're at a dead end, so we're talking about,
05:49:28 should something occur, and I understand what you're
05:49:30 talking about because yes, I'm familiar with heavy
05:49:33 industrial uses and of course I'm familiar with
05:49:35 MacDill, which is a completely different animal in my,
05:49:38 you know, in my view of that as a lot of the residential
05:49:42 there pre-dated MacDill Air Force Base.
05:49:44 That being the case.
05:49:46 The other thing that I would say is that we're talking
05:49:51 about not proximate.
05:49:55 We're talking about immediately adjacent.
05:49:58 Like if St. Joseph's Hospital --
05:50:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That was the wrong thing to say here.
05:50:04 >> Wrong hospital.
05:50:05 That's like saying Tampa General Hospital was the
05:50:10 location of a site that could create all these dangerous
05:50:14 impacts and everyone that lived on Davis Island would
05:50:18 have to pass that particular structure to get off the
05:50:20 bridge.
05:50:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Like the hospital and the people that live
05:50:24 on MacDill Air Force Base, which are next to noxious
05:50:27 fumes, dangerous conditions there.
05:50:29 And I don't mean from the enemy.
05:50:31 I'm just talking about from gasoline, there could be an
05:50:34 explosion there.
05:50:34 Could be a lot of things.
05:50:35 My point is -- this is the first time I've ever seen you
05:50:41 put dangerous on your report.
05:50:43 That's all I was asking.
05:50:44 I've never seen it.
05:50:46 I may be wrong, I've just never seen it before.
05:50:48 >> Well that condition does exist.
05:50:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ: It's the only time it's ever existed is
05:50:53 what you're saying?
05:50:54 >> Yes.
05:50:54 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
05:50:55 But I've never seen it.
05:50:56 So you're saying this has been done before?
05:50:59 >> What's been done before?
05:51:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You've been a planner how many years?
05:51:03 Has it ever been done before, doing a text amendment,
05:51:06 changing the policy in the Planning Commission
05:51:10 recommendation, would be dangerous.
05:51:14 Again, I've never seen that before.
05:51:16 That's what I'm asking you.
05:51:17 You're not answering me.
05:51:19 >> No, no.
05:51:21 Your task this evening, if this were to be adopted, which
05:51:24 is not being adopted this evening.
05:51:26 You're transmitting.
05:51:27 But at the end of the day when this gets adopted, the
05:51:31 scenario would be this, again the City of Tampa is going
05:51:33 to go into much more detail on this than I am.
05:51:36 The issue here is that you'll create a situation where
05:51:42 you could have many people living on a corner that they
05:51:48 will potentially not be able to leave should there be a,
05:51:55 an event on this site immediately adjacent to them, that
05:51:59 would impede them being able to get off of Rattlesnake
05:52:02 Point.
05:52:04 That is an issue of public safety.
05:52:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And again -- I'm going to finish with
05:52:10 this, Mr. Garcia, because I don't want to belabor it any
05:52:13 more.
05:52:14 This is the first time you've ever brought this up in
05:52:16 terms of danger.
05:52:17 The second part is that there are several other places in
05:52:20 which, you know, there's dangerous conditions all over
05:52:23 the city, but this is the one time that we have had
05:52:26 something that has brought you here to say dangerous.
05:52:30 That's all I'm saying.
05:52:32 I've never seen it in my five years.
05:52:35 You make recommendations but you never say this is
05:52:36 dangerous, don't do this, it's dangerous.
05:52:39 That's all I have.
05:52:40 Any other questions of Mr. Garcia?
05:52:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll comment later.
05:52:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: City?
05:52:45 Thank you.
05:52:57 >> Good afternoon, Council.
05:52:59 Bob McDonaugh, economic development, City of Tampa.
05:53:02 Just to boil this down to a single issue.
05:53:06 And Mr. Garcia talked about it and that is the changing
05:53:12 of a policy.
05:53:14 And the policy right now, policy 20.8.1 protect any
05:53:19 future residential commercial uses from the hazardous or
05:53:22 noxious heavy industrial uses along Tyson Avenue, the
05:53:26 only exit from the peninsula comprising Rattlesnake Point
05:53:30 waterfront area by not allowing any residential uses
05:53:34 until the hazardous or toxic heavy industrial uses are
05:53:37 permanently relocated from the Rattlesnake Point
05:53:41 waterfront area.
05:53:42 And as Mr. Garcia was talking about, we were talking
05:53:48 about immediately adjacent and we're talking about
05:53:54 materials like sulfuric acid, talking about materials
05:53:58 like bleach.
05:54:00 And one point of ingress and egress, and immediately
05:54:06 adjacent.
05:54:07 So that's the question is, whether or not Council is
05:54:11 willing to change a policy that is currently in effect
05:54:19 for this particular piece of property and to allow people
05:54:25 to change that, to put people immediately adjacent to
05:54:29 hazardous materials.
05:54:30 s.
05:54:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Miranda?
05:54:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm just going to make a statement.
05:54:42 Not a reflection on this.
05:54:43 I've been hearing this, like you said, Mr. Chairman, let
05:54:47 me say this.
05:54:48 Five and a half decades ago, bait a little house on
05:54:53 chestnut street.
05:54:54 2700 block.
05:54:56 Pretty close to an empty cigar factory called Santaella
05:54:59 cigar factory on Chestnut and Armenia.
05:55:05 It was us, not us, not you, but this city put in a
05:55:09 company there, let them stay there quite a while called
05:55:12 southern mill creek company.
05:55:13 And they do all kinds, all kinds of chemicals.
05:55:17 In fact, one night we had an alarm, people knocking on
05:55:22 the door because some chlorine had come out of the
05:55:24 building and we had to, so the city let them in, the
05:55:31 residents were already there.
05:55:33 It wasn't the other way around.
05:55:36 Listen, if somebody wants to live next to a dump and
05:55:40 moving a house, they bought a lot, they live next to a
05:55:43 dump, they've seen it, I guess they do.
05:55:46 Let me go further.
05:55:47 70, 75 years ago, sometimes it pays to get old, Ashley
05:55:53 Street, what was it?
05:55:55 It wasn't Ashley.
05:55:57 What was the Hillsborough River?
05:56:01 Commercial industrial.
05:56:03 They did all kinds of things on that river, against all
05:56:08 kinds of laws that we have today.
05:56:09 And look at it now.
05:56:10 Let's go back a little, not too far more in history.
05:56:14 Let's go to Channelside.
05:56:16 What was in Channelside?
05:56:17 It would've stayed in the same cue as we're talking about
05:56:22 now, there would be no residential Channelside.
05:56:24 It was a dump.
05:56:30 Docks, chemicals, all kinds of things.
05:56:32 Let's go to Harbor Island, or Staten Island.
05:56:36 If I say Staten Island, half the population wasn't even
05:56:39 alive, don't know what I'm talking about.
05:56:41 Let's go back to Harbor Island.
05:56:43 Well, you look older than what you are.
05:56:47 [ Laughter ]
05:56:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And what I'm saying is, look at Harbor
05:56:54 Island, how it's flourished.
05:56:57 In fact, the most complaint I used to get when I first
05:57:01 got elected was from the good folks in Davis Islands and
05:57:05 rightly so.
05:57:05 When the wind would blow from east to west and they were
05:57:08 doing the phosphate changing with the trains, and
05:57:13 phosphate can catch fire, I guess.
05:57:16 And trains never had a wreck.
05:57:18 You know that.
05:57:18 Never in the history of the United States of American has
05:57:21 been train wreck.
05:57:22 There's been derailment of trains.
05:57:24 Harbor Island would turn white and yellow and all kinds
05:57:28 of colors.
05:57:29 People would get kind of upset.
05:57:31 What Harbor Island came along, look what it's done to the
05:57:34 whole place.
05:57:35 Harbor Island, Davis Island, I'm not saying that this is
05:57:39 right or wrong.
05:57:40 I'm just saying that we're going in the wrong direction
05:57:43 here because history tells me that we have done it the
05:57:46 other way around.
05:57:47 We have had a complete neighborhood in West Tampa and put
05:57:49 a chemical plant or chemical storage facility in one of
05:57:53 the centers of West Tampa.
05:57:54 And that happened 50 some years ago.
05:57:58 And don't take my word for it.
05:58:00 Have it verified.
05:58:02 What was there is Santaella cigar factory.
05:58:07 >> Mr. Miranda, those are great examples.
05:58:10 Harbor Island didn't get developed residential until
05:58:13 after they used to clean up where the county used to work
05:58:15 for mosquitoes.
05:58:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let's go back because my memory hasn't
05:58:19 finished.
05:58:20 >> Channel District didn't get cleaned up.
05:58:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: What's on the other side, east side of
05:58:26 the Channel District?
05:58:27 >> There is Amerada Hess has a gasoline terminal.
05:58:31 Cargo has a grain facility.
05:58:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And that's not dangerous to nobody on
05:58:37 the west side?
05:58:38 >> I don't see any houses there, sir.
05:58:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You don't see no houses in
05:58:45 Channelside, no high-rise buildings, nothing like that?
05:58:46 >> There are, probably twelve to 1400 feet away, that's
05:58:48 accurate, yes, sir.
05:58:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's all I'm saying.
05:58:51 I'm trying to use logic here and understand what we're
05:58:54 doing.
05:58:54 Then I tell myself, if I would've used the same thought,
05:58:59 that would've never been developed, because they're all
05:59:03 industrial.
05:59:03 >> None of those got developed until after those noxious
05:59:07 uses left.
05:59:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Not rightly so.
05:59:10 It was piece by piece and it's still going on piece by
05:59:14 piece.
05:59:15 We haven't seen the transformation of the Channelside
05:59:18 district finish at all.
05:59:20 That's my opinion, sir.
05:59:23 >> I agree.
05:59:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: May be wrong.
05:59:25 It hasn't even started to show what it's going to be.
05:59:28 >> Nitrate and soda and others are.
05:59:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Nitrate soda is okay, you can't smoke
05:59:35 very well.
05:59:36 It really blows up on you.
05:59:38 That's all, Mr. Chairman.
05:59:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions for the city for
05:59:41 Mr. McDonaugh?
05:59:42 Thank you.
05:59:43 Petitioner?
05:59:44 >> Good evening, Councilmembers, Gina Grimes with the law
06:00:05 firm of Hill Ward Henderson, 101 East Kennedy Boulevard.
06:00:08 And tonight I'm here representing Viper Ventures, LLC.
06:00:17 They are the applicant on this comp plan amendment.
06:00:19 I'm going to put up on the Elmo for you a map that I have
06:00:25 highlighted my clients own the 31 acres that are shown
06:00:31 with the two red stars.
06:00:33 These two pieces.
06:00:34 What I've shown here on this map is the outlined in
06:00:38 orange is the CMU 35 property.
06:00:40 And in green is the location of Chemical Formulators.
06:00:46 I'll address them in just one minute.
06:00:48 As you've heard from the staff back in 2006, my client
06:00:54 viper ventures as well as three other property owners
06:00:58 comprising two thirds of the entire Rattlesnake Point,
06:01:02 they filed a comp plan text amendment and comp plan map
06:01:05 amendment.
06:01:06 And as you've heard, there was an adoption of some new
06:01:11 text in the comprehensive plan addressing Rattlesnake
06:01:14 Point.
06:01:15 And you heard Mr. McDonaugh read to you one of the
06:01:19 policies in the comprehensive plan that currently exists.
06:01:24 He read one of the policies but what he didn't read and
06:01:27 what is really the most important issue driving all this
06:01:30 is the objective.
06:01:31 Remember, in the hierarchy of the plan, you have goals,
06:01:34 objectives and policies.
06:01:35 So policies are supposed to implement the objectives.
06:01:39 Objectives are supposed to carry out the overall goals.
06:01:42 The objective on Rattlesnake Point, important, encourage
06:01:45 the transition of the Rattlesnake Point waterfront area
06:01:49 from its current mix of heavy and light industrial uses
06:01:53 to a mix of residential, commercial, retail uses and a
06:01:58 waterfront community in a manner that protects the
06:02:02 health, safety and welfare.
06:02:03 That's what we're proposing.
06:02:05 It's almost identical to the language that's in the comp
06:02:07 plan right now.
06:02:08 So, the idea, the policy, the objective, I'm sorry, that
06:02:13 was adopted back in '06, was to encourage the transition
06:02:17 away from heavy industrial to residential and commercial
06:02:21 mixed use.
06:02:22 So let's not forget that because that's what should be
06:02:24 guiding all this discussion.
06:02:26 This area on Rattlesnake Point is really what ends up
06:02:31 being a remnant industrial area.
06:02:33 I think even back in 2006, everybody agreed that this
06:02:38 should transition away from this industrial, the
06:02:40 industrial uses.
06:02:41 So we have proposed two comp -- two amendments to the
06:02:45 comp plan.
06:02:46 And they are proposed to remove two restrictions that are
06:02:50 in there.
06:02:50 The first as you've heard is to remove the restriction
06:02:54 that prohibits residential uses until all the toxic or
06:02:59 hazardous heavy industrial uses are permanently
06:03:01 relocated.
06:03:02 We're proposing that be removed.
06:03:06 And in fact, Chemical Formulators is the only one left.
06:03:09 Of the, what the comp plan says hazardous or toxic heavy
06:03:15 industrial uses.
06:03:16 That's the only one left.
06:03:17 The LP farm down further to the east has already been
06:03:20 closed and abandoned.
06:03:21 No longer in use.
06:03:22 The second requirement that we're seeking to remove from
06:03:26 the comp plan is the requirement for the city to do a
06:03:29 transition plan.
06:03:30 Also want to clarify that we have also retained several
06:03:35 of the policies that are in the plan pretty much intact.
06:03:39 But what's important to note is that we're not proposing
06:03:41 that any of the existing industrial uses be made
06:03:46 nonconforming.
06:03:47 We're not suggesting that they be amortized out.
06:03:50 What we're saying is they can continue to exist in their
06:03:53 current forms, and some of them, the ones outside of the
06:03:58 CMU 35 area can even expand if they like.
06:04:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Hang on a second.
06:04:05 >>HARRY COHEN: Could I ask you a question?
06:04:06 According to this, based on what you were just reading
06:04:09 from and everything following it, all of this is supposed
06:04:12 to be considered during a PD zoning process.
06:04:15 >> Corrects.
06:04:16 >>HARRY COHEN: So why are we considering it here?
06:04:19 >> Why is this level of detail in the comprehensive plan?
06:04:22 >>HARRY COHEN: No, no, in other words, if there's an
06:04:24 issue with it being close to a hazardous use, wouldn't
06:04:29 that be considered in the PD process?
06:04:32 >> Yes.
06:04:33 >>HARRY COHEN: Wouldn't that be the place?
06:04:35 And it would be appropriate to set conditions if the two
06:04:38 are were going to coexist together in some way?
06:04:41 >> Yes, in our proposed policy 20.8.5, what we say is PD
06:04:46 zoning conditions must address mitigation of impacts and
06:04:50 the consideration of public access to the water,
06:04:53 important, the next point is what you're making, also
06:04:56 consideration of where proposed PD rezonings abut heavy
06:05:00 industrial uses that are hazardous, demonstrate through
06:05:03 design and accepted practices that the occupants of the
06:05:06 new use shall not be unduly at risk from such hazards.
06:05:10 So those are issues --
06:05:12 >>HARRY COHEN: So in other words, if we want to go up a
06:05:14 setback from the use, the place to do that would be in
06:05:17 the PD.
06:05:18 >> Yes.
06:05:18 And the plan calls for that, requires that.
06:05:20 Both the existing language and the proposed language.
06:05:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Hold on a second.
06:05:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Speaking about things that we usually
06:05:32 deal with in the PD process, ingress and egress is one of
06:05:35 those.
06:05:35 And I don't know how we can, you know, overcome the fact
06:05:41 that there's one way in, one way out.
06:05:43 >> I think it depends on what the proper protocol is.
06:05:46 Given the nature of the use, which would we come to
06:05:49 rezone to a PD, we don't even know if that use will still
06:05:53 be in existence.
06:05:54 But we'd have to examine the nature of the use and
06:05:56 potential risk that it imposes to determine whether or
06:05:58 not the fact that there's one road in, one road out makes
06:06:02 a difference.
06:06:02 But it definitely would have to be addressed and
06:06:05 considered and evaluated at the time of the rezoning.
06:06:08 So again, back, the points I wanted to make.
06:06:16 We're not asking that you eliminate or make nonconforming
06:06:20 any of the existing heavy industrial or light industrial
06:06:24 uses.
06:06:24 And again I just went through with you what we're
06:06:27 proposing that the comp plan, the language that it retain
06:06:32 to make sure that all of these different issues that were
06:06:35 supposed to be addressed in the transition plan are
06:06:38 addressed at the time of the PD zoning.
06:06:41 And I don't want to underestimate the importance of the
06:06:45 fact that we also have to address public access to the
06:06:48 water front.
06:06:49 That's a really important component to this area.
06:06:51 As you heard the city and planning commission objected on
06:06:55 way see is three general areas.
06:06:57 The safety issue, the transition plan and the impact that
06:07:02 this proposed change has on the industrial uses.
06:07:05 Well, taking the last one first, and with all due respect
06:07:10 to Tony because he didn't draft the report.
06:07:12 He's just here tonight providing the report.
06:07:14 The plan commission report is completely backwards from
06:07:17 the objective that I read to you of encouraging the
06:07:21 transition away from heavy industrial and to residential.
06:07:25 The Planning Commission's report is replete with
06:07:28 different reasons why we need to protect the industrial.
06:07:31 And we can't allow the residential.
06:07:33 It says that the proposed language threatens the
06:07:36 long-term viability of industrial uses.
06:07:38 Well, it's supposed to because we're supposed to
06:07:40 transition away from it.
06:07:41 That it's opposite of the industrial context that's found
06:07:45 on the peninsula.
06:07:46 Again, that's what's supposed to occur, encouraging the
06:07:49 transition.
06:07:50 And threatening established industrial uses by allowing
06:07:54 residential within close proximity.
06:07:57 That's we're supposed to be transitioning to residential.
06:08:01 And the last one which I really can't explain, they were
06:08:05 concerned the proximity of the residential to heavy
06:08:08 industrial would impose potential negative impact to
06:08:11 industrial uses such as increased insurance premium.
06:08:15 I don't even know why that would be a consideration.
06:08:17 Especially given that objective.
06:08:19 On the safety issue, they're very concerned about the
06:08:21 risk of exposure of persons to the hazardous uses that
06:08:24 already exist.
06:08:25 Well, under the current entitlement, you can have four
06:08:32 million square feet of office users out there on the
06:08:35 point, four million square feet of retail users in the
06:08:41 CMU-35 area plus right now four million square feet of
06:08:46 industrial.
06:08:46 All we are saying is allow us to have the max build out
06:08:50 would be 2,000 dwelling units, in place of the four
06:08:53 million square feet of industrial.
06:08:55 To me that's a decrease in the exposure of persons,
06:08:59 individuals to this alleged hazardous toxic use.
06:09:03 So actually, you're decreasing the exposure of the risk.
06:09:06 And don't also forget that this user, Chemical
06:09:11 Formulators, transports its product by rail, by truck
06:09:16 through some of the most densely populated areas of the
06:09:18 city.
06:09:19 As far as the transition plan is concerned, the city
06:09:24 claims that in previous correspondence that we all, all
06:09:27 the property owners need to get together and agree upon a
06:09:30 transition plan.
06:09:31 Well, the plan, our current plan simply doesn't say that.
06:09:35 It uses the language in the current plan that says the
06:09:37 city will provide an opportunity for all property owners
06:09:40 within the Rattlesnake Point waterfront area to
06:09:43 participate in the development of the transition plan.
06:09:46 It was never done.
06:09:48 Back in 2006, in reviewing the transcript and report that
06:09:54 went to DCA, the city said it would be done in the plan
06:09:57 update because of the timing of the plan update and when
06:10:00 they thought this area would transition.
06:10:02 It was never included in that.
06:10:03 That's fine.
06:10:04 We're not advocating that we need to have a transition
06:10:07 plan.
06:10:08 The areas transitioned on its own.
06:10:11 The liquid propane facility is gone.
06:10:14 The uses out on the point including this piece owned by
06:10:19 Orion is mostly used for open storage.
06:10:22 These are a lot of warehouses in here.
06:10:24 My client is the one that probably has some of the uses
06:10:27 that are more intense.
06:10:28 But they of course would be gone if we were able to have
06:10:32 this comp plan amendment approved and they could
06:10:35 redevelop it with mixed uses.
06:10:37 So we think the area is transitioned on its own.
06:10:39 We don't need a plan.
06:10:41 We think the CMU-35 with all of the policies that you
06:10:44 have in the plan and the code provisions provides
06:10:47 adequate direction as to how this should, how this should
06:10:51 be developed.
06:10:52 And again, in the comp plan you have the different
06:10:56 requirements as to what must be addressed when this area
06:10:59 does -- when anybody applies for a rezoning in the
06:11:03 CMU-35.
06:11:04 So, the last reason I think, we think this comp plan
06:11:08 should be adopted is because the inequity of this
06:11:11 specific comp plan provision in this situation.
06:11:13 It has the affect of allowing one property owner,
06:11:17 Chemical Formulators, to control and limit the
06:11:20 redevelopment of the entire 90 acres almost of this
06:11:24 point.
06:11:24 That should be in City Council's hands, not one property
06:11:28 owner.
06:11:29 This residential industrial restriction doesn't exist
06:11:32 anywhere else.
06:11:34 I'd like to call upon Cindy Tarapani, our planner who is
06:11:37 going -- I'll show you some other locations in the city
06:11:41 where a similar situation exists with heavy industrial
06:11:44 uses adjacent to residential.
06:11:46 She's also, we have included in your materials a, her
06:11:49 reports, two reports regarding the consistency of our
06:11:52 proposed amendment with the comprehensive plan and the
06:11:54 compatibility standards that are already in place that we
06:11:57 would have to meet whenever we sought to redevelop this
06:12:01 site.
06:12:01 So Cindy, with that, I'd like to turn it over to you.
06:12:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Excuse me, question from Ms. Montelione.
06:12:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
06:12:09 Ms. Grimes, you mentioned about the transitioning.
06:12:12 And I know when we spoke about this, and again when I
06:12:18 spoke with staff about this, is it Bertram or Bert tran?
06:12:25 >> B-E-R-T-R-A-M.
06:12:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Bertram, boatbuilders, yacht builders,
06:12:32 whatever.
06:12:33 Did they recently move in the area?
06:12:36 Are they expanding their operations?
06:12:38 >> It is my understanding they just may have closed on
06:12:40 that property today.
06:12:42 It was previously owned by Rivera.
06:12:45 It was these three right in here.
06:12:49 It is my understanding that they have just today closed
06:12:53 on the property.
06:12:54 That's what my clients believe.
06:12:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So --
06:12:58 >> Right now it's warehousing.
06:13:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: If -- I'm going to consider them
06:13:02 manufacturing, because they're building boats.
06:13:05 If a major manufacturer is locating there, I'm not sure
06:13:08 that that supports the transitioning to residential that
06:13:13 you mentioned.
06:13:14 >> It's a marine waterfront related use.
06:13:17 As are some of these uses along in here, as are, as is
06:13:23 the Orion piece, where they have the outdoor storage for
06:13:27 the bridge building.
06:13:28 Cindy?
06:13:35 >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman and members of City
06:13:51 Council.
06:13:51 My name is Cindy Tarapani, vice-president of planning
06:13:55 with Florida Design Consultants.
06:13:57 Represent Viper Ventures this evening.
06:13:59 I've been a planner for 35 years.
06:14:01 Previously been qualified as an expert witness.
06:14:03 Also worked for the City of Tampa many years ago.
06:14:05 Won't tell how long ago but it was quite long time ago
06:14:08 and I enjoyed my time here.
06:14:10 I live in Pinellas County, I'm quite familiar with the
06:14:12 site and with Tampa and Hillsborough County.
06:14:14 First thing I'd like to do is respond to some of the
06:14:17 questions and comments that were regarding other areas
06:14:20 that might have this same situation that was referenced
06:14:23 by Mr. Chairman and Mr. Cohen.
06:14:25 And there are several that we have identified.
06:14:27 We have found six different areas and they are in your
06:14:30 booklet at tab 6.
06:14:32 These same photographs I'm going to show you.
06:14:34 The first one is our site.
06:14:35 And you can see new port residential to the north.
06:14:41 Westshore yacht club to the southwest.
06:14:43 The Westshore yacht club has a driveway on Tyson Avenue,
06:14:47 same driveway that serves our site and the rest of the
06:14:49 property.
06:14:50 The next one is Port Tampa city.
06:14:54 In this case, I think it was Mr. Suarez who, Mr. Chairman
06:14:58 who identified are there other places where there is
06:15:02 residential immediately adjacent.
06:15:04 Yes, there are.
06:15:05 And this is one of them.
06:15:07 Port Tampa city, there are, can you see the residential
06:15:10 that's outlined in red.
06:15:12 There is industrial plan category immediately west and
06:15:15 industrial uses in close proximity.
06:15:17 Also talked about today, you have heavily populated
06:15:26 residential area of Davis Island and immediately to the
06:15:29 east, you have hookers point area with industrial users
06:15:31 and fairly intense outdoor storage and tanks in that
06:15:35 area.
06:15:36 Through a shipping channel, which also presents its own
06:15:40 dangerous conditions.
06:15:41 Another area Harbor Island.
06:15:45 I actually was at the city when Harbor Island was an
06:15:49 island and renovated over time.
06:15:51 Of course it has now pretty much completely built out.
06:15:54 Another area where you have residential in close
06:15:57 production interest to industrial plan category and heavy
06:16:00 industrial users along a shipping channel.
06:16:02 Channelside area was also discussed this evening.
06:16:10 Clearly that area is in transition and changes are
06:16:12 happening in Channelside even as we speak.
06:16:15 This is another area where industrial use is immediately
06:16:18 adjacent on three sides to residential use.
06:16:22 If you look, the area between the Crosstown expressway
06:16:25 that curved edge up right in here.
06:16:27 This is all -- excuse me, change to residential urban
06:16:32 mixed use plan category and approved for residential use,
06:16:35 directly adjacent to industrial users.
06:16:38 Palmetto beach area, another area where in close
06:16:44 proximity, across the street to actual industrial heavy
06:16:48 users.
06:16:49 The last one, this is the university south Florida area
06:16:55 along McKinley.
06:16:57 You can see the residential outline in red.
06:16:59 Again, immediately adjacent to industrial users.
06:17:02 Those are in your books should you care to refer to them.
06:17:08 There's also in your book the comp plan, not showing the
06:17:12 comp plan categories to document what I just presented to
06:17:15 you.
06:17:18 In 2006, the Council set long-term plan and long-term
06:17:22 goal for Rattlesnake Point by designating it commercial
06:17:25 mixed use this designation left the IH plan category in
06:17:29 effect for the industrial users east of our site.
06:17:32 What I wanted to talk about today was that the existing
06:17:40 policies in your goals, objectives and policies in your
06:17:42 comp plan that support this change to the text amendment
06:17:45 which would allow our client to develop a true mixed use
06:17:48 project including commercial, residential and office
06:17:51 uses.
06:17:51 One of the major most critical issues facing the city is
06:17:55 having enough land to provide housing for the estimated
06:17:58 54,000 people that will be here, estimated to be here by
06:18:02 2025.
06:18:02 Less than 10 years away.
06:18:05 And almost 25,000 new homes are estimated to be needed.
06:18:07 And by 2035, an additional 101,000 people and 45,000 new
06:18:13 homes.
06:18:14 This is not my numbers.
06:18:16 These are taken right out of your comp plan, the Planning
06:18:18 Commission's estimate.
06:18:20 With approval of this text amendment the applicant can
06:18:22 include residential in his project as he wants to do to
06:18:26 provide some of this needed housing.
06:18:28 This is consistent with goal one, objective -- excuse me,
06:18:34 goal 14, objective 14.1, policies 14.1 and 14.14.
06:18:39 This is also in your book if you'd like to take a look at
06:18:43 that.
06:18:43 The second main reason this application is consistent
06:18:47 with the comp plan, it is the city's goal to continue to
06:18:50 provide urban services in an efficient manner.
06:18:53 All utilities are currently in place at this site and
06:18:56 allowing a new use, redevelopment of the site would be an
06:18:59 efficient use because you will not have to extend those
06:19:02 services.
06:19:04 It does not encourage urban sprawl.
06:19:06 This is consistent with goal 10, objectives 10.1,
06:19:09 policies 101-1 and 10-1-2.
06:19:13 Also goal 20 and its related objectives and policies.
06:19:17 The third major reason.
06:19:24 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You might have to go to miner in ending
06:19:28 your presentation.
06:19:29 >> Sorry.
06:19:29 I thought as the applicant we had a total.
06:19:32 >>MIKE SUAREZ: What happened, your lawyer talked more
06:19:34 than you did.
06:19:35 That's the only problem you had.
06:19:36 >> I'll have to talk to her about that.
06:19:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You will have to.
06:19:39 But off the microphone.
06:19:42 Thanks for the presentation.
06:19:43 I appreciate it.
06:19:44 Are there any questions from Council of the petitioner or
06:19:46 of the city concerning this particular -- Mr. Reddick?
06:19:51 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you.
06:19:52 I don't know who can answer this question from the
06:19:54 petitioner.
06:19:56 But let me just present you a hypothetical.
06:19:59 If there's residential properties at this location that
06:20:05 you're requesting, and from what I'm hearing tonight,
06:20:11 there's one way in and one way out.
06:20:13 And with this chemical plant sitting there, if there's an
06:20:21 explosion or some type of events to take place at that
06:20:26 plant, that is a danger to all of the residential
06:20:30 properties that is surrounding this particular place.
06:20:34 Who would be held liable for that, those people who would
06:20:38 be affected?
06:20:39 >> I'm certainly not an attorney but I think that whoever
06:20:42 had created the problem and created the release of the
06:20:47 materials would be the one that would be held liable.
06:20:50 The chemical company or heavy industrial user.
06:20:53 >> What guarantee would we have that the owners, the
06:20:56 holders of that chemical plant would be liable?
06:20:58 Because I'm pretty sure there would be plenty lawsuits
06:21:01 coming from.
06:21:04 >> Yes, sir, I don't pretend to be an attorney.
06:21:07 >>FRANK REDDICK: You got an attorney out there take talk.
06:21:10 >> Gina Grimes.
06:21:12 You have that same problem right now, don't? Just one
06:21:15 road in and one road out.
06:21:17 And they're allowed to develop 4 million square feet of
06:21:20 office.
06:21:20 4 million square feet of retail.
06:21:22 And 4 million square feet of industrial.
06:21:27 >>FRANK REDDICK: Could the city be held liable in any
06:21:28 way?
06:21:30 >> I can't say whether or not you would be sued.
06:21:33 Whether or not you would be held liable would be, depend
06:21:36 on the circumstances of whatever release occurred and
06:21:38 whether there was any negligence on the part of the
06:21:41 operator when it did occur.
06:21:42 Keep in mind too that this particular facility processes
06:21:50 chlorine and bleach.
06:21:52 I know it was mentioned that there was sulfuric acid
06:21:55 there.
06:21:57 It's my client's understanding there is no such chemical
06:21:59 out on the point.
06:22:00 It is just those two ingredients that go into Chemical
06:22:04 Formulator's product.
06:22:06 And not only that, as far as liability, wouldn't you, if
06:22:10 your question is what it is, you think about the
06:22:13 liability when that product is put in railcars and
06:22:16 travels through the most densely populated area of South
06:22:19 Tampa and into downtown and through Ybor City.
06:22:24 It's the same liability issue.
06:22:25 Keep in mind, we're in urban area.
06:22:28 We have -- we don't have areas where all of these uses
06:22:33 can be spread out.
06:22:34 It's developed over time and it's developed with all of
06:22:37 these uses in close proximity to one another.
06:22:40 That's really in part inherent in any kind of true urban
06:22:44 area.
06:22:45 >>FRANK REDDICK: But my focus is primarily on the
06:22:48 existing site.
06:22:49 Not when they put it on the rail and take it out.
06:22:54 >>MIKE SUAREZ: If I could interrupt you, Ms. Grimes, I'm
06:22:57 going to try and answer based on the liability issue.
06:22:59 And I will answer this as an insurance professional.
06:23:02 What typically happens is this.
06:23:03 You are liable, and chemical manufacturers are heavily
06:23:08 regulated.
06:23:09 And they are liable for any actions they tax both for the
06:23:13 chemical that they produce on-site and off site.
06:23:16 So regardless of the actions that are taken by us
06:23:19 tonight, they are the first, essentially the first stop
06:23:24 for any liability issues concerning the manufacture of
06:23:26 the product itself.
06:23:27 That's why when I asked some questions of the Planning
06:23:30 Commission about this being a dangerous decision, I
06:23:32 wanted to make sure that we understood that the
06:23:36 manufacturer of that product will continue to go on
06:23:38 regardless of what we do here tonight and it is already
06:23:41 created a dangerous condition by virtue of the type of
06:23:44 chemical they have.
06:23:45 That's all I wanted to say.
06:23:47 I don't know if that answered the question at all.
06:23:52 >>HARRY COHEN: Can I?
06:23:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Go ahead.
06:23:55 >>HARRY COHEN: Just to follow up, I want to ask
06:23:56 Councilman Reddick's question a little bit differently.
06:24:00 If the city were to make a mistake in the way that it
06:24:05 allowed the use to be developed here, wouldn't that
06:24:09 mistake be made as part of the PD process rather than at
06:24:15 this point in the process?
06:24:16 In other words, if there were some sort of an accident,
06:24:20 if we were going to be blamed for anything, wouldn't it
06:24:23 be the way that we evaluated the risks on the plan for
06:24:28 the PD?
06:24:29 Isn't that the place that we would, that we would, you
06:24:36 know, decide how much room there would have to be between
06:24:40 the use and the building, or the details about this?
06:24:46 >> Yes.
06:24:46 Because the proposed comp plan language requires you to
06:24:51 evaluate again through what it says is design and
06:24:55 accepted practices to ensure that the occupants of the
06:24:59 new use shall not be unduly at risk from such hazards,
06:25:03 whichever they are, whatever exists at the time.
06:25:05 Keep in mind too --
06:25:06 >>HARRY COHEN: But we would evaluate that question as
06:25:08 part of the PD applicant.
06:25:10 >> That's what it says.
06:25:11 PD rezoning conditions must address this.
06:25:13 Keep in mind too, Mr. Reddick, hopefully this helps
06:25:16 answer your question.
06:25:17 This is 30 acres right here.
06:25:20 We're all assume, they're assuming that this use,
06:25:24 Chemical Formulators immediately abuts the residential
06:25:27 that we're asking to be able to develop.
06:25:30 In all likelihood residential is going to be developed as
06:25:33 close to the water as possible because that's what people
06:25:36 want, when they're on the water, the residences want to
06:25:39 view it.
06:25:40 Other users don't necessarily have to be waterfront.
06:25:42 So it could be acreage and acres away from this use.
06:25:48 You still have the tissue as you mentioned, one road in
06:25:50 and one road out.
06:25:51 But as I mentioned also, that you have very same issue
06:25:55 right now.
06:25:55 And we don't know that the protocol would be for
06:25:57 everybody to get in their cars and try to drive off the
06:26:00 point.
06:26:00 The protocol in all likelihood, and we will have to
06:26:04 address this at the time of rezoning, would be to stay
06:26:06 indoors and not to leave.
06:26:09 And not to go outside and expose yourself to the gas.
06:26:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Ms. Montelione?
06:26:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So, not to belabor a point, but you
06:26:23 are the applicant's attorney, so we have city attorney
06:26:26 sitting in the back, Ms. Kert.
06:26:29 Just so that we have equal representation on the same
06:26:36 question.
06:26:37 >> I haven't worked in the city attorney's office for a
06:26:39 long time.
06:26:40 [ Laughter ]
06:26:41 >> One thing I remember was when it comes to any kind of
06:26:44 negligence that planning level decision, the Council is
06:26:50 immune, government is immune to liability on planning
06:26:52 level decisions.
06:26:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think Mr. Cohen brings up a very
06:26:55 good point in that at this level of the comprehensive
06:26:57 plan amendment, we are, you know, it's something that may
06:27:03 happen in the future or it may not happen in the future.
06:27:06 So at this level, or approval to make the comp plan
06:27:11 change, or request of comp plan change, it's not that
06:27:16 we're allowing -- we're not approving the residential to
06:27:20 go in tomorrow.
06:27:21 >> Correct.
06:27:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So, you know, I think Mr. Cohen made a
06:27:25 good point.
06:27:29 >> [simultaneously talkers [.
06:27:34 >>REBECCA KERT: If this is approved, you are opening up
06:27:37 the door for the opportunity for the PD.
06:27:39 That being said, I'm not even sure that's being said yet.
06:27:43 First of all, I think as you all have recognized, we can
06:27:46 and do get sued all the time over everything.
06:27:50 [ Laughter ]
06:27:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think we are all aware of that.
06:27:55 >>REBECCA KERT: Under no circumstances do I want anyone
06:27:58 to believe that I do not think we could be brought into
06:28:00 any subsequent litigation from some future disaster that
06:28:04 may or may not happen.
06:28:05 That being said I think we certainly would have some
06:28:08 defenses based upon the type of decision that this is at
06:28:13 this point, that we would not be liable.
06:28:15 But I cannot predict what a court would do in the future.
06:28:18 I do not think we would be liable from that decision.
06:28:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you very much, Ms. Kert.
06:28:24 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions or comments for the
06:28:26 petitioner or for the city at this time?
06:28:28 Okay.
06:28:30 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
06:28:32 item number one?
06:28:34 Item number one.
06:28:35 Now, are you a member of the public or are you a member
06:28:42 of the legal team?
06:28:43 I think we have to make a distinction on that,
06:28:46 Mr. Mechanik.
06:28:47 >> We got a mic.
06:28:51 I'm Dave mechanic, 305 South Boulevard, Tampa, Florida.
06:28:55 I'm here on behalf of Old Dutch Foods, which is another
06:28:59 property owner on Rattlesnake Point.
06:29:02 So I'm not speaking on behalf of the applicant.
06:29:05 I'm speaking on behalf of another property owner.
06:29:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you for clarifying that.
06:29:10 >> And I think Ms. Grimes did a pretty thorough job
06:29:13 addressing the issues, but a couple things I'd like to
06:29:16 maybe just emphasize.
06:29:18 Right now under the current comp plan policies, even with
06:29:24 the prohibition of residential uses, she already made the
06:29:30 point we could build office or retail.
06:29:33 The point being though is that when you consider the fact
06:29:37 you could build an office building and you could have as
06:29:41 many or more people located in that office building as
06:29:45 you could a residential building, so whatever hazard that
06:29:49 is being addressed or being concerned about would apply
06:29:54 equally to an office building or in all likelihood what
06:29:59 you would like to see or you might see is a restaurant.
06:30:02 An open air restaurant on the waterfront.
06:30:05 So, that's a perfectly legitimate use that could be
06:30:08 allowed today under the comprehensive plan.
06:30:10 So if we are concerned about impacts to people, then
06:30:15 those people deserve the same protection.
06:30:17 Yet the plan does not prohibit those uses.
06:30:20 So I'd like to just, you know, emphasize that particular
06:30:24 point.
06:30:24 Again, we will address through PD zoning, we will address
06:30:30 whatever mitigation measures are appropriate.
06:30:33 I would like to answer Ms. Montelione's question about
06:30:37 the Bertram yacht purchase.
06:30:41 I mean first of all, the property owner when they are
06:30:44 left with few choices on what they may be doing with
06:30:47 their property, they certainly might very well lease or
06:30:50 sell to a yacht builder in this particular case.
06:30:54 Which I don't believe is the hazardous or toxic use.
06:30:58 But also it does not represent a significant investment
06:31:04 in an industrial use, because the boat building
06:31:07 facilities were already on that particular property.
06:31:10 So they very well could be there on an interim basis for
06:31:14 some number of years and still be desirous of converting
06:31:19 to a residential or mixed use at some point in the
06:31:22 future.
06:31:23 So I don't know that that really indicates a trend away
06:31:26 from a residential or mixed use.
06:31:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think Mr. McDonaugh would disagree
06:31:33 with you.
06:31:34 I can see him sitting on the edge of his chair?
06:31:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Since this is public comment, we'll let
06:31:40 him sit on ten of his chair a while.
06:31:42 Are you done?
06:31:43 >> I am.
06:31:44 Thank you very much.
06:31:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Is there anyone else in the public that
06:31:47 would like to speak on item number one?
06:31:49 I see no one.
06:31:51 >> Move to close.
06:31:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You have a motion to close from had
06:31:54 Mr. Miranda.
06:31:55 I have a second from 0 -- do you want to hear from.
06:32:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: McDonaugh, yes, I do.
06:32:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. McDonaugh, would you like to speak?
06:32:05 >>MR. McDONAUGH: Just a clarification.
06:32:07 I met with the Bertram yacht.
06:32:09 They're owned by an Italian conglomerate.
06:32:12 I don't think they would necessarily think this was a
06:32:14 minor investment.
06:32:15 They're working with the state of Florida and hope over
06:32:18 the period of time to employ up to 400 people at that
06:32:21 site an they're investing millions of dollars.
06:32:23 To brush it off is maybe a slight investment, transitory
06:32:27 thing, I'm not sure it would be actually accurate.
06:32:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, we had a discussion about, you
06:32:33 know, the trend, in the area and I shared with you some
06:32:38 of the things that I knew about internal discussions at
06:32:42 CSX, about this rail line and the spur that's located
06:32:45 there.
06:32:45 So, you know, not being a student right now in today's
06:32:52 market of industrial property trends, and not having one
06:32:58 in the audience that can speak to this, what are you,
06:33:05 when you say they're working with the state of Florida,
06:33:08 I'm assuming it's a QTI deal, something of that nature.
06:33:11 So, you know, what are you seeing on the industrial
06:33:17 marketplace?
06:33:19 >>MR. McDONAUGH: We are seeing a paucity of waterfront
06:33:23 land.
06:33:23 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Paucity?
06:33:26 >>MR. McDONAUGH: There's not a whole lot for sale.
06:33:27 They could locate at the port property but the port does
06:33:29 not sell, they only lease.
06:33:32 And to engage with a lease with the port authority, you
06:33:34 often have to guarantee a certain amount of waterborne
06:33:38 commerce, a certain amount of tonnage and dockage and
06:33:41 wharfage fees paid to the port.
06:33:44 >>LISA MONTELIONE: The port has a lot of property.
06:33:47 >>MR. McDONAUGH: They do.
06:33:48 But they will not sell it.
06:33:49 They will aim it specifically towards -- I was the head
06:33:52 of real estate for the port for six years, so I have
06:33:54 somewhat of a background.
06:33:56 They will lease the land and it will be based on the
06:34:00 amount of tonnage and drayage that comes across the
06:34:03 wharves.
06:34:05 So a boatbuilder would not be able to buy.
06:34:07 These people were interested in buying.
06:34:09 This was also a Marine radar company that was looking at
06:34:13 this same property.
06:34:15 There are not a whole lot of opportunities like this for
06:34:18 marine.
06:34:19 And again, people have their druthers about whether they
06:34:24 would rather see a residential development or a
06:34:27 manufacturer.
06:34:28 Again, my interest is the fact that they are investing a
06:34:32 serious amount of money in the property, as well as the
06:34:34 hope that they will employ several hundred of our people
06:34:37 in our community at relatively well paying jobs.
06:34:41 >>LISA MONTELIONE: But by making this decision tonight
06:34:44 about the comprehensive plan change, it doesn't, it
06:34:49 doesn't eliminate the opportunity if they see a better
06:34:53 one in the industrial market, because it's, like you
06:34:57 said, there's a paucity of industrial property available.
06:35:05 If somebody made the right offer, then they might see,
06:35:09 that we might see this property change hands for an
06:35:12 industrial use rather than a residential use.
06:35:15 >>MR. McDONAUGH: Again, that's a possibility.
06:35:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Making this change in the plan doesn't
06:35:21 eliminate -- [simultaneous speaking]
06:35:26 >>MR. McDONAUGH: There always is that possibility, yes.
06:35:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: All right.
06:35:29 Thank you.
06:35:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
06:35:30 We had a motion to close and a second.
06:35:32 Petitioner, did you want to say something?
06:35:36 >> Yes.
06:35:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You sure?
06:35:37 Okay.
06:35:38 I'm just asking.
06:35:39 >> The only thing, it's not something I wanted to say.
06:35:42 Al Steenson, the president of Gandy Sun Bay South called
06:35:46 me right before the hearing.
06:35:47 He, as you all know, he's having hip problems and he was
06:35:52 not able to attend.
06:35:54 But this is what he wanted me to say and quote him.
06:35:57 He said that it's not 1950 any more.
06:36:00 That Chemical Formulators is in the wrong place.
06:36:04 And that it's unconscionable, his words, that they've
06:36:08 been able to hold hostage redevelopment of the whole
06:36:11 point.
06:36:11 He says it's never going to be the Gandy gateway corridor
06:36:17 as you mentioned it was once called, into the city until
06:36:20 Chemical Formulators leaves.
06:36:22 He also said that this property on the point, all this
06:36:26 property on the point is too valuable to just allow it to
06:36:29 sit in its current state and with its current uses.
06:36:33 We have got to start somewhere because he believes that
06:36:35 this truly could be a wonderful gateway into our city.
06:36:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions or comments by
06:36:41 Council?
06:36:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If you believe that they don't make
06:36:45 any land, let me tell you, they're making less waterfront
06:36:49 now.
06:36:49 [ Laughter ]
06:36:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If you believe what I just said, then
06:36:53 you believe, look at this and then you look on the other
06:36:55 side, the Causeway Boulevard, what that used to be, Crab
06:36:59 Hut and the dump that was there, look at it now.
06:37:05 There's only one way in and one way out of that one.
06:37:08 I'm not on either side.
06:37:10 But I love this debate.
06:37:13 You know why?
06:37:16 That means that we're growing.
06:37:17 We're discussing something.
06:37:18 Nobody wanted to come here, nobody wanted to buy, saw
06:37:23 nothing, none of us would be here.
06:37:24 Just think of that.
06:37:25 But properties in the City of Tampa have become and is
06:37:30 changing very geographically very quick.
06:37:34 The city's line -- more than likely I don't really know
06:37:38 but I don't think this was part of the city back in the
06:37:40 '40s.
06:37:42 The line of the city, anything west of Dale Mabry, you
06:37:45 could do anything you want.
06:37:49 Look what we have on Spruce between Lois and Dale Mabry.
06:37:54 Not that we wanted to put it there.
06:37:55 That was on the outside part of the city.
06:37:59 So what went there?
06:38:00 Central maintenance, sanitation department, now called
06:38:04 solid waste.
06:38:05 There was a jail there.
06:38:06 We're trying to clean up all that, move to it somewhere
06:38:08 else.
06:38:09 Because it's no longer the periphery of the city.
06:38:13 It's in the center of the city now.
06:38:15 So all the things that are happening is changing because
06:38:18 people want to live here, raise their kids here and the
06:38:21 kids want to live here.
06:38:22 So, most of our growth comes from within.
06:38:25 Even though 800 people a day move into Florida, it's
06:38:31 going to happen.
06:38:32 And the numbers are represented on my estimate of water
06:38:35 supply sitting on Tampa Bay Water are low.
06:38:37 We're presenting much more than that.
06:38:42 Because it's going to happen.
06:38:44 And it's going to happen in Hillsborough County and the
06:38:48 heart of Hillsborough County, the other cities could get
06:38:50 upset with me, is called Tampa.
06:38:52 That's all, Mr. Chairman.
06:38:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: All right.
06:38:56 We still had Mr. Miranda, you had the motion to close the
06:39:01 public hearing.
06:39:01 I belief Mr. Maniscalco was the seconds.
06:39:03 Okay.
06:39:04 You still good with that?
06:39:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mir yes, sir.
06:39:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: All in favor, please indicate by saying
06:39:08 aye.
06:39:08 Any opposed?
06:39:09 What is the pleasure of Council?
06:39:13 Who wants to take this one?
06:39:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move to transmit.
06:39:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion from Mr. Miranda, avenue second
06:39:18 from Mr. Maniscalco.
06:39:19 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying
06:39:22 aye.
06:39:23 Any opposed?
06:39:23 Thank you.
06:39:25 Yes, Mr. Shelby?
06:39:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a reminder.
06:39:29 That the request was to set the public hearing.
06:39:37 Mr. Garcia --
06:39:41 >> Steve mentioned August 25th.
06:39:43 Think we could change that date?
06:39:44 Mr. Mechanik is not available on that date.
06:39:47 May not be either.
06:39:48 It could be a little later.
06:39:49 Come back with a resolution setting that.
06:39:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Why don't we take this offline, make a
06:40:00 decision, come back to us.
06:40:01 That would be great.
06:40:01 I appreciate it so we can get going with the meeting.
06:40:04 Thank you.
06:40:05 Okay.
06:40:05 We were going to item number 2.
06:40:08 Our friends of the police department had asked that we
06:40:11 move up item number 9 to be done now because they do need
06:40:15 to go back out onto the street.
06:40:20 Mr. Schmid if you could come on up here.
06:40:24 Just get your stuff.
06:40:25 Mr. Schmid if you could come up here.
06:40:29 >>HARRY COHEN: Mr. Chair?
06:40:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes, sir.
06:40:30 >>HARRY COHEN: I believe we have some people that wanted
06:40:32 to speak on public comment related to the noise ordinance
06:40:36 issue that are here.
06:40:37 So perhaps we can accommodate them while we take up this
06:40:41 item.
06:40:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: If it's okay with Council, I will allow
06:40:45 that to happen after the presentation.
06:40:48 >>HARRY COHEN: That would be great.
06:40:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I don't know if we need to make a motion
06:40:52 to that effect.
06:40:53 We will do that at that time.
06:40:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That would be fine.
06:40:56 I would ask Council not take any action until they hear
06:40:58 from the public.
06:41:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
06:41:01 Mr. Schmid.
06:41:03 >>Michael Schmid: Good evening.
06:41:04 I'm here to present a, some proposed language for the
06:41:08 noise ordinance to give a little bit --
06:41:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Your name for the record again.
06:41:13 >>Michael Schmid: Mike Schmidt, assistant city attorney.
06:41:15 Little bit of history.
06:41:19 I'll try to go through it quickly.
06:41:21 Obviously there's a long history with the noise
06:41:23 ordinance, but to sort of give a little recap for City
06:41:26 Council and the public, 1999 we saw a revision to our
06:41:32 noise ordinance that was then again revised in 2003.
06:41:38 Then again in 2006.
06:41:40 And then some additions and revisions in 2013.
06:41:44 In 2013, the last time we revised our noise ordinance,
06:41:48 City Council asked for us to come back in a yearly review
06:41:53 to provide some statistics.
06:41:54 That brought us to January 2014, when the police
06:42:02 department and city attorney office came before you to
06:42:04 provide some statistics.
06:42:06 There was a motion and a request to present any
06:42:10 recommended changes.
06:42:15 This was then in January set for hearing for recommended
06:42:18 changes in 2014.
06:42:19 In between that time period that we were last in front of
06:42:22 you and those recommended changes that we were going to
06:42:25 bring forward, there was a lawsuit placed on the City of
06:42:28 Tampa.
06:42:29 So therefore, our recommended changes were, we actually
06:42:33 recommended that we hold off on the recommendations until
06:42:35 the lawsuit was resolved.
06:42:37 The lawsuit has since resolved.
06:42:39 And we are now in front of you, finally, coming forward
06:42:44 with our recommended changes.
06:42:45 So, that's the reason there's been I guess a delay since
06:42:50 we have actually been before you to present the
06:42:55 recommendations.
06:42:55 So what we have done, we have presented some
06:42:57 recommendations tonight with proposed languages for the
06:43:00 changes in the ordinance.
06:43:01 In addition, TPD has gathered some statistics that we
06:43:07 would like to present to you and in addition, I know
06:43:12 there is some public comment that probably like to be
06:43:15 proposed tonight.
06:43:16 We'd like you to hear from that.
06:43:18 What ultimately we're asking is that legal be requested
06:43:21 to come back for a first draft.
06:43:23 I think in the memo I said July 14th.
06:43:26 I've since found out that somebody that we were going to
06:43:30 want to be present at first reading.
06:43:32 Isn't available on that date.
06:43:35 So we're actually asking for August 4th.
06:43:38 Ultimately what I'm asking for is that your direct legal
06:43:41 to come back with an ordinance for August 4th and tonight
06:43:44 we have the proposed language.
06:43:47 I would like to quickly go through the proposed language
06:43:50 and then I'll turn it off to TPD to discuss some
06:43:54 statistics for you.
06:43:55 The proposed language changes, presently article III,
06:44:01 noise contains two sections.
06:44:03 It's 14151 and 152.
06:44:05 What we are proposing is to expand article III noise to
06:44:10 break out what was currently in 151 and 152 into more
06:44:16 smaller delineated sections.
06:44:18 So, for example, 14-151 is going to be broken out into
06:44:25 numerous different sections so that it's easier for
06:44:28 officers and the public to digest.
06:44:30 One of the problems with 14-151 is that it was
06:44:34 approximately 7 pages long and going to the right section
06:44:36 that you needed depending on the circumstance was at
06:44:40 times difficult for an officer or the public.
06:44:43 So we believe that clarity would help by just simply
06:44:47 breaking these out into smaller sections with titles that
06:44:51 will allow people to go directly to the section that they
06:44:54 are concerned about.
06:44:55 So, beginning with our new revisions, 14-151 would simply
06:45:01 be a purpose statement.
06:45:03 There's currently is again 14.
06:45:06 151 is 7 pages.
06:45:07 14-151 now is proposed with just simply be a purpose
06:45:11 statement.
06:45:12 14-152 would be definitions.
06:45:14 Currently many of these definitions are not in there.
06:45:18 These definitions are being proposed in order to help
06:45:21 provide everybody with understanding of certain terms
06:45:23 that have been used and have been questioned throughout
06:45:26 the years.
06:45:27 So this is meant to bring clarity for everybody.
06:45:30 14-153 is the unreasonably excessive noise from a
06:45:35 property prohibited.
06:45:36 It's only central business district Ybor City historic
06:45:41 district and Channel District.
06:45:43 That currently is 14-151 B 1.
06:45:45 But as you can already see, it's got 14-151 B 1, then a B
06:45:50 2.
06:45:51 It gets to be quite cumbersome.
06:45:53 That's why we're break it out into its own separate
06:45:56 section.
06:45:56 It is now just 14-153.
06:45:59 That provision is substantially the same.
06:46:04 The timing, times of day are the same.
06:46:06 The decibel levels are the same.
06:46:10 We just simply moved into it section 14-153.
06:46:14 14-154 unusual excessive noise from a property prohibited
06:46:18 all other areas.
06:46:19 Previously people have to go to 14.
06:46:21 151 B 2 to try to figure this out.
06:46:24 And we believe by separate being this out into clearly
06:46:27 titled section, people will nowhere to go.
06:46:30 It does still allow for a plainly audible standard in
06:46:33 other sections of the Tampa, it also allows for loud and
06:46:37 raucous standard.
06:46:39 So, there are some changes in 14-154.
06:46:44 Mostly what I just described.
06:46:47 Also in 14-154, we're changing the timing.
06:46:51 Currently plainly audible is not defined for a time limit
06:46:55 when an officer can use it.
06:46:57 As it's proposed, it would be only between the hours of
06:47:01 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
06:47:03 An officer could then enforce using a plainly audible
06:47:06 standard.
06:47:06 If he can hear the noise a hundred feet or more.
06:47:09 There's still a required warning period to be given
06:47:12 first.
06:47:13 But we are adding other time, another option for
06:47:17 enforcement, which would be unreasonably loud and raucous
06:47:20 standards.
06:47:21 They're clearly laid out in 154 for what they would be
06:47:24 and they would need to be complaint based.
06:47:27 14-155 is unreasonably excessive noise from a vehicle
06:47:32 prohibited.
06:47:33 The major change there that it was previously 14-152.
06:47:37 It would be moved to 14-155 with the addition that the
06:47:41 term in the past was motor vehicle.
06:47:43 The term now is going to be vehicle.
06:47:45 The word motor would be stricken from that and vehicles
06:47:48 defined.
06:47:49 It would be a broader interpretation of vehicle.
06:47:52 14-156 is placing loud speakers on public streets or
06:47:59 sidewalks.
06:47:59 That previously was contained in 14-151-I, so we're just
06:48:08 moving it to 14-156.
06:48:10 14-157 as proposed would be unreasonably excessive noise
06:48:15 declared a public nuisance.
06:48:16 Those are, that is in order to make it clear that noise
06:48:21 violations are in fact a public nuisance which gives
06:48:24 citizens or the city a right to bring suit to enforce the
06:48:27 ordinance.
06:48:27 14-158 is now exemptions.
06:48:31 Exemptions were under 14-151-H and now they're just moved
06:48:37 to a clearly delineated section.
06:48:39 They're also being narrowed to comply with case law.
06:48:42 14-159 is the enforcement.
06:48:45 Enforcement previously was under 14-151-J.
06:48:50 It is now being delineated in its own section.
06:48:55 So everybody knows where enforcement is located.
06:48:58 Enforcement is as suggested being slightly changed.
06:49:02 Enforcement currently as it stands, enforcement can be
06:49:06 done with a noise meter or as you know, in 2013, we
06:49:10 started the audible standard.
06:49:14 Those two things are still there.
06:49:15 But if you use a noise meter, currently, it would be
06:49:18 punished as a crime.
06:49:20 And if you used a plainly audible standard it would be a
06:49:24 civil citation.
06:49:25 City attorney's office is recommending that enforcement
06:49:30 be uniform, no matter how an officer chooses to enforce
06:49:34 it, that it's the same enforcement tool.
06:49:37 So, for example, whether it's enforced by a meter or
06:49:41 whether it's enforced under a plainly audible or loud
06:49:44 raucous standard, we are recommending that it starts out
06:49:47 as a civil violation.
06:49:50 So that would change actually to take criminal out of the
06:49:55 meters until it meets certain requirements and as
06:49:59 explained in 14-159 enforcement, there is a number of
06:50:03 violations within a specified time that then could become
06:50:07 enforceable as a criminal violation.
06:50:09 14-160, 161 and 162 were previously 14-151 D, E and F.
06:50:24 So those are just simply moved and delineated.
06:50:27 14-163 was moved from 14-151 C.
06:50:36 And there has been minor changes between the language of
06:50:42 14-151 in these places.
06:50:44 But for the most part --
06:50:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sorry, Mr. Schmid.
06:50:49 I'm trying to flip through the pages as you're mentioning
06:50:52 these provisions.
06:50:55 So you went from 14-159, the enforcement civil citation
06:51:02 and then we always, there's always the -- I shouldn't say
06:51:07 the opportunity.
06:51:08 There's always the ability to take it beyond civil
06:51:12 citation as we have in all of our codes, for enforcement.
06:51:19 So then you went to 14, back to 151?
06:51:24 General purpose?
06:51:26 >>Michael Schmid: I think I was just explaining that
06:51:28 14-159 is presently six and 14-151 J.
06:51:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE: All the numbers you're throwing around
06:51:38 is getting confusing.
06:51:41 >>Michael Schmid: Prior to, you know, any future action
06:51:44 on this I will make sure I submit something that explains
06:51:48 where each thing was taken from.
06:51:50 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
06:51:51 Because that's getting into the, I guess housekeeping
06:51:56 type issue.
06:51:57 I think I'm more interested in the meat of the issue
06:52:01 rather than the housekeeping.
06:52:04 >>Michael Schmid: So the meat of the issue is primarily
06:52:08 what the ordinance is doing is cleaning it up.
06:52:12 It is one of our largest recommendations because we think
06:52:14 that will make it more usable and enforceable.
06:52:17 But in addition we are making sure there's more than one
06:52:21 avenue for noise violations.
06:52:24 Meaning we are adding 14-157 to specifically to declare
06:52:36 that it is in fact a public nuisance.
06:52:38 That would, if it's not currently allowed, it's making
06:52:42 clear that it would be currently allowed for somebody to
06:52:45 go seek a civil action, such as an injunction if
06:52:49 somebody's noise is reaching a level of public nuisance
06:52:51 and they want to go seek an injunction, whether that be a
06:52:55 citizen or a, somebody with the city attorney's office if
06:52:58 the city attorney's office wanted to go seek an
06:53:01 injunction.
06:53:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So if I may, I'm looking at the
06:53:05 underlying copy here.
06:53:06 So, we have got just the sections outlined because
06:53:11 they've been rearranged.
06:53:13 We have got the hours under 14-153 B.
06:53:19 Which is 6:00 p.m. to 3:00 a.m. for 85-decibels and
06:53:28 3:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. for 65-decibels.
06:53:32 In the central business CBD Ybor and Channel District.
06:53:39 So that's a change in the hours.
06:53:41 >>Michael Schmid: That did not change.
06:53:43 I'm sorry.
06:53:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm looking at the underlying copy
06:53:48 going how come the hours changed?
06:53:50 >>Michael Schmid: This is going to be a strike through.
06:53:52 What we would do, because this is only the proposed
06:53:55 language.
06:53:56 What we actually would do is strike through 14-151
06:53:59 completely.
06:54:00 And actually repeal it and ask to replace it with this
06:54:04 entire new noise ordinance.
06:54:06 And the reason we're doing that, there would be so many
06:54:10 strike-throughs, it would be almost impossible to do it
06:54:14 any other way.
06:54:16 >>HARRY COHEN: May I?
06:54:18 Just to be clear, you're going to come back with an
06:54:21 ordinance for first reading on July 14th.
06:54:24 >>Michael Schmid: August 4th now.
06:54:27 >>HARRY COHEN: We're going to do it on August the 4th.
06:54:29 So that will give us plenty of time to look at it.
06:54:32 Will also give the public, people that are interested in
06:54:34 this mattered, you're going to hear from public comment
06:54:37 about something I know are, some time too review it.
06:54:41 I just have one sort of overall question for you.
06:54:45 Did I step out of the room for a moment so I might be
06:54:48 asking something you already covered.
06:54:50 We have been engaged in litigation on this issue avenue
06:54:52 time we have attempted to do something about it.
06:54:55 I believe that this original motion started with
06:54:58 Mr. Reddick like two years ago.
06:55:00 And it just keeps getting continued because of various
06:55:04 different lawsuits.
06:55:05 I know you can't guarantee that we won't be sued because
06:55:08 you've heard our previous discussion before this, we get
06:55:11 sued about everything.
06:55:12 But is it is your belief at this point that this is as
06:55:18 tight as you can make it to give us the best possible
06:55:23 chance of surviving a challenge to the constitutionality
06:55:28 of these provisions?
06:55:31 >>Michael Schmid: Short answer, yes.
06:55:33 >>HARRY COHEN: Okay.
06:55:34 If between now and august 4th there are provisions you
06:55:39 think might be problematic, it might be a good idea to
06:55:42 meet with us individually and make a decision between now
06:55:46 and then whether or not we want to keep or remove those
06:55:49 things.
06:55:50 We don't want this thing to get gummed up again and
06:55:53 suspended over, you know, maybe something that's a
06:55:58 discretionary part of a it.
06:56:00 >>Michael Schmid: We have spent now years in drafting and
06:56:03 tweaking this and making numerous versions and with those
06:56:07 things in mind, and we hopefully have made this as tight
06:56:12 as we can.
06:56:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Anybody else?
06:56:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes, Mr. Laguardia, may I say
06:56:22 something?
06:56:24 What a great attorney.
06:56:24 He said currently yes.
06:56:25 Which means it hasn't been tested but we're going to try
06:56:28 it.
06:56:28 It looks good, I agree with you.
06:56:31 I like that.
06:56:31 Man's full of energy, I like that.
06:56:36 >>Michael Schmid: One other thing.
06:56:38 And I will -- on August 4th, I think I can come back and
06:56:43 explain a little bit more the meat of the ordinance at
06:56:46 that time and allow public to digest this some more.
06:56:49 I have been meeting with numerous different boards and
06:56:53 citizens and I'll continue to do that.
06:56:56 I'm available.
06:56:57 So anybody who basically invites me between now and
06:57:01 August 4th, I'm going to try to reach out to all the
06:57:04 different associations and make sure that they want us
06:57:07 throughout to talk to them, we're out there and we're
06:57:10 available for questions and comments and we're going to
06:57:12 continue listening and if there are changes either needed
06:57:16 between now and August 4th, we can make a substitution.
06:57:20 >>HARRY COHEN: And particularly some of the people that
06:57:21 are here tonight, please reach out to and talk to them
06:57:24 about it.
06:57:25 At the end of public comment, I think would be
06:57:27 appropriate to entertain a motion to actually set first
06:57:31 reading for August 4th.
06:57:32 But we'll do that after we hear from the public.
06:57:35 >>Michael Schmid: Thank you.
06:57:35 I will then ask TPD.
06:57:38 >>HARRY COHEN: We are going to have public comment just
06:57:40 on this issue, item number 9.
06:57:43 Anybody from the public that would like to address
06:57:45 Council now would be your opportunity to do that.
06:57:49 Three minutes per speaker.
06:57:50 >> My name is clay Dan, 3708 east mouse bay.
06:57:59 I've been coming up 14 years with this noise.
06:58:01 The noise is bad.
06:58:02 It's bad in East Tampa.
06:58:04 I asked ya'll three or four years ago, would you come
06:58:07 over to East Tampa and join us so you can see what it's
06:58:10 like to live over there through this noise.
06:58:12 I'm not here to criticize no one because Democrats
06:58:16 simply, ya'll are Democrats, they're mostly sympathetic.
06:58:20 They really care about the minimum wage and other thing.
06:58:22 But I'm really concerned about ya'll.
06:58:25 Ya'll need to come over to East Tampa and see how we're
06:58:28 suffering from this noise.
06:58:29 This goes on all night.
06:58:30 All you heard, boom boom, your windows rattling.
06:58:33 It's out of control.
06:58:34 It's environmental problem.
06:58:36 It's not good for your health.
06:58:37 Mr. Reddick can't do it by himself.
06:58:40 He needs ya'll to he had him.
06:58:42 When you go back to ya'll district, they may not know the
06:58:45 noise.
06:58:46 Your family is sleeping.
06:58:47 My family and other people is not sleeping.
06:58:49 That's the problem.
06:58:50 For ya'll to understand the problem, you need to come off
06:58:52 to East Tampa and see and hear the problem.
06:58:55 If downtown come off to hear it or see it, you don't know
06:58:58 what it's like to go through in life with this problem.
06:59:01 I am tired of coming up here.
06:59:03 I'm 65 years old.
06:59:04 I've been fighting this for 14 years and I've asked ya'll
06:59:08 please do something with this noise.
06:59:10 Get with the Mayor and demand that the police start
06:59:14 writing warning tickets and doing something about this
06:59:17 noise.
06:59:17 It rattles my windows.
06:59:21 The neighbors are complaining, senior sit yens.
06:59:25 My whole house is like sitting there and they're dropping
06:59:29 bombs.
06:59:29 They go down the district three, they have no respect for
06:59:33 the police department.
06:59:34 We cannot let the hoodlums take over the city.
06:59:37 There has been studies done by the justice department
06:59:40 saying when they stop these cars they found drugs and
06:59:42 guns.
06:59:44 And I know every district is different.
06:59:46 But I live in a high crime area.
06:59:48 And I'm asking ya'll again to please come over there
06:59:51 because ya'll getting paid by all the taxpayers in the
06:59:54 City of Tampa.
06:59:54 Just don't come election time.
06:59:56 Come and just check it out.
06:59:58 And see what's going on.
07:00:00 It's a problem over there.
07:00:01 That noise is out of control.
07:00:03 I can't sleep at night.
07:00:05 If you can't sleep at night, that's a problem.
07:00:08 But see, I don't believe ya'll understand that because
07:00:12 ya'll sleep at night.
07:00:13 Sleep with earplugs on.
07:00:14 My house is just rattling.
07:00:16 The neighbors are complaining.
07:00:17 I've called the police.
07:00:18 All I'm asking ya'll to get with the Mayor and ask the
07:00:22 Mayor, and go it with the chief to start cracking down on
07:00:25 this noise.
07:00:25 It's out of control.
07:00:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm going to answer something,
07:00:32 Mr. Chairman.
07:00:33 I hardly ever do this.
07:00:34 But Cuban people make a lot of noise too.
07:00:37 I'm going to tell you just like it is.
07:00:40 If you don't think I get complaints from all over the
07:00:42 city, you're wrong.
07:00:43 But our hands were kind of tied because this thing was in
07:00:46 litigation for some period of time.
07:00:48 I'm not forming excuses for nobody, including myself.
07:00:51 That's all, Mr. Chairman.
07:00:56 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you.
07:00:57 I was going to add to that but I guess it's too late.
07:01:00 So go ahead.
07:01:01 >> Hi there.
07:01:03 Cathy Framcor, 305 South Westland Avenue.
07:01:10 Like to give you an example why we're here to support the
07:01:13 new proposed noise ordinance.
07:01:14 With the little video.
07:01:16 I don't know if I can put it on here.
07:01:20 >>HARRY COHEN: If you lift it up just a little bit and
07:01:22 play it, we can hear it.
07:01:44 >>HARRY COHEN: I think it's upside down actually.
07:01:58 >>HARRY COHEN: Cathy, it's upside down but we can hear it
07:02:01 well.
07:02:02 There you go.
07:02:03 >> So, that was MacDinton's on a Wednesday night after
07:02:14 1:00 a.m.
07:02:14 I mean, it sounds like they're having fun and I'm not
07:02:18 opposed to people having a good time.
07:02:20 The problem is where it's happening.
07:02:22 This is not a closed environment.
07:02:24 It's not a building located in the strip mall or on the
07:02:28 highway.
07:02:29 It's an open venue that butts up to residential
07:02:33 neighborhoods just feet away.
07:02:34 It's disrupting the quality of life for the neighbors.
07:02:37 So I actually sent this video to the owner of the bar.
07:02:41 And his response was, the only reason why it was so loud
07:02:45 was because all the other bars were dead that night.
07:02:49 And it just happened to be that the sounds, his sounds
07:02:52 even louder.
07:02:54 I'm asking him, does that make it okay?
07:02:57 Or is he just saying all the other nights, everyone else
07:03:00 is just as loud?
07:03:03 Were they come Pete for patrons by playing the loudest on
07:03:06 the street?
07:03:06 I'm not saying that this is every bar because some do
07:03:09 actually try and work with the neighbors.
07:03:12 For instance, World of Beer, they used to play, used to
07:03:15 have a loud rock band that they played.
07:03:17 They ended up changing their business model.
07:03:19 Now they just have an acoustic player.
07:03:22 They moved their speakers.
07:03:23 So some do try.
07:03:25 And in fact, even drink.
07:03:27 I'll throw it out there for drinks.
07:03:29 They've been trying.
07:03:30 They've got their building and so they've done stuff to
07:03:34 help with the noise and my complaints to drink have been
07:03:38 less.
07:03:39 But you still got places that just don't care about what
07:03:47 surrounds them.
07:03:48 They continue to push the envelope.
07:03:50 And why, it's because the punishment is a joke at this
07:03:54 current state.
07:03:54 That's why it's a given that you guys all know that
07:03:57 there's a noise issue along Howard.
07:03:59 That's why we need you to push this envelope through,
07:04:02 this new noise ordinance into effect.
07:04:05 So thank you.
07:04:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
07:04:08 Next please?
07:04:09 >> Good evening.
07:04:13 Sandra Guggino, 3107 West Horatio Street, Tampa, 33609.
07:04:20 I'll be brief.
07:04:21 I sent an email earlier in the week just highlighting one
07:04:25 establishment within my neighborhood over the past three
07:04:28 or four years.
07:04:29 There have been 160 noise complaints, three citations.
07:04:35 Now we're trying to deal directly with the establishment
07:04:39 to get some relief.
07:04:40 Nothing is working.
07:04:41 To echo what the first gentleman said, I've got people in
07:04:45 my neighborhood that are sleeping in their living room
07:04:48 and then they move to their bedroom when the bar closes
07:04:51 at 3:00 a.m.
07:04:52 Sleep with earplugs in.
07:04:53 We're losing good neighbors.
07:04:56 And I know all of you know it because I've gotten to know
07:05:00 all of you quite well over this incident.
07:05:02 And I do remember when Guido was candidate, Maniscalco,
07:05:08 he spent a Monday night in the neighborhood and it was
07:05:11 greatly appreciated because he got a bird's-eye view of
07:05:14 it.
07:05:14 I'm here to basically ask you to please advance this.
07:05:17 Michael spent some time with a number of us on June the
07:05:21 13th.
07:05:22 We fully support what he's trying to do for Tuesday and
07:05:25 we urge you to do the same.
07:05:27 Thank you.
07:05:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Anyone else in the public would like to
07:05:30 speak on item number 9 before we move forward?
07:05:33 Sir?
07:05:36 >> Good evening.
07:05:37 My name is Ryan Frecky.
07:05:38 I live 215 South Westland Avenue, unit number two, which
07:05:42 is right at the corner of Westland and Platt Street.
07:05:45 Kitty-corner from the drink.
07:05:46 I support any changes to help the police officers and our
07:05:51 citizens to enforce noise violations.
07:05:56 Routinely Wednesday through Sunday nights, I will be
07:06:01 woken up anywhere from 12:30 to 1:00 and then again at
07:06:05 3:00 and then ongoing.
07:06:08 Oftentimes the restaurants or the bars, they will behave
07:06:13 for certain period of time.
07:06:14 But then they lapse.
07:06:16 So anything that helps the police to put some teeth into
07:06:19 these noise ordinances would be extremely helpful.
07:06:23 I moved into this property back in 2005.
07:06:27 I bought it in 2003 when it was under construction.
07:06:30 So I've lived in this neighborhood before many of these
07:06:34 establishments existed and they were not as loud as they
07:06:37 are today.
07:06:37 So I appreciate any and all help.
07:06:40 I hope that this is a more solid ordinance that would
07:06:44 help us enforce it on a more regular basis.
07:06:48 Thank you.
07:06:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Anyone else in the public would like to
07:06:51 speak on item number nine?
07:06:53 >>HARRY COHEN: Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to
07:06:55 set first reading of the noise ordinance on August 4th.
07:06:59 >> Seconds.
07:07:00 >>HARRY COHEN: At 10:30 a.m. under staff reports.
07:07:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion from Mr. Cohen, second from
07:07:06 Mr. Miranda.
07:07:07 Any discussion on that motion?
07:07:10 Yes, sir?
07:07:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would you want that to show up for staff
07:07:15 reports or for the first reading?
07:07:19 >>HARRY COHEN: I do.
07:07:19 Because I think we're going to want to have a chance to
07:07:22 discuss it before we pass it.
07:07:23 That's why I said that.
07:07:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
07:07:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You've got that, clerk?
07:07:28 The motion?
07:07:29 >>THE CLERK: Yes, thank you.
07:07:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: All in favor of that motion, please
07:07:32 indicate by saying aye.
07:07:32 Any opposed?
07:07:34 Thank you.
07:07:34 Thank you all for attending.
07:07:36 Okay, we're going to go to item number two.
07:07:42 Mr. Snelling, I apologize for making you wait.
07:07:49 >>THOM SNELLING: Thom Snelling, planning and development
07:07:49 director.
07:07:51 With me tonight is Qiana Daughtry.
07:07:56 Vanessa is in Europe.
07:07:58 We decided to let her have a vacation.
07:08:01 Qiana is going to do the PowerPoint.
07:08:03 Fairly brief one.
07:08:04 The bottom line purpose of this hearing is to open the
07:08:08 public hearing and to really commence the 30 day review
07:08:11 period.
07:08:11 Tomorrow after we have officially opened it by
07:08:17 requirement, the draft document will be posted online.
07:08:21 We'll make it available a couple different locations,
07:08:24 physical paper copies and things like that.
07:08:26 Over the next 30 days we're going to various different
07:08:29 neighborhoods, meetings coordinating that with Maria
07:08:32 Holmes, neighborhood liaison.
07:08:35 She has a very long title but that's who she is.
07:08:38 So we will be reaching out and going into the
07:08:40 neighborhoods with this information as well.
07:08:42 But again stressing tonight that the purpose of this is
07:08:44 to really commence that 30 day period so we can start to
07:08:47 do a lot of those things.
07:08:48 Could we have the PowerPoint?
07:09:01 >> I'm Qiana Daughtry.
07:09:04 I'm the community development coordinator for the housing
07:09:08 community development division of the City of Tampa.
07:09:11 So we are here tonight to open the public hearing as your
07:09:15 motion of course.
07:09:16 And going to the next slide, or do I have to click it?
07:09:19 I click it.
07:09:21 Fun.
07:09:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Don't say that we don't train you here at
07:09:28 the City of Tampa.
07:09:29 >> So the purpose of this hearing is actually to go over
07:10:00 the 2017 HUD program funding awards for both the federal
07:10:05 programs and we're going to mention the ship program in
07:10:08 this presentation.
07:10:09 We'll cover the community development block grant, the
07:10:12 emergency solutions grant, the home investment
07:10:15 partnership grant, the housing opportunities for persons
07:10:18 with aids and the state housing initiative partnership.
07:10:22 We'll talk also about the anticipated levels of funding.
07:10:26 We'll additionally explain the one year action plan
07:10:29 process, the calendar of events.
07:10:31 The request for proposal process and provide any
07:10:34 organization or member of the public the opportunity to
07:10:37 speak regarding the action plan.
07:10:39 The plan itself provides summary of the activities and
07:10:44 the actions that we're planning to take and take on for
07:10:48 this coming year.
07:10:49 And they have already been identified through our five
07:10:51 year action plan, consolidated plan, excuse me.
07:10:55 The HUD grant funding levels are listed above.
07:10:58 Please note that these are the anticipated grant funding
07:11:01 levels.
07:11:01 We have not received yet our agreement from HUD but we
07:11:04 will after this plan is deemed approved.
07:11:07 We went over previously in the first public hearing the
07:11:13 fact that we had an increase in some of the programs and
07:11:16 decrease only in one.
07:11:18 The SHIP allocation again is going, is just mentioned
07:11:21 briefly, just the fact that we will receive 2.2.
07:11:24 And a side note to that is that we did receive the email
07:11:28 today stating that the ELAPP was approved.
07:11:32 So funding cap which we have presented in the past are
07:11:34 still the same.
07:11:36 CDBG has a requirement that for public services, we set
07:11:39 aside 15%, so in this case it's $411,000.
07:11:43 HOME has a CHDO set aside of 157,000.
07:11:52 ESG has a requirement we set aside 60-40 split.
07:11:57 60% goes in program which was originally designed to
07:12:00 implement for shelters only.
07:12:02 That would be operations, outreach and any other services
07:12:05 to engage the homeless population.
07:12:07 The second -- I'm sorry.
07:12:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Ms. Rizzo, there was a lot of angst
07:12:15 over what happened at Hillsborough County with different
07:12:23 agencies losing funding.
07:12:29 Was the spring, alpha house and the Salvation Army.
07:12:34 And there's, from what I know, it eliminated their
07:12:41 abilities to serve especially those with immediate
07:12:47 shelter needs.
07:12:49 The spring obviously service domestic violence victims.
07:12:53 That's a big, big, big concern.
07:12:55 So, we tried to pick up the slack from the county.
07:12:59 >> Yes, we are.
07:12:59 Just a correction to that.
07:13:00 Is that it's the transitional housing that was lost.
07:13:03 Not their shelter operations.
07:13:05 So for each agency, yes, the city, the county and the
07:13:09 Tampa Hillsborough homeless initiative have met with
07:13:12 those agencies.
07:13:13 So we have been included in that evident to repair the
07:13:15 damage that was done there.
07:13:17 As the City of Tampa, we have gone in and offered the
07:13:20 opportunity for those families to actually participate in
07:13:22 our home tenant based rental assistance program to assist
07:13:27 them in transitioning for a period of year.
07:13:29 So we sent staff out to each facility and they're able to
07:13:32 explain the programs and then we have already actually
07:13:35 done the intake appointments for Alpha House.
07:13:37 The spring is scheduled to be next.
07:13:39 We were waiting for the county to go and offer its
07:13:42 services and explain its programs.
07:13:43 And that way the residents are able to make and informed
07:13:46 decision as to which program they would choose to
07:13:48 participate?
07:13:50 >> What I can do as an aside, Qiana has quickly outlined
07:13:55 what we are doing.
07:13:56 We have a program in place and I can put something
07:13:59 together and distribute it all to Councilmembers just so
07:14:02 you know --
07:14:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That would be very helpful.
07:14:05 Because it's a tremendous concern of mine and I kind of
07:14:09 went into a tailspin when I heard about that.
07:14:11 >> They put it together so they can make them whole.
07:14:14 Rather than just giving a 30 day window when funding
07:14:18 expiration, we have developed something that will support
07:14:20 them for the next 6 months in order they can transition
07:14:23 with their populations and help them find other
07:14:25 locations, some with the city, some with the county,
07:14:28 tenant based rental assistance and other programs.
07:14:31 I'll put that together and get it to Council.
07:14:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Because I spoke to some county
07:14:35 commissioners and let's just say they didn't share as
07:14:39 much concern as I expressed.
07:14:44 >> Okay.
07:14:47 So returning to the funding caps, I was explaining, so
07:14:52 60% is traditional management of the grant.
07:14:55 Rapid rehouse is the other 40%, which is used to rapidly
07:14:59 rehouse anyone who is homeless.
07:15:01 Under that effort you could also possibly use it for
07:15:04 prevention, which is not used since our allocation is so
07:15:08 small.
07:15:08 Additionally the HOPWA program is required to be across
07:15:16 four counties.
07:15:17 City has the privilege of administering that.
07:15:20 The funding breakdown.
07:15:21 We do use for the HOPWA program in particular, we use the
07:15:26 HIV/AIDS surveillance reports to determine the percent
07:15:30 for county in terms of the funding level.
07:15:32 Here we have the calendar of events for this year's
07:15:36 process in terms of the RFP process.
07:15:39 So we have released the RFP -- RFA excuse me back in
07:15:44 April.
07:15:44 We held the workshop April 28th and May 3rd.
07:15:48 April 29th we held the first public hearing for the
07:15:51 action plan.
07:15:53 May 20th was submission deadline for applications.
07:15:55 During the month of may we did the review of the
07:15:58 applications and of course we are here tonight doing the
07:16:01 second public hearing.
07:16:02 August the 4th, we will actually upload the full action
07:16:07 plan for Council to actually approve the final document
07:16:10 after we have received any comments during this 30 day
07:16:13 period.
07:16:13 And then it's the plan August 15th through HUD.
07:16:18 And October 1st, we expect that the agreements go into
07:16:21 effect and everybody begins carrying out their work.
07:16:24 The next item to discuss is the fact that this is a draft
07:16:29 document and it's based on the RFP responses or RFA
07:16:33 responses.
07:16:34 So we also have in the next couple of slides those who
07:16:37 will be funded as well as the types of program use
07:16:40 funding, what levels.
07:16:42 It is again a 30 day comment period.
07:16:44 Starting today, closing July 28th.
07:16:47 And we are expecting hopefully public comments that we
07:16:51 will be able to incorporate into the draft.
07:16:53 The program uses are listed here, so these are in
07:16:59 particular just other types of delivery that we budget
07:17:02 out using the grant funds.
07:17:04 And it's the higher level view basically.
07:17:08 When you go to the next slide here, you see who we have
07:17:12 actually funded.
07:17:13 And this is again based on the RFP review process, which
07:17:16 is that the City of Tampa releases the RFP.
07:17:20 We coordinate the workshop so nonprofits are invited to
07:17:23 attend and understand what it is we're asking them to
07:17:26 respond to.
07:17:26 As a result of that, we also assembled the review panels,
07:17:31 which these are all public meetings.
07:17:33 The non-profits are invited to these review meetings so
07:17:36 that they can hear and take notes on what the panel has
07:17:39 to say regarding their application.
07:17:41 And then we're now at the point where we have a draft of
07:17:44 the action plan in terms of the awards and, that are
07:17:48 being offered.
07:17:49 The next slide is in particular in regard to housing
07:17:53 programs.
07:17:53 And again, a hire level view of what it is that we plan
07:17:56 to fund.
07:17:57 ESG, these are the agencies that we do plan to fund,
07:18:03 alpha house and the spring.
07:18:05 This would be again specifically for their shelter
07:18:07 operations and not their transitional.
07:18:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mr. Snelling said he's going to sends
07:18:13 the information because I'm concerned about Salvation
07:18:16 Army.
07:18:16 I guess I'll find that out.
07:18:19 >> Yes.
07:18:20 They are part of the other plan, yes, for their
07:18:22 transitional.
07:18:24 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Excellent.
07:18:25 Thank you.
07:18:26 >> The last entity there is Tampa Housing Authority for a
07:18:29 rapid rehab.
07:18:30 Across the four counties, these are the agencies that
07:18:33 will be funding for the HOPWA program.
07:18:37 And the last slide is just the fact that we do hope to
07:18:41 have public involvement.
07:18:42 I know that we have one provider who is actually here
07:18:45 tonight looking to make a public comment.
07:18:47 We do have surveys that are available.
07:18:50 The draft action plan will be posted on our web site and
07:18:53 I'm sure Tom and Vanessa will likely meet with those who
07:18:57 have a question for them.
07:18:58 Additionally, the survey can be obtained also from the
07:19:01 web site and everything is due to Vanessa by the 28th as
07:19:05 long as you open the comment area.
07:19:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So one year as I was reading through
07:19:11 the action plan when it was publish it, I found that some
07:19:16 of the survey respondents were not from the City of
07:19:20 Tampa.
07:19:21 And it was, you know, a telephone, I think -- someone had
07:19:30 called in or -- and there wasn't a way or even online
07:19:34 there wasn't a way for us at that time, you know what I'm
07:19:37 talking about, to restrict, you know, that this is only
07:19:41 the City of Tampa.
07:19:43 You got comments on Hillsborough County, go comment over
07:19:45 there.
07:19:46 >>THOM SNELLING: That was during the consolidated plan.
07:19:50 As part of that, we had consultant come in and she
07:19:53 distributed that, she broadcast it widely and a lot of
07:19:56 people, because the county is doing theirs at the same
07:19:59 time.
07:20:00 So I think there may have been some confusion.
07:20:03 So they responded to ours as well as the county.
07:20:05 The way we're using surveys this year, we're doing more
07:20:09 hands-on when we go to neighborhood meetings, for handing
07:20:12 them out and collecting them right then and there.
07:20:16 So unless some rogue person from the county decides to go
07:20:17 to a meeting.
07:20:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE: We're not doing all surveys the
07:20:21 old-fashioned way in paper, aren't we doing online?
07:20:27 >> It is online or no.
07:20:28 It will be online.
07:20:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So is there a way for us to filter,
07:20:35 you know, the City of Tampa residents from non-City of
07:20:38 Tampa residents?
07:20:40 >> The front page of the survey does ask for your
07:20:43 information, but it is optional.
07:20:45 You can't require someone to put their information on it.
07:20:47 >> Typically somebody would put down where they live or
07:20:50 what their address with and we would certainly
07:20:52 double-check that.
07:20:53 We're not going to get like hundreds and hundreds.
07:20:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Could we ask just for the zip codes?
07:20:58 I know some zip codes overlap also.
07:21:01 3316 overlaps with Temple Terrace.
07:21:03 And others overlap with unincorporated Hillsborough
07:21:06 County.
07:21:06 At least if we, we would know that zip code is like town
07:21:10 and country, we would know that that's way far removed.
07:21:15 >> We can certainly figure out some kind of filter.
07:21:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I would appreciate that.
07:21:19 Thank you.
07:21:19 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions from Council?
07:21:21 Of staff about this information?
07:21:23 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
07:21:26 item number 2?
07:21:27 Please come forward.
07:21:28 >> Carol brown, I'm the executive director of Tampa light
07:21:32 house for the blind.
07:21:33 1106 West Platt.
07:21:35 I wanted to thank you all first for your consolidated
07:21:39 plan, which includes persons with disabilities,
07:21:42 specifically seniors and keeping them safe and
07:21:46 independent in their home, which we do.
07:21:49 I also want to thank you for the privilege of
07:21:51 participating in a very open and well guided process.
07:21:57 We are in other counties and a part of Hillsborough
07:22:04 County as well.
07:22:05 That this process was very open.
07:22:07 This was one of the few that we were able to sit in the
07:22:10 review process and we, at the light house seven as a
07:22:15 meeting place.
07:22:16 Also for the neighborhood association that Councilman
07:22:19 Cohen revitalize it.
07:22:21 Now they call themselves Spanish town creek.
07:22:25 6 and also Mayor's alliance for persons with
07:22:29 disabilities.
07:22:29 A couple years ago you gave us spending for one of our
07:22:32 bad parking lots they used to fuss at me about.
07:22:35 And I have one more less.
07:22:38 Through that process city staff was so great in helping
07:22:40 us each step of the way.
07:22:44 And I'm appreciating the recommended to do the one last
07:22:49 parking lot, so that -- it's a dirt lot and hasn't been
07:22:54 accessible to wheelchairs and walkers and seniors and
07:22:57 people coming in and out.
07:23:01 Just wanted to thank you all for your support over the
07:23:04 years and both our program services and keeping people
07:23:09 inland and back to work, but also couple years ago, the
07:23:12 public facilities and this year, and also for your
07:23:17 participation last year for our 75th anniversary.
07:23:20 Councilman Reddick being there.
07:23:22 Just wanted to commend the staff for the process and the
07:23:28 openness and I commend all for the support in making the
07:23:34 whole process so accessible.
07:23:39 Thank you.
07:23:41 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
07:23:42 Thank you for your patience in being here tonight.
07:23:44 Is there anyone else in public that would like to speak
07:23:47 on item number 2?
07:23:49 Okay.
07:23:49 I see no one.
07:23:50 Thank you all very much for attending.
07:23:52 Mr. Snelling?
07:23:54 >>THOM SNELLING: What we would need council to do is to
07:23:56 make a motion to open the 30-day review period for the
07:24:02 fiscal year 2017 and program year 2016 annual action plan
07:24:05 for the City of Tampa.
07:24:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Move what Mr. Snelling just said.
07:24:10 >>THOM SNELLING: I read it so carefully.
07:24:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion from Ms. Montelione,
07:24:13 second by Mr. Miranda.
07:24:16 All in favor please indicate by saying aye.
07:24:17 Any opposed?
07:24:18 Anything else, sir?
07:24:20 >>THOM SNELLING: No.
07:24:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you very much.
07:24:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thanks to Qiana who did such a
07:24:26 wonderful job representing the department.
07:24:29 Thank you so much.
07:24:30 I know how hard she works and how much this means to her.
07:24:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you all very much.
07:24:34 Before I ask for a motion to open the hearings, I just
07:24:37 want to read into the record Ms. Capin, who is not here
07:24:40 this morning and not here now had a conflict and was
07:24:44 traveling so could not make it today.
07:24:46 Can I get a motion to open -- I have a motion from
07:24:50 Mr. Miranda, second from Ms. Montelione.
07:24:52 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying
07:24:54 aye.
07:24:54 Any opposed?
07:24:56 Anyone that is going to speak about items number 3
07:25:01 through 8, please rise and be sworn in.
07:25:06 [Oath administered by Clerk]
07:25:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
07:25:12 Staff?
07:25:17 >> Item number 7, you have a request for a continuance.
07:25:22 I was wanting to go ahead and ask for that.
07:25:24 It would be to the August agenda.
07:25:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Move continuance.
07:25:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Just wanted to make sure that the
07:25:31 petitioner had a chance to ask for that continuance.
07:25:34 Petitioner?
07:25:35 >> Anne Pollack, 501 east Kennedy.
07:25:41 I would like a continuance please.
07:25:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, Ms. Pollack.
07:25:45 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
07:25:47 the continuance only on item number 7?
07:25:49 I see no one.
07:25:50 Yes, Mr. Shelby?
07:25:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, date is August 25th, 2016
07:25:55 at 6:00 p.m.
07:25:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
07:25:57 Do I have a motion to that effect?
07:26:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Go ahead.
07:26:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: August 25th at 6:00 p.m.
07:26:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion, second from Mr. Maniscalco.
07:26:17 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
07:26:18 aye.
07:26:19 Any opposed?
07:26:20 Thank you very much.
07:26:21 Ms. Moreda, number three.
07:26:25 >> That is AB2-16-13, property is located at 3225 South
07:26:32 MacDill Avenue, suite number 117.
07:26:37 The property is currently zoned CI.
07:26:40 And is in a community mix -- community commercial land
07:26:45 use classification.
07:26:46 The site is currently approved for alcohol beverage
07:26:51 sales, back in 2011 for a small venue, beer, wine,
07:26:56 package sales, off-site consumption only.
07:26:59 They are now proposing to add the ability to do on-site
07:27:03 consumption.
07:27:04 They are still indicating that the primary use of the
07:27:08 property will be the package store retail sales, shoppers
07:27:12 goods.
07:27:13 They are indicating that the size of the AB sales area is
07:27:18 2,435 square feet.
07:27:21 Inside only.
07:27:23 The shopping center currently has 157 parking spaces.
07:27:30 The hours of operation are indicated Monday through
07:27:33 Saturday, 10:00 a.m. through 8:00 a.m.
07:27:36 Sunday, 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.
07:27:39 They are asking for a reduction in the distance
07:27:44 separation required for residential from 250 feet to
07:27:49 247 feet.
07:27:50 And then they are adjacent to another AB establishment so
07:27:56 that is from 250 to zero.
07:27:59 They are an existing package store now, it's the red neck
07:28:05 wine company.
07:28:05 It was located, the shopping center here, South MacDill.
07:28:14 Have some photographs here of the residential that's
07:28:22 across the street as well as the front of the shopping
07:28:27 area.
07:28:27 The Palma Ceia shopping center there.
07:28:31 But they are not considered at this point a change of
07:28:35 use, so the parking is not being triggered for the
07:28:38 shopping center.
07:28:39 They are really simply asking to be able to do the
07:28:44 consumption on premise.
07:28:45 They are indicating though that they are not going to
07:28:48 have any seating area, that they would just have some
07:28:52 tasting abilities on the property.
07:28:54 The legal description of this petition was revised but
07:28:59 there are still some site plan provisions need to be
07:29:02 corrected.
07:29:04 If Council's inclined CEO inland to approve the petition.
07:29:08 MacDill, this is a transit emphasis corridor.
07:29:13 HART does run on MacDill Avenue, at least the weekdays
07:29:17 from 6:00 to, in the morning to 8:00 at night.
07:29:21 There is again the residential that is within 247 feet.
07:29:28 It is a single-family attached RM-35 district.
07:29:34 The Pane Rustica is what is directly adjacent to this
07:29:40 site.
07:29:41 Staff did find it inconsistent.
07:29:43 The police report was turned in.
07:29:44 I think I sent a copy to the city clerk's office, if you
07:29:52 all have it.
07:29:52 They had no objection to the request.
07:29:54 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
07:29:58 >>REBECCA KERT: We did have a substitute ordinance to,
07:30:02 that corrected the title, the address was incorrect, so
07:30:06 if you do feel inclined to approve this, there is a
07:30:10 substitute ordinance.
07:30:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Do you have it available to us currently?
07:30:13 Thank you.
07:30:14 Appreciate it.
07:30:15 Okay, petitioner?
07:30:16 >> Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of Council.
07:30:21 John Grandoff, sweet 3700 Bank of America Plaza.
07:30:24 I represent Wine Amour LLC, which operates the Red Neck
07:30:29 Wine Company.
07:30:32 It is immediately next door to Pane Rustica.
07:30:36 And they have a package approval right now.
07:30:38 They want to upgrade it to consumption on premises
07:30:43 because they can get better pricing on their wine and
07:30:45 they do want to serve a little bit on premises beyond
07:30:49 just tasting and no tables coming out, no seats, just
07:30:53 Merrill upgrade you wouldn't even know the change from
07:30:56 today to tomorrow.
07:30:57 And that's all we have.
07:31:01 We ask you approve the two waivers and also that you
07:31:03 allow the opportunity to revise the site plan and get it
07:31:06 buffed up the way it needs to be before you hold your
07:31:09 second reading.
07:31:10 I've received no calls of opposition on the application.
07:31:12 Request your approval this evening.
07:31:15 Thank you.
07:31:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, sir.
07:31:16 This is item number 3.
07:31:19 AB 2-16-13.
07:31:21 Is there anyone in the public that wishes to speak at
07:31:24 this time on this item?
07:31:25 I see no one.
07:31:26 I have a motion to close from Mr. Cohen, seconds from
07:31:30 Mr. Maniscalco.
07:31:31 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
07:31:32 aye.
07:31:32 Any opposed?
07:31:34 Ms. Montelione, will you please take item number 3?
07:31:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Certainly, sir.
07:31:41 I move an ordinance repealing ordinance number 2011-104
07:31:53 approving a special use permit S-2 for alcoholic beverage
07:31:57 sales, small venue, on premises consumption and retail
07:32:01 package sales off-premises consumption and making lawful
07:32:04 the sale of beer and wine at or from that certain lot,
07:32:06 plot or tract of land located at 32250 South MacDill
07:32:11 Avenue, suite 117, Tampa, Florida as more particularly
07:32:16 described in section 3, that all ordinances or parts of
07:32:19 ordinances in conflicts are repealed providing an
07:32:22 effective date.
07:32:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion from Ms. Montelione, second from
07:32:26 Mr. Maniscalco.
07:32:27 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
07:32:28 aye.
07:32:29 Any opposed?
07:32:33 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent.
07:32:35 Second reading and adoption will be on July 14th at
07:32:38 9:30 a.m.
07:32:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Item number 4.
07:32:40 >>Gloria Moreda, land development.
07:32:44 This is item AB 2-16-14, property is 4606 West Boy Scout
07:32:51 Boulevard and it is a CI zoned property, RMU-100 land use
07:32:58 classification.
07:32:58 The proposal is for a large venue, beer, wine, liquor
07:33:03 on-premise consumption only for a restaurant.
07:33:05 The restaurant is 14,517.93 square feet inside area.
07:33:14 3,772 square feet more or less outside area, for
07:33:22 approximately 18,290 square feet total area.
07:33:27 The site plan is indicating there are 155 off-street
07:33:33 parking spaces.
07:33:34 Their hours of operation is listed on the site plan are
07:33:38 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday.
07:33:41 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. on Sunday.
07:33:44 They are needing a number of waivers.
07:33:47 They are asking for a distance separation from
07:33:50 residential from 250 feet to 165 feet.
07:33:56 They are needing a reduction of off-street parking from
07:34:01 170 spaces to 155.
07:34:05 They are also requesting access to a local street, Trask
07:34:11 Street.
07:34:11 And they are asking for the reduction of loading and
07:34:14 unloading spaces from two to zero.
07:34:17 The property is here on Boy Scout.
07:34:27 It is right up the southwest corner of Trask and Boy
07:34:33 Scout.
07:34:33 There is currently under renovation.
07:34:36 >> This is the back view from the parking.
07:34:43 Directly on the east side of Trask.
07:34:46 There is a residential complex.
07:34:51 Currently the previous restaurant that was at this
07:34:54 location did not have access to Trask.
07:34:57 They are wanting to establish a curb cut on to Trask but
07:35:02 there currently is not one.
07:35:04 Staff is concerned about that proposed access since it is
07:35:08 a local street.
07:35:10 We are also concerned about the reduction of parking.
07:35:14 It's a very large restaurant that's being proposed here.
07:35:17 And the fact that they do not meet the distance
07:35:20 separation from residential.
07:35:21 There are a number of site plan corrections that need to
07:35:26 be made.
07:35:27 As it relates to the wet zoning and how it's depicted on
07:35:34 the property.
07:35:34 But they're not substantial changes to the site plan.
07:35:38 If Council is inclined to approve.
07:35:41 Transportation has raised the same concerns about the
07:35:44 access to Trask as well as parking reduction.
07:35:48 Again, the residential is directly across the street on
07:35:53 Trask.
07:35:54 This is a, within the Westshore business center.
07:35:58 And the property is in a mixed use corridor.
07:36:03 HART does run route 15 along Boy Scout.
07:36:07 Weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
07:36:11 And weekends from 7:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.
07:36:16 Generally speaking.
07:36:17 Again, this is the site plan does indicate that the
07:36:21 primary use of this venue will be restaurants.
07:36:25 But staff is raising the concerns related to the waivers
07:36:30 that are being requested.
07:36:31 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
07:36:34 Petitioner?
07:36:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Do we have a petitioner?
07:36:42 That's okay.
07:36:43 >> Steven Stepp, I'm a professional engineer with Abbott
07:36:49 group, representing Lucky Dill Local Brewing Company.
07:36:54 The property is located at 4606 Boy Scout Boulevard,
07:37:01 directly across from international mall, diagonal to the
07:37:04 Tampa airport and within the Westshore overlay district.
07:37:08 The property was previously occupied by the Versailles
07:37:16 steakhouse, which closed approximately three years ago.
07:37:19 The restaurant had a large venue beer, wine and liquor
07:37:23 alcoholic beverage sales license.
07:37:25 Lucky Dill brewing company proposes to renovate the
07:37:30 building and property in order to open a quality sit-down
07:37:34 restaurant and it's seeking City Council's approval to
07:37:37 expand the alcohol beverage sales license to include the
07:37:40 outdoor patio area addition that is part of the
07:37:43 renovations.
07:37:44 In addition to this application, the property is
07:37:47 currently going through permitting for site, landscaping,
07:37:51 buildings renovations, so many of the site plan revisions
07:37:55 that are being requested by staff in their report have
07:37:58 already been made or we will respond to those comments
07:38:02 and incorporate them before the next City Council
07:38:04 meeting.
07:38:04 The renovations will include -- can I put this up here?
07:38:11 I've never used this before.
07:38:12 Do I speak into this one?
07:38:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Just keep speaking.
07:38:27 >> The renovations include extensive interior remodeling.
07:38:32 Building facade redesign.
07:38:35 Here's a elevation of our facade rework.
07:38:42 North elevation.
07:38:44 Facing Boy Scout.
07:38:46 Here's a rendering of our east elevation.
07:38:53 Facing Trask.
07:38:56 Back to the site plan real quick.
07:39:01 Addition of the outdoor patio area out on Boy Scout Road.
07:39:05 Addition of a walk-in cooler in the back.
07:39:10 Extensive landscaping improvements both on Boy Scout and
07:39:13 Trask.
07:39:13 Improved site access, addition of the entrance to Trask.
07:39:16 Addition of a ten foot wide sidewalk trail along Boy
07:39:21 Scout Boulevard.
07:39:23 The four waivers that are being requested are minimal and
07:39:30 necessary for renovation of the property, so that Lucky
07:39:33 Dill Local Brewing Company can open for business at this
07:39:37 location and contribute to the community's quality of
07:39:40 life.
07:39:40 Number one waiver.
07:39:42 The residential distance separation reduction.
07:39:46 The reduction in residential district separation from 250
07:39:50 down to 165 feet is due to the recently constructed
07:39:55 Madeira Westshore luxury apartments to the east.
07:39:59 That's right over here.
07:40:00 The property as well as other quality restaurants in the
07:40:04 area have alcoholic beverage licenses.
07:40:06 There are numerous others, as you guys know, restaurants
07:40:10 up and down Boy Scout Road.
07:40:12 The Westshore overlay is intended to be dense, vibrant,
07:40:15 walkable, mixed use district.
07:40:17 The apartments were constructed there to take advantage
07:40:20 of the site's close proximity to businesses and services
07:40:25 offered in the Westshore area.
07:40:26 The restaurants, the hotels, the office buildings, et
07:40:30 cetera.
07:40:30 The separation requirement isn't necessary within, within
07:40:35 such a mixed use environment, especially for a quality
07:40:38 restaurant venue like Lucky Dill.
07:40:40 The waivers two and three off-street parking and loading
07:40:45 space reductions.
07:40:46 Let's talk about those.
07:40:47 Those two waivers are interrelated issues.
07:40:52 Both the waiver for reduction of parking from 170 spaces
07:40:55 to 155 spaces and the waiver in reduction from loading
07:41:00 from two loading bays to zero are needed to grandfather
07:41:03 the existing condition.
07:41:05 The parking lot is existing and there's no way to add
07:41:08 additional parking spaces without removing more landscape
07:41:12 areas.
07:41:12 Which would have minimal impact on the parking count, but
07:41:17 would be adverse to the synthetics of the site.
07:41:21 Aesthetics of the site.
07:41:24 Adding loading spaces would result in further reduction
07:41:26 in the parking provided.
07:41:28 Delivery trucks can continue to parallel park and unload
07:41:31 along the south side of the building.
07:41:33 During off hours, where there isn't demand for
07:41:38 immediately adjacent parking spaces, the area is
07:41:43 convenient to the delivery entrance.
07:41:46 And is screened from public view by the building, which
07:41:51 has, and has minimal temporary impact on parking
07:41:55 availability.
07:41:56 Also the site is located within a high density walkable
07:42:01 district nearby apartment residents, hotel guests, office
07:42:06 workers can leave their car parked and conveniently walk
07:42:09 a short distance to the Lucky Dill for breakfast, lunch
07:42:13 or dinner.
07:42:15 There's going to be a lot of walk-up patrons we think.
07:42:18 And the fourth waiver is the waiver for commercial access
07:42:23 to a local street.
07:42:25 The waive for commercial access to the local street,
07:42:30 Trask Street will improve site access and circulation
07:42:35 without adversely impacting the surrounding area.
07:42:37 There is no interconnect from the site to the west or to
07:42:42 the south.
07:42:43 And having I think I heard you guys talk about this
07:42:46 earlier.
07:42:47 Having more than one way in and one way out is a safer
07:42:50 and better design.
07:42:51 The design that we came up with aligns with chestnut
07:42:55 street.
07:42:57 To comply with the spirit of the grid network system and
07:43:01 provide separation from Boy Scout Road.
07:43:05 While Trask is technically, they're calling it a local
07:43:09 street, its purpose is not to provide access to some type
07:43:14 of single-family neighborhood that would need protection
07:43:17 from cut-through traffic.
07:43:19 We have had that many times in projects we have done in
07:43:22 the city.
07:43:23 Instead, Trask Street is part of a grid street network
07:43:28 within a high density mixed use district, mixed use
07:43:33 corridor district that already provides access to so many
07:43:36 numerous non-residential uses.
07:43:39 Some of which are, I just drove up and down there,
07:43:42 extended stay America, Tampa Marriott Westshore, AAA auto
07:43:48 club, tower place office complex, and actually Trask is
07:43:52 almost like reverse frontage road to Westshore Boulevard,
07:43:55 which is off to the west, a main artery.
07:43:58 So with that --
07:44:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Excuse me.
07:44:07 You mentioned everything on the west side of the street.
07:44:09 There's kind of a big property on the east side of the
07:44:12 street.
07:44:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's called the dragons.
07:44:16 >> Jefferson high school.
07:44:17 Right.
07:44:17 Jefferson high school does exist immediately to the east.
07:44:20 But everything questions, on the west side of Trask
07:44:25 Street is all commercial.
07:44:26 Pretty much all commercial.
07:44:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Familiar with that I just wanted to make
07:44:31 sure that you understood you mentioned all the commercial
07:44:33 side but none of the public use, the part of the reason
07:44:37 is that there's going to be a lot of traffic there and a
07:44:40 lot of younger drives.
07:44:41 Not just commercial use.
07:44:42 So go ahead, sir.
07:44:43 Apologize for interrupting.
07:44:45 >> You're right.
07:44:46 That's pretty much it.
07:44:48 Lucky Dill will contribute to the local economy and its
07:44:51 consistent with the city's vision of a mixed use corridor
07:44:55 village in the Westshore business center.
07:44:58 And Westshore overlay district.
07:45:00 This is a mixed use area and we think we fit in nicely.
07:45:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions from Council besides
07:45:09 giving some pointers on where the Jefferson dragons are?
07:45:13 Mr. Cohen?
07:45:14 >>HARRY COHEN: So, if Councilwoman Capin was here, I
07:45:18 would tell you the two questions that she would ask you.
07:45:21 The first would be whether or not -- would be why you're
07:45:24 asking for these specific hours and not asking they just
07:45:27 be to code, since this is what our code allows.
07:45:31 >> Hours of operation?
07:45:33 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.
07:45:34 >> The hours of operation that are being requested are
07:45:36 the hours of operation that Lucky Dill has at its other
07:45:40 stores.
07:45:45 >>HARRY COHEN: Let me be clear.
07:45:46 By making the hours of operation to code, as opposed to
07:45:54 delineating them specifically, it means that if the city
07:46:01 ever changed the code, you would be subject to whatever
07:46:04 the code allows.
07:46:07 By putting them in specifically, you're basically
07:46:12 exempting yourself from that.
07:46:14 So if it's all the same to you, we would -- I would say
07:46:19 that it's really better if you just ask for the sales
07:46:21 hours to be to code, which would allow you to be open
07:46:25 till 3:00 a.m.
07:46:26 And really wouldn't make any difference, but it would
07:46:32 just be a more standard way of going about it.
07:46:34 >> It's okay with me.
07:46:35 It's okay with you.
07:46:39 >> Good evening.
07:46:40 Steve Spencer, project architect.
07:46:42 I work with the clients a lot, that's what -- we just
07:46:48 like to get this through.
07:46:51 >>HARRY COHEN: It's not what we like.
07:46:52 It's what you like.
07:46:53 But, that's just one thing that could be, at your
07:46:59 request, could be done between first and second reading.
07:47:02 The second thing is the question you are going to have an
07:47:05 outdoor dining space.
07:47:06 Do you have a residential waiver.
07:47:08 Are you planning on having any amplified music outside
07:47:11 and if you're not, perhaps if you would ask for -- well,
07:47:19 there is a waiver here from residential.
07:47:21 So if there were to be amplified music until 3:00 in the
07:47:24 morning, one could make the argument that, that that
07:47:28 might be a little bit too close for comfort.
07:47:31 So, one thought about how to mitigate that would be to
07:47:34 have, not to allow that outside.
07:47:37 If that would be something you are inclined to want to
07:47:42 ask for.
07:47:44 >> Appreciate it.
07:47:48 >>HARRY COHEN: She will be back for second reading.
07:47:50 >> We would address that at the second reading then.
07:47:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, Ms. Kert is going to instruct
07:47:57 you that it's going to have to be addressed between first
07:48:00 and second reading.
07:48:02 >>REBECCA KERT: Any changes to be made between first and
07:48:04 second reading have to be directed by City Council
07:48:06 tonight.
07:48:07 And just to call to your attention, your special
07:48:11 restaurants which you're allowed administratively,
07:48:14 allow -- I'm quoting -- if I'm saying it wrong, lawyer,
07:48:17 let me know -- allow outdoor amplified sound until
07:48:20 11:00 p.m.
07:48:21 Just by way of reference.
07:48:23 >>HARRY COHEN: So what you're saying then, I just want to
07:48:25 be clear with you, Ms. Kert.
07:48:28 You're saying under this type of approval, amplified
07:48:31 music would have to ends at 11:00 p.m.?
07:48:34 >> No.
07:48:34 I'm saying if they came in for your special restaurant,
07:48:37 which is a administrative approval, so it's got tighter
07:48:40 conditions on it.
07:48:41 Under that one, it's that earlier hours and all --
07:48:45 >>HARRY COHEN: This does not have that.
07:48:47 This does not have any of that.
07:48:49 >> But by way of reference, the special restaurants which
07:48:52 you allow administratively, you do allow outdoor
07:48:55 amplified sounds until 11:00 p.m.
07:48:58 That was my point.
07:49:00 >>HARRY COHEN: So perhaps it would be reasonable to ask
07:49:04 for that?
07:49:06 >> Yes.
07:49:06 >> Thank you.
07:49:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So I'm a fan of outdoor amplified
07:49:13 sound.
07:49:14 [ Laughter ]
07:49:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Because which sit at an outdoor venue
07:49:18 to eat or, you know, sit for happy hour or whatever, I
07:49:24 like to have music in the background.
07:49:26 So that's just my opinion.
07:49:27 It is not shared by everybody on Council.
07:49:30 But, be that as it may.
07:49:33 The question -- Mr. Cohen brought that up.
07:49:40 >> I don't mean to interrupt.
07:49:41 But we are, if that would happen, I think most the sound
07:49:44 would be on the deck area, outdoor deck area facing Boy
07:49:48 Scout.
07:49:49 That's probably where we would have it.
07:49:51 It wouldn't be facing residential.
07:49:53 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Right.
07:49:54 I was going to point that out, that from looking at the
07:49:57 site plan, yes, they have the residential waiver, but the
07:50:02 outdoor dining addition depicted here on the plan is a
07:50:07 parking lot away from the residential -- thank you very
07:50:12 much.
07:50:12 There it is.
07:50:13 It is on Boy Scout Boulevard, which the ambient sound
07:50:17 alone from the cars driving by on Boy Scout is going to
07:50:20 drown out any a much tied sound they could have that's
07:50:23 going to reach those high rise apartments.
07:50:26 And they are high rise apartments, they're not
07:50:29 single-family homes and their windows don't open.
07:50:33 So, anyway.
07:50:35 >> As always, Councilwoman Montelione, you're very though
07:50:39 row.
07:50:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you very much, Mr. Cohen.
07:50:41 And as always, you are very good representative of
07:50:45 Councilmembers who have, who aren't here at the time.
07:50:49 So the mention was of a sidewalk trail along Boy Scout.
07:50:59 And looking at this and, you know, my eyes are tired
07:51:02 tonight, it looks to be that there's a five foot concrete
07:51:07 sidewalk depicted.
07:51:09 >> Correct.
07:51:09 We got to provide another five feet to make it ten feet
07:51:12 wide.
07:51:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
07:51:13 See I didn't see that additional five feet on the plan.
07:51:19 On the side of Boy Scout?
07:51:21 >> It is shown here.
07:51:22 It's hard to read at this scale.
07:51:23 We are showing the additional sidewalk with addition on
07:51:26 Boy Scout here.
07:51:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
07:51:28 That's what I was asking.
07:51:31 >> It is hard to read.
07:51:35 >>LISA MONTELIONE: When you said that, it didn't seem to
07:51:37 mesh with what was on the site plan.
07:51:39 Ms. Kert I think did say there was some site plan
07:51:42 revisions that needed to be done.
07:51:47 Ms. Moreda said that you look so much alike.
07:51:50 So that was the only question I had was to clear up the
07:51:55 trail issue.
07:51:55 >> Thank you.
07:51:58 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Miranda?
07:52:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I just want to bring up Trask.
07:52:02 City had objection to ingress and egress on Trask.
07:52:05 Why do you need it?
07:52:09 >> The reason is, there's no other access but just off of
07:52:13 Boy Scout.
07:52:14 And it's obviously a problem for access there because the
07:52:18 previous restaurant actually removed in several areas
07:52:21 along Trask the wheel stops.
07:52:24 Would just drive over the sidewalk and grass.
07:52:27 In two locations on Trask.
07:52:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Maybe that's why they closed.
07:52:31 >> Pardon me?
07:52:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Maybe that's why they closed.
07:52:35 >> Maybe.
07:52:35 I'm not sure.
07:52:37 I only ate there one time and I think there's other
07:52:40 reasons why they closed.
07:52:41 [ Laughter ]
07:52:42 >> But I think for access and just having one way in and
07:52:46 one way out on Boy Scout, I think that Trask is a nice
07:52:50 option.
07:52:50 I don't think it's going to be used as much obviously as
07:52:53 Boy Scout but it would sure help the flow.
07:52:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't know much about the loading
07:52:59 restaurant, but loading docks bothers me.
07:53:02 There were restaurants on Busch, and only had increase
07:53:05 and egress off of Busch.
07:53:07 >> All right.
07:53:10 I know a little bit about restaurants.
07:53:13 I mean, I'm drawing them and Lucky Dills, they've been
07:53:17 very popular.
07:53:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Usually when you have corporate, they
07:53:20 have a standardization.
07:53:21 Once you do one, you do them all in the same way.
07:53:24 >> I'm sorry, didn't mean to overspeak you.
07:53:27 This one's a little unique because it has two venues.
07:53:30 The owners have the local brewing company and Lucky Dill
07:53:34 and they're combining them in one.
07:53:36 I think that's why it's a little larger and little
07:53:38 different than typical freestanding GPC and freestanding
07:53:43 Lucky Dill.
07:53:44 I think that's the reason.
07:53:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't know what's going to happen in
07:53:48 the City of Tampa, but Trask bothers me a lot.
07:53:51 Something else is going to develop on Trask very, very
07:53:53 shortly.
07:53:54 Trask ends there -- it's a piece road, it doesn't go
07:54:01 continuous from South Tampa all the way to Busch
07:54:03 Boulevard.
07:54:04 But it goes all the way out there in sections.
07:54:07 This one ends on Cypress.
07:54:09 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions?
07:54:16 I have a couple things I wanted to mention.
07:54:18 What Mr. Miranda is saying about Trask, when he made the
07:54:24 comment about not knowing much about restaurants, I think
07:54:26 he was in the restaurant business for over 20 years, so,
07:54:28 that was a facetious comment on his part.
07:54:32 He lasted over 20 years.
07:54:38 So he must know something.
07:54:39 Anyway, the problem that we have, you know, I'm very
07:54:43 familiar with Trask for a lot of different reasons, in
07:54:45 addition, working very close there for many, many years,
07:54:50 Trask tends to be kind of a cut-through.
07:54:52 You made the comment about it being a sort of frontage
07:54:55 road for the Westshore area.
07:54:57 Tough part about that particular restaurant and where the
07:55:00 location is, is that you have to turn around in order to
07:55:05 come along.
07:55:06 You have to go along the Westshore Boulevard area and
07:55:09 then come along Boy Scout going east in order to enter
07:55:13 the restaurant.
07:55:14 As it is now.
07:55:15 As it's situated.
07:55:16 >> I'm sorry, can you explain that one more time?
07:55:18 >> While you're coming, while you're traveling east on
07:55:21 Boy Scout, you have to -- only way to enter the
07:55:25 restaurant is coming east on Boy Scout.
07:55:27 Okay.
07:55:28 Because you can't turn, you have to turn around, you have
07:55:32 to go up towards where the median is at, come back around
07:55:36 on Westshore anyway and come back.
07:55:38 There's no way to enter it that way.
07:55:39 That's the reason why you want it on Trask.
07:55:42 That's the main reason, you're trying to draw a lot of
07:55:45 folks from those, as you mentioned, on the west side of
07:55:50 Trask, you want all those customers that are there,
07:55:52 potential customers, that are all those buildings.
07:55:57 You did say it was a very walkable area.
07:55:59 My assumption based on what you said was that they were
07:56:02 going to walk there.
07:56:03 They don't really need that access from Trask, is that
07:56:06 correct?
07:56:07 >> We're expecting some of the patrons to be people that
07:56:11 walk from businesses, office buildings from the
07:56:15 residential and hence, the reason for a request for a
07:56:19 slight parking reduction.
07:56:21 But there will still be a lot of vehicles traveling to
07:56:24 the site.
07:56:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Right.
07:56:26 Because it's really not as walkable as you kind of
07:56:29 presented earlier I think.
07:56:30 >> Well, I think what the spirit of the Westshore overlay
07:56:34 district and the mixed use corridor village plan is to
07:56:41 try to over time, as that area redevelops, is to make it
07:56:45 more walkable.
07:56:46 Hence, also the reason why we're widening the sidewalk
07:56:50 out on Boy Scout road from five feet to ten feet, I think
07:56:54 the idea there, they'd like to see that as a ten foot
07:56:57 wide sidewalk all the way down.
07:56:58 So all those people that work along there can walk and
07:57:03 use all those mixture of uses up and down buy scout.
07:57:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: But you still think that Trask is
07:57:10 important as an entryway because you're still going to
07:57:13 need that entrance by virtue of all the cars that are
07:57:17 going to be going by there, is that correct?
07:57:20 >> Let me address that please, the owner spoke to me
07:57:24 about, their main reason for the Trask is for leaving.
07:57:27 Not arriving.
07:57:29 Their concern was, you have people coming in and then you
07:57:32 have people exiting and Boy Scout is somewhat busy.
07:57:37 Trask may be a way for them to exit.
07:57:40 It was not for entering.
07:57:41 Their main concern was leaving the restaurant.
07:57:43 To address you, sir.
07:57:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Being 0.
07:57:47 Sounds like the owner has not been around Trask very
07:57:50 often.
07:57:50 That's okay.
07:57:51 That's all I have.
07:57:52 Anything else?
07:57:52 Any other questions or comments?
07:57:54 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
07:57:57 item number 4?
07:57:59 AB 2-16-14.
07:58:01 I see no one.
07:58:02 I have a motion to close -- before we go forward,
07:58:07 Mr. Cohen?
07:58:09 >>HARRY COHEN: Before we close, I just would like to -- I
07:58:12 think your point was well taken on the a much tied musk
07:58:14 issue.
07:58:15 But the issue of just being consistent -- I did hear that
07:58:20 perhaps the applicant was going to ask to be consistent
07:58:25 with chapter 14 rather than delineate the hours and I
07:58:28 wasn't sure if that was something that was on the agenda
07:58:31 between first and second reading.
07:58:33 >> That's something I would like to include.
07:58:35 I think there were two things.
07:58:37 The outdoor music till 11:00 p.m. and then the, just
07:58:41 follow the code the hours of operation.
07:58:43 Those are the two things we'd like to address between the
07:58:46 second reading.
07:58:47 Thank you for bringing that up.
07:58:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Is that okay Mr. Cohen?
07:58:50 No other questions?
07:58:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The petition used the word music.
07:58:55 Normally the sound, because I think Twiggs and the like.
07:59:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Will you stipulate sir you meant amplified
07:59:02 sound as opposed to a much tied music?
07:59:05 >> Yes, I stand corrected.
07:59:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, sir.
07:59:07 >> Thank you very much.
07:59:09 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Petitioner, anything else to add?
07:59:10 Okay, we have a motion to close from Ms. Montelione.
07:59:13 Second from Mr. Maniscalco.
07:59:15 All in favor of that motion to close, please indicate by
07:59:17 saying aye.
07:59:18 Any opposed?
07:59:19 Mr. Maniscalco, will you take item number 4, please?
07:59:23 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
07:59:24 I have an ordinance being presented for first reading
07:59:26 consideration.
07:59:26 An ordinance approving a special use permit for alcoholic
07:59:30 beverage sales, large venue restaurant, consumption on
07:59:33 premises only, and making lawful the sale of beverages
07:59:40 regardless of alcoholic content - beer, wine and liquor -
07:59:40 that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 4606
07:59:43 west Boy Scout Boulevard, Tampa, Florida, as more
07:59:47 particularly described in section 2, that all ordinances
07:59:49 or parts of ordinances in conflict are repealed,
07:59:52 providing an effective date.
07:59:56 >>HARRY COHEN: Second with the changes.
07:59:58 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: With the changes promised between
07:59:59 first and second reading.
08:00:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion from Mr. Maniscalco, a
08:00:03 second from Mr. Cohen.
08:00:04 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying
08:00:05 aye.
08:00:06 Any opposed?
08:00:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Aye.
08:00:11 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda voting no and
08:00:13 Capin being absent.
08:00:14 Second reading and adoption will be July 14th at
08:00:17 9:30 a.m.
08:00:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:00:18 Item number 5.
08:00:21 >> Gloria Moreda, land development.
08:00:26 AB 2-16-15, it concerns property at 4465 west Gandy
08:00:32 Boulevard, suite 600.
08:00:34 The property is zoned CI.
08:00:37 And has been the CC-35 land use classification.
08:00:40 This property was the subject of an alcohol petition in
08:00:46 2015 for a large venue beer and wine on-site consumption
08:00:51 and package sales for off-site consumption.
08:00:53 It is the same location.
08:00:58 It is still the microbrewery with tasting rooms and the
08:01:02 same request for a large venue beer, wine on-site
08:01:05 consumption and package sales off site.
08:01:07 They are adding square footage.
08:01:10 It's now going to be 17,875 square feet inside area.
08:01:17 There is 576 square feet outside area, for a total of
08:01:23 18,451 square feet total.
08:01:29 There are 586 spaces in the shopping center and they
08:01:35 indicate that they will be consistent with chapter 14,
08:01:38 hours of operation.
08:01:40 They are needing a distance separation from 250 feet to
08:01:46 103 feet to residential.
08:01:47 They are reducing the off-street parking from 718 spaces
08:01:56 to 586 spaces.
08:01:59 And they are indicating they have access to Oakellar
08:02:03 Avenue, which is a local street.
08:02:05 As it relates to the parking waiver, this is not really
08:02:12 considered an increase in intensity of use.
08:02:14 They're indicating their occupant load is the same and
08:02:17 that waiver was previously granted.
08:02:20 The site is off of Gandy.
08:02:25 Backs all the way up to Oakellar Avenue.
08:02:28 There are currently in the existing shopping center
08:02:31 already access to Oakellar.
08:02:34 And we are just referencing that they are maintaining
08:02:37 that.
08:02:37 Here is the front.
08:02:42 They're in the back building.
08:02:44 There are two buildings in this center.
08:02:46 They're in this building here.
08:02:48 And they are located here on the side.
08:02:52 81 bay brewery and company.
08:02:58 I think they're about to open very soon.
08:03:00 This is a look of their parking area.
08:03:03 The residential is directly to the rear of the property.
08:03:10 I did indicate that this, I found this consistent.
08:03:19 This is a very minor change from what there previous
08:03:23 approval was.
08:03:23 The square footage that they're adding, I've been told is
08:03:27 for the brewery area.
08:03:28 The actual tasting room and the occupant level related to
08:03:33 the tasting on-site is not changing.
08:03:36 There is some minor changes to the site plan that are
08:03:39 needed.
08:03:40 But staff is finding this inconsistent.
08:03:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from Council?
08:03:47 Petitioner?
08:03:48 >> Good evening, Councilmembers, I trust tonight will be
08:03:54 an earlier hearing night for some of you compared to last
08:03:57 night.
08:03:57 My name --
08:03:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: We are prepared to go 3:00 a.m. if you
08:04:01 are.
08:04:01 >> I do not.
08:04:02 [ Laughter ]
08:04:02 Grace Yang, Gray Robinson, 401 East Jackson Street, Suite
08:04:07 2700.
08:04:09 Tampa, 33602.
08:04:11 As Ms. Moreda explained, this is a petition for 813
08:04:17 brewing LLC doing business as 81 bay brewing company.
08:04:22 I came before you last September and October on the
08:04:24 initial request for this.
08:04:26 And since we had that approval granted last October at
08:04:31 second reading, my client did request some additional
08:04:34 square footage, additional square footage opens up in the
08:04:38 brewery space and they would like to add 2,463 square
08:04:43 feet to store the spent grains and the kegs for the beer
08:04:47 that they're doing.
08:04:48 The waivers, Ms. Moreda has already summarized.
08:04:53 We would greatly appreciate your support to allow my
08:04:55 client's business to expand for a little extra space in
08:04:59 the brewing section.
08:05:00 I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.
08:05:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions?
08:05:03 Is there anyone in the public would like to speak on item
08:05:06 5, AB2-16-15?
08:05:09 I see no one.
08:05:11 Motion to close from Mr. Cohen.
08:05:13 Second from Mr. Miranda.
08:05:14 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying
08:05:15 aye.
08:05:16 Any opposed?
08:05:18 Mr. Reddick, would you kindly take number five?
08:05:23 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
08:05:24 Move an ordinance being presented for first reading
08:05:27 consideration, an ordinance repealing ordinance number
08:05:28 2015-107, approving a special use permit S-2 for
08:05:35 alcoholic beverage sales, large venue, microbrewery
08:05:38 on-premises consumption retail package sales off-premises
08:05:41 consumption, and making lawful the sale of beer and wine
08:05:45 at or from that certain lot, plot or tract of land
08:05:45 located at 4465 west Gandy Boulevard, suite 600, Tampa,
08:05:52 Florida, as more particularly described in section 3,
08:05:55 that all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict
08:05:58 are repealed, providing an effective date.
08:06:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
08:06:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion from Mr. Reddick, a second from
08:06:04 Mr. Miranda.
08:06:05 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
08:06:06 aye.
08:06:06 Any opposed?
08:06:10 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent.
08:06:12 Second reading and adoption will be July 14th at
08:06:15 9:30 a.m.
08:06:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:06:18 Item six.
08:06:22 >> Gloria Moreda, this is AB 2-16-16.
08:06:25 Involves property at 1609 West Swann Avenue.
08:06:30 The property is zoned PD.
08:06:32 It's part of the Old Hyde Park Village.
08:06:34 It's community mixed use land use classification.
08:06:37 The property currently does hold alcohol permit for
08:06:47 4(COP-X).
08:06:49 They are proposing to amend that to a small venue beer,
08:06:52 wine, liquor on-premise consumption and package sales for
08:06:56 off-site consumption.
08:06:58 The total square footage is 3,000 -- excuse me -- 2,308
08:07:03 square feet inside, 908 square feet outside, for a total
08:07:07 of 3,216 square feet in area.
08:07:12 The shopping center has 993 parking spaces.
08:07:17 They are indicating the hours of operation for the
08:07:20 restaurant to be Monday through Thursday, 11:00 a.m. to
08:07:26 12:00 a.m., Friday, Saturday, 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m.
08:07:32 And then Sunday from 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
08:07:35 They are asking for a distance separation waiver from
08:07:40 250 feet to zero for another AB establishment.
08:07:44 The, this is for the Wine Exchange.
08:07:48 They are not proposing to change their occupant load of
08:07:56 the existing restaurant.
08:07:57 They indicate on their site plan that they will continue
08:08:01 to be a restaurant use.
08:08:03 This is aerial of the old, old Hyde Park shopping center.
08:08:10 And they're located just off the Snow Avenue.
08:08:14 I wasn't really able to get close with the road
08:08:16 construction going on in the center, but I did get these
08:08:21 pictures [Inaudible]
08:08:26 But there are minor changes to the site plan that will
08:08:29 need to be done as well as the AB 2 sketch needs to be
08:08:34 revised as well to correct the total square footage as
08:08:38 identified.
08:08:38 Staff did find it inconsistent due to the fact that the
08:08:42 waive that they're asking.
08:08:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:08:44 Petitioner?
08:08:45 >> Hi, I'm Patricia Ortiz here on behalf of the Wine
08:08:51 Exchange to request a change of wet zone designation from
08:08:55 4(COP-X) to small venue, beer, wine liquor on-site
08:09:00 consumption and package sales.
08:09:02 The intent of this request is to allow the Wine Exchange
08:09:05 the opportunity to offer package sales to their existing
08:09:09 clientele as to-go items.
08:09:12 The Wine Exchange has been serving food and drinks in the
08:09:16 village since 1991 and their successful business model is
08:09:21 designed around the idea of providing quality products at
08:09:24 fair prices and remaining relevant.
08:09:26 The alcohol beverage also available for sale will
08:09:30 generally be considered specialty items and will appeal
08:09:33 to a limited client base.
08:09:36 As you are well aware, Hyde Park Village is undergoing a
08:09:40 multi-million dollar renovation, which is intended to
08:09:43 reinvent the village as a premier mixed use development.
08:09:47 The request before you will allow this established
08:09:52 restaurant the opportunity to remain competitive in this
08:09:56 changing market by providing a unique and complementary
08:10:00 service.
08:10:00 The petition does require one waiver and that is a waiver
08:10:03 to reduce the distance of separation between
08:10:07 establishments serving alcohol from 250 feet to zero
08:10:11 feet.
08:10:12 The Wine Exchange is not moving.
08:10:16 It currently exists within 250 feet of other
08:10:21 establishments serving alcohol.
08:10:22 The waiver is necessary because of the change of wet zone
08:10:27 classification.
08:10:28 A similar waiver was granted in 2007 when the Wine
08:10:32 Exchange moved from its previous location on Swann Avenue
08:10:36 to its current location on Snow Avenue.
08:10:39 This current location is within the distance of
08:10:46 separation of other areas designated [Inaudible] as
08:10:53 restaurants.
08:10:53 And always intended to serve alcoholic beverages.
08:10:57 And I can show you here.
08:11:09 The wine change is located about here.
08:11:11 And Bartaco is located here, sort of in the back and
08:11:17 adjacent to the Wine Exchange.
08:11:19 Piquant is located at the intersection of Snow and Rome.
08:11:26 And both of these existing establishments are within that
08:11:29 distance of separation.
08:11:30 They're both within 250 feet.
08:11:32 The code does allow waivers to a distance of separation
08:11:37 between establishments serving alcohol to be granted in
08:11:40 cases such as this where the use does not jeopardize
08:11:44 public health, safety or welfare.
08:11:46 The use is compatible with the surrounding properties.
08:11:49 The use is in conformance with the comp plan and the use
08:11:52 has not set a precedent of more intensive uses.
08:11:56 The existing restaurant, like I said, located within
08:12:01 250 feet of other alcohol serving establishments.
08:12:05 However, there are no negative impacts to public health,
08:12:09 safety or welfare.
08:12:11 And there will be none with the approval of package
08:12:14 sales.
08:12:15 The requested use is compatible with the existing use and
08:12:20 complementary to uses in the area.
08:12:23 It's consistent with the community mixed use 35 land use
08:12:27 designation.
08:12:28 The Hyde Park urban village standards and the mixed use
08:12:33 nature of Hyde Park Village.
08:12:34 Package sales are compatible with the existing
08:12:38 restaurant.
08:12:39 And they will not intensify the existing use.
08:12:43 There will be no alterations to the exterior or interior
08:12:49 of the restaurant.
08:12:51 Currently this is what you see on the front of the
08:12:56 outside of the restaurant.
08:12:57 There will be no indication that package sales are
08:13:00 allowed.
08:13:01 The occupant load will not increase.
08:13:04 There will be no requirements for additional parking.
08:13:08 The hours of operation are not proposed to be extended.
08:13:12 And there will be no changes to the existing approved
08:13:16 lighting, utilities or drainage.
08:13:18 Additionally, we're not proposing to change the sound or
08:13:25 have live music outside.
08:13:27 Instead, we think that this proposal will provide a
08:13:33 unique and complementary service to Hyde Park Village.
08:13:38 I'll stand for questions.
08:13:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from Council?
08:13:40 All right.
08:13:42 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
08:13:45 item number 6?
08:13:48 AB 2-16-16?
08:13:50 I see no one.
08:13:51 Have a motion to close from Mr. Reddick, second from
08:13:53 Mr. Maniscalco.
08:13:54 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
08:13:56 aye.
08:13:56 Any opposed?
08:13:58 Mr. Miranda, will you kindly take number 6?
08:14:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: File number AB 2-16-16.
08:14:11 Move an ordinance presently for first readings
08:14:13 consideration, an ores repealing ordinance nope 2007-221,
08:14:19 approving a special use S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales
08:14:23 small venue on-premises consumption for retail package
08:14:26 sales off premises consumption and making lawful sale
08:14:29 beer, wine liquor at or from that certain lot, plot or
08:14:32 tract of land located at 1609 West Snow Avenue, Tampa,
08:14:36 Florida, more particularly described in section 3, that
08:14:39 all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict are
08:14:42 repealed, providing an effective date.
08:14:43 >> Second.
08:14:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion from Mr. Miranda.
08:14:45 I have a second from Ms. Montelione.
08:14:47 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
08:14:49 aye.
08:14:49 Any opposed?
08:14:51 Thank you.
08:14:53 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent and
08:14:55 Cohen being an send.
08:14:58 Second reading and adoption July 14, 9:00 a.m.
08:15:01 >> We have cleared the agenda of number seven.
08:15:04 Number eight.
08:15:06 >>REBECCA KERT: Kristen Moore from our office is going to
08:15:09 be presenting this item.
08:15:10 I'd like to take this opportunity to introduce her to
08:15:13 you.
08:15:14 She recently joined our office.
08:15:16 She's practiced in the land use area for a number of
08:15:19 years in private practice.
08:15:19 Prior to that she was a planner at Hillsborough County,
08:15:21 so she's got a wealth of experience to bring to us.
08:15:24 She graduated from honors at Stetson university.
08:15:26 She's going to be handling development agreements,
08:15:29 alcoholic beverages, BRB signs and other various land use
08:15:33 items and we're very excited to have her with us.
08:15:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, welcome aboard.
08:15:35 Ms. Montelione, you have a question?
08:15:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm going to have a real problem not
08:15:39 calling you Kristen Tolbert.
08:15:40 We used to work together.
08:15:43 So, it's -- welcome aboard.
08:15:47 >> Thank you very much.
08:15:48 Much appreciated.
08:15:50 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Glad you're here.
08:15:52 >> Thank you.
08:15:52 It is a pleasure to be here.
08:15:54 Good evening, Council, Kristen Moore with the legal
08:15:56 department.
08:15:57 The item before you is a development agreement to
08:16:00 implement a rezoning density bonus with rezoning 1638,
08:16:06 which the Council heard on June 9th.
08:16:08 This is a density bonus to allow approximately 51
08:16:12 additional units for 175-unit residential apartment
08:16:15 building.
08:16:16 This development agreement is under your old bonus
08:16:21 regulations, so the amenities being provided are
08:16:25 structured parking with 75% of the required parking being
08:16:29 within the principal building.
08:16:31 The provision of transit stop facilities, either an
08:16:35 existing stop or provision of a new stop, and streetscape
08:16:39 improvements along Isabella avenue.
08:16:42 You received a new development agreement, had slight
08:16:46 revisions done this week, to better reflect the
08:16:48 obligations with respect to the maintenance of the
08:16:51 improvements that are going to be inning the
08:16:53 right-of-way.
08:16:54 They're going to be providing decorative benches,
08:16:57 decorative trash receptacles.
08:17:00 Removing parallel parking along Isabel, which will allow
08:17:04 for additional green space and providing 13 four-inch
08:17:07 caliper live oak trees and 20 three-inch caliper crepe
08:17:11 myrtles, which is above and beyond the planting
08:17:14 regulations.
08:17:15 So I am available if you have any questions on this.
08:17:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from Council?
08:17:19 Mr. Reddick?
08:17:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: Just scanning through this, and it's two
08:17:27 things that I see where you got under city obligation,
08:17:32 first time you got item number 8 out of section five in
08:17:36 good faith.
08:17:38 Something we talked about today.
08:17:40 I'm just scanning through this real quick.
08:17:47 I want to make sure, because it came up today during
08:17:51 discussion, from people in the audience.
08:17:54 And that is any development agreement that we put in
08:17:59 place from the city standpoint, that they meet all of the
08:18:04 WBE, BBE and all these other obligation.
08:18:10 Is this in this agreement?
08:18:12 >>REBECCA KERT: This is not that type of agreement.
08:18:14 This is under your zoning regulations.
08:18:17 It's a bonus density.
08:18:20 If they provide that's, they're entitled.
08:18:22 It's not a contract for them to do the work.
08:18:24 It's a chapter 163 development agreement.
08:18:27 But we can't apply those -- it's not that kind of
08:18:31 contract.
08:18:32 >>FRANK REDDICK: Why would good faith be in here?
08:18:37 >>REBECCA KERT: That's -- I understand.
08:18:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: The terminology.
08:18:42 >>REBECCA KERT: It's a legal term.
08:18:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: A legal term?
08:18:45 >>REBECCA KERT: Yeah.
08:18:45 I'm sorry.
08:18:47 >>FRANK REDDICK: When we have discussion about good
08:18:49 faith, everybody got a meaning for it.
08:18:52 Now it's a legal term.
08:18:54 It's a statute and all that this morning.
08:19:00 >>REBECCA KERT: I understand your point.
08:19:01 But we're not in the middle of the WMBE discussion.
08:19:05 We're not the attorneys fighting you on that we're
08:19:09 friends.
08:19:09 [ Laughter ]
08:19:10 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Parity, would you like to speak on this
08:19:15 item?
08:19:16 >> Robert Edelle, Gardner Brewer, 400 North Ashley 67
08:19:21 drive.
08:19:21 I think she spoke to kind of the biggest issues with
08:19:24 respect to the maintenance obligation and our client, we
08:19:28 gave the city the first run at putting together the
08:19:30 language and we accepted everything that they asked.
08:19:33 We look forward to working with the staff and appreciate
08:19:36 all your support.
08:19:37 I can certainly walk through some of those provisions if
08:19:39 you'd like.
08:19:40 But to respect your time and since it's late, just let me
08:19:44 know.
08:19:45 I'll be here.
08:19:45 Thank you very much.
08:19:49 >> So you're saying our new attorney did a great job.
08:19:53 That's good to know.
08:19:54 All right.
08:19:56 Any questions from Council?
08:19:57 Ms. Montelione?
08:19:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
08:19:59 A lot of times we see the development agreements come
08:20:03 with a rezoning or they're scheduled around the same
08:20:06 time.
08:20:06 So just for general knowledge, Bayshore center
08:20:10 acquisition is purchasing the building or are they
08:20:13 constructing -- I'm not familiar.
08:20:15 I'm sorry, with the address or the project.
08:20:19 >> They have owned this property for, can't identify the
08:20:24 exact amount of time period.
08:20:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Ballpark.
08:20:27 >> It's been more than 6 years I believe.
08:20:29 And in this case, I think they're just, they're wanting
08:20:33 to amend what they have, there is existing plan for the
08:20:37 property.
08:20:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
08:20:39 So what is the difference between the current development
08:20:41 agreement and this development agreement?
08:20:43 Because this isn't a red line copy.
08:20:49 >>REBECCA KERT: You heard the rezone -- the accompanying
08:20:52 rezoning last, at your last land use meeting and approved
08:20:56 it.
08:20:56 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
08:20:57 This is that one.
08:20:58 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes.
08:20:59 This is that one.
08:21:00 This was unfortunately not able to be scheduled to go the
08:21:02 same night.
08:21:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sorry.
08:21:04 I didn't make the connection.
08:21:05 And if you said that, Ms. Moore, I didn't catch that.
08:21:12 >> I wasn't there.
08:21:12 Rezoning was heard on June 9th.
08:21:14 Then the development agreement is going tonight.
08:21:17 They will both go together at the July 14th.
08:21:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
08:21:23 Thank you very much.
08:21:23 That's all I had.
08:21:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:21:26 Is there anyone in the public would like to comment on
08:21:28 item number 8?
08:21:29 I see no one.
08:21:30 Have a motion to close from Mr. Maniscalco.
08:21:33 Have a second from Ms. Montelione.
08:21:36 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
08:21:38 aye am any opposed?
08:21:40 Ms. Kert, do they have to read this or do they just have
08:21:43 to move it.
08:21:44 >> Move the resolution.
08:21:46 >>REBECCA KERT: Actually, you do need -- it's required to
08:21:49 have two public hearings and you will move it at the
08:21:51 second public hearing.
08:21:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Just want to make sure.
08:21:57 >>THE CLERK: The second public hearing will be
08:21:58 July 14th at 9:30 a.m.
08:22:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:22:00 We did information reports earlier today.
08:22:02 Unless any of the Councilmember also have any other new
08:22:04 information report, I night a motion to receive and file.
08:22:07 >>FRANK REDDICK: I just need to make.
08:22:09 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I'm sorry, go ahead.
08:22:11 >>FRANK REDDICK: Just want to remind the public that if
08:22:18 you live in zip code 33602, 33603, and 33605, the humane
08:22:27 society of Tampa is sponsoring free spay, neuters and
08:22:30 vaccinations for all residents in those area codes.
08:22:36 Please call the humane society at 813-442-2279.
08:22:43 Humane society of Tampa Bay.
08:22:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:22:50 >> Free service, so everybody should take advantage of
08:22:52 it.
08:22:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Before we adjourn, we do need to sent the
08:22:56 text amendments hearings.
08:22:58 Mr. Hello by?
08:22:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
08:23:01 Council, there's request of Tony Garcia of the Planning
08:23:04 Commission to set two items for September 22nd, 2016 at
08:23:08 5:01 p.m.
08:23:09 The first is a first public hearing on E 2016-47, also
08:23:17 known as PA 16-02, that's what was heard earlier.
08:23:21 The second one is, the second item is a presentation of
08:23:24 the May 2016 cycle of comprehensive plan amendments.
08:23:28 So if there could be a motion to set those two items.
08:23:31 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Can we do it all in one motion?
08:23:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe you can.
08:23:37 For the sake of argument.
08:23:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: If I could get a motion to move the first
08:23:41 item Mr. Shelby mentioned.
08:23:44 Motion from Mr. Maniscalco.
08:23:46 Second from Ms. Montelione.
08:23:48 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
08:23:49 aye.
08:23:50 And another motion to deal with the second item
08:23:52 Mr. Shelby mentioned.
08:23:54 I have a motion from Ms. Montelione, second from
08:23:56 Mr. Maniscalco.
08:23:57 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
08:23:59 aye.
08:24:00 Okay.
08:24:01 I need a motion to receive and file.
08:24:03 Motion from Mr. Maniscalco, second from Ms. Montelione.
08:24:05 All in favor of that motion, please indicate by saying
08:24:07 aye.
08:24:07 And if there is no other business to come before Council,
08:24:10 we are adjourned.
08:24:11
TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
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.