Tampa City Council
Thursday, September 8, 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.
05:33:16 [Sounding gavel]
05:33:16 Tampa City Council is now called to order.
05:33:18 Roll call please.
05:33:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
05:33:23 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
05:33:24 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.
05:33:26 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
05:33:27 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Here.
05:33:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
05:33:31 Okay.
05:33:31 We have a continued public hearing from our last meeting.
05:33:37 Mrs. Kert, I don't know if you have had contact with the
05:33:41 petitioner.
05:33:41 I believe they want to continue it?
05:33:43 >>REBECCA KERT: It's actually not a continuance.
05:33:46 The petitioner disagrees with it but everyone is agreeing
05:33:50 that the notice was not -- well, they disagree that the
05:33:53 notice was not perfected but they understand the city's
05:33:55 position is that the notice is not perfected and it needs to
05:33:58 be rescheduled.
05:33:59 And you do have an e-mail from petitioner's representative
05:34:01 requesting that it be scheduled to November 10th at
05:34:04 5:30.
05:34:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So all we need is a motion to continue it
05:34:07 until November 10th.
05:34:10 To reschedule it.
05:34:11 >> So moved.
05:34:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The motion from Mr -- I thinking the second
05:34:22 was from Mr. Cohen or the other way around.
05:34:25 I'm not sure.
05:34:26 All in favor of that motion?
05:34:27 Any opposed?
05:34:28 Thank you.
05:34:29 Okay.
05:34:30 There's nothing else on our public hearings for 5:30 so we
05:34:33 are adjourned until 6:00 p.m.
05:34:35 >> (City Council recess.)
05:34:37
06:04:57 [Sounding gavel]
06:05:00 Tampa City Council is now called into order.
06:05:02 Roll call, please.
06:05:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
06:05:05 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.
06:05:07 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
06:05:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.
06:05:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
06:05:12 Okay.
06:05:13 I need a motion to open up public hearings 2 through 13.
06:05:19 I have a motion from Mr. Miranda, a second from Mr. Reddick.
06:05:23 All in favor of that motion indicate by saying aye.
06:05:25 Any opposed?
06:05:26 These are public hearings.
06:05:27 Anyone that is going to speak on these public hearings,
06:05:30 please stand up, raise your right hand and be sworn in.
06:05:34 (Oath administered by Clerk)
06:05:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you so much.
06:05:42 We are on item number 2.
06:05:44 Staff.
06:05:44 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Land Development Coordination.
06:05:50 If I may clear the agenda, specifically item number 9.
06:05:53 The applicant is has requested a continuance.
06:05:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: To what date?
06:05:59 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: We have time available on October
06:06:02 13th hearing.
06:06:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
06:06:04 Can I get a motion to continue item number 9 to the October
06:06:07 13th --
06:06:10 >> So moved.
06:06:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion from Mr. Miranda.
06:06:14 I have a second -- first from Mr. Reddick, excuse me, a
06:06:18 second from Mrs. Capin.
06:06:19 All in favor of that motion indicate by saying aye.
06:06:22 Any opposed?
06:06:23 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
06:06:25 the continuance of item number 9 at this time?
06:06:27 Item number 9 on the continuance only.
06:06:30 I see no one.
06:06:32 It is as 6:00 p.m.
06:06:33 Do you have that, clerk?
06:06:35 Thank you.
06:06:36 Mrs. Samaniego, any other items to be cleared up?
06:06:39 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: No, sir.
06:06:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Item number 11 does not need to be cleared
06:06:45 at this time?
06:06:46 >> No, sir.
06:06:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: It will be heard at that time?
06:06:56 >> Uh-huh.
06:06:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Item number 2.
06:06:58 >> REZ 1655, property at 45023 west North "A" Street, a
06:07:06 rezoning from RS-50 to RM-18.
06:07:08 >> David Hay with Planning Commission staff.
06:07:16 I have been sworn.
06:07:16 We start in the Westshore planning district for this next
06:07:19 case.
06:07:22 The site is located within the west shore planning district,
06:07:25 the Westshore business center, and it is also located in the
06:07:28 Westshore Palms neighborhood.
06:07:31 It's located approximately four blocks Jefferson high school
06:07:37 is located approximately four blocks north of the
06:07:40 applicant's property.
06:07:41 There is transit within the general area.
06:07:46 Serves that area.
06:07:47 Charles C. Williams park is the closest public recreational
06:07:50 facility.
06:07:50 And the site is within a level "B" evacuation zone.
06:07:56 Onto the aerial.
06:08:00 We have got Kennedy Boulevard.
06:08:02 We have got the commercial which is located along Kennedy
06:08:06 Boulevard.
06:08:09 Here is the subject site.
06:08:10 This neighborhood as you can see has a mix of single-family
06:08:14 detached and attached, and small site family projects.
06:08:20 Onto the future land use map.
06:08:23 As you can see on the map, the subject site and all the
06:08:28 properties to the east, west and north are all that
06:08:30 residential 20.
06:08:33 We have got residential 35 to the east, and then further
06:08:38 west you can see the Westshore mall area, and all that
06:08:42 intense activity in that rezoning 100 future land use
06:08:47 category.
06:08:47 Overall the applicant is requesting that residential
06:08:50 multifamily 18 zoning district.
06:08:57 The site, there are some existing trees on-site and the comp
06:09:01 plan promotes preservation.
06:09:04 The plan also development and retention variety of housing
06:09:08 options within the city, and the proposed rezoning does
06:09:12 further that component of the comprehensive plan.
06:09:15 Based on those considerations, the Planning Commission staff
06:09:19 finds the proposed rezoning consistent with the provisions
06:09:22 of the Tampa comprehensive plan.
06:09:23 Thank you.
06:09:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
06:09:25 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Thank you, David.
06:09:35 Here is an aerial photograph of the subject property.
06:09:41 This is North "A" Street.
06:09:44 The intersection with his per he hades and just north of
06:09:50 Kennedy Boulevard.
06:09:52 North "A," the commercial uses of Kennedy through the
06:09:56 residential service to the north, and town home and
06:10:03 apartment development.
06:10:05 Here is the zoning map.
06:10:06 The subject property is in green.
06:10:12 Again, RS-50.
06:10:14 You can see there is a myriad of developments throughout
06:10:20 this area.
06:10:29 The area had traditionally been single-family houses to
06:10:32 higher density to allow for recommended with the
06:10:35 comprehensive plan R-20 land use category to single-family
06:10:39 detached, attached, town home development.
06:10:45 Here is the subject property.
06:10:47 Single-family detached house.
06:10:52 The property to the east.
06:10:53 Now going to the west.
06:10:57 Single-family detached unit.
06:11:02 And then across the street, behind the PVC fence the back of
06:11:08 the commercial properties along Kennedy.
06:11:10 And the site of the commercial building that is along
06:11:14 Kennedy.
06:11:17 This property is currently 8055 square feet.
06:11:24 If it were to be approved as a rezoning tonight, they would
06:11:27 be required to comply with all the applicable standards
06:11:30 under the RM-18 zoning district.
06:11:32 Generally, those are a 25-foot front yard setback, 7-foot
06:11:38 side yard setback and 15 feet rear and 35 maximum height.
06:11:44 And this property is not in an overlay district.
06:11:47 And given the size of the property, maximum number of
06:11:52 dwelling units for this site would be 37 provided again they
06:11:56 could get through zoning tonight.
06:12:01 Other than that, again, Euclidean rezoning, there's no
06:12:05 waivers requested or appropriate.
06:12:06 There's no site plan to review.
06:12:08 And the development staff found it consistent with Land
06:12:11 Development Code.
06:12:14 Do you have any questions?
06:12:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from council?
06:12:17 Thank you.
06:12:17 Petitioner.
06:12:22 >> Good evening.
06:12:23 Steve Michelini here on behalf of the owner.
06:12:27 Basically, it's a straightforward rezoning.
06:12:29 We are requesting the RM 18 which would allow the
06:12:32 development of three semi-detached units.
06:12:36 We are planning through the permit process, meet all of the
06:12:39 codes, and as Mary has stated, there are no waivers to pull
06:12:43 out so we have to meet parking code, solid waste,
06:12:47 stormwater, and it will also improve the infrastructure and
06:12:54 develop as part of the redevelopment effort will be required
06:12:56 to replace the water and sewer line.
06:13:01 It's in a transition area between commercial and multifamily
06:13:04 residential.
06:13:06 It's surrounded for the most part by multifamily townhouses,
06:13:11 and a few remaining single-family dwellings.
06:13:13 It's in the redevelopment kind of stage, in the whole area,
06:13:17 and it's very close to the transit area which is immediately
06:13:21 to the east.
06:13:22 It's one block north of Kennedy Boulevard.
06:13:25 And as I said it's a transition between the existing
06:13:27 commercial along Kennedy and the redevelopment of the
06:13:30 multifamily to the north.
06:13:34 We certainly believe this is a good in-fill development, and
06:13:36 we respectfully request your approval.
06:13:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
06:13:40 Any questions from council at this time?
06:13:43 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
06:13:45 item number 2, REZ 16-55?
06:13:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
06:13:51 >> Second.
06:13:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion to close from Mr. Miranda.
06:13:53 I have a second from Mr. Maniscalco.
06:13:55 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
06:13:58 Any opposed?
06:13:59 Mr. Miranda, will you kindly take item number 2?
06:14:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move file REZ 16-55, an ordinance
06:14:06 presented for first reading consideration, an ordinance
06:14:08 rezoning property in the general vicinity of 4503 North "A"
06:14:12 street, in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly
06:14:15 described in section 1 from zoning district classifications
06:14:17 RS-50 residential single-family to RM-18 residential
06:14:21 multifamily providing an effective date.
06:14:22 >> Second.
06:14:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion from Mr. Miranda, second
06:14:27 from Mr. Maniscalco.
06:14:28 All in favor?
06:14:29 Any opposed?
06:14:30 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
06:14:33 Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
06:14:36 9:30 a.m.
06:14:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Item number 3.
06:14:39 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Item number 3 on your agenda is REZ
06:14:44 16-56.
06:14:45 This is a rezoning request for the property at 3911 West
06:14:49 Cleveland Street, and a request to rezone the property from
06:14:53 RS-60 to RS-50.
06:14:55 >>DAVID HAY: Planning Commission staff.
06:15:05 I have been sworn.
06:15:06 We move down to the South Tampa for this next case, it is
06:15:09 located within an area of transit.
06:15:11 There is Hart route 30 and 36 located within the general
06:15:14 area.
06:15:14 The closest public recreational facility is Robles Park and
06:15:19 the subject site falls within a level D evacuation.
06:15:24 Onto the aerial.
06:15:26 You see the subject site.
06:15:28 Cleveland to the south.
06:15:30 Kennedy to the north.
06:15:31 This is cool automotive to the north.
06:15:35 Then the Melrose apartments to the east.
06:15:37 You can see the property backs up against the very intensive
06:15:42 development pattern along Kennedy Boulevard, and then it
06:15:46 transitions downward into homes single-family detached to
06:15:50 the south of the subject site.
06:15:56 Onto the future land use map.
06:15:59 You can see the subject site and the property to the west
06:16:03 and south and farther to the north are all that residential
06:16:07 10 future land use category.
06:16:10 We then get to a residential 35, real rose place apartments
06:16:14 are, and actually UMU 60 to the north of Kennedy Boulevard.
06:16:22 The applicant is requesting that the site be rezoned from
06:16:25 residential single-family 60 to that residential
06:16:28 single-family 50.
06:16:29 The city's comprehensive plan encourages the use of its
06:16:33 limited land resources in a more efficient way by supporting
06:16:36 in-fill development and higher density.
06:16:38 Proposed development is employing an underutilized site
06:16:41 based on the underlying land use category, and it helps to
06:16:45 continue that development pattern that is evolving for that
06:16:49 Swann estates neighborhood.
06:16:50 Approval of the applicant's quarterback will increase the
06:16:54 single-family detached housing supply which a variety of
06:16:57 housing is always encouraged by the comprehensive plan.
06:17:00 Based on those considerations, the Planning Commission staff
06:17:02 finds the proposed rezoning consistent with be the
06:17:05 provisions of the Tampa comprehensive plan.
06:17:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
06:17:09 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Again this is a rezoning request from
06:17:19 RS-60 to RS-50.
06:17:24 Here is an aerial photograph of the subject property, much
06:17:28 as David pointed out, existing homes.
06:17:31 It's really kind of at the corner of the subdivision or
06:17:35 neighborhood, rather, a large car dealership to the north,
06:17:40 and a little bit the west there is an apartment complex, and
06:17:46 then on the south side at Cleveland street is single-family
06:17:50 neighborhood.
06:17:55 Here is the property for the zoning map.
06:17:59 Again, commercial intensive along Kennedy.
06:18:02 This is expansion for that car dealership. This planned
06:18:08 development is an apartment complex.
06:18:09 There's a series, all these other PDs are all different,
06:18:17 either apartment complexes or town home developments.
06:18:23 Here is the subject property.
06:18:27 Let me show you, I am going to start up here on Gandy and
06:18:32 then come down Cleveland.
06:18:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Kennedy.
06:18:39 >> This is the subject property on Cleveland.
06:18:48 Here is the car dealership from Grady.
06:18:53 This is south on Grady.
06:18:55 A series of single-family houses.
06:19:02 Turn the corner to Cleveland, west of the application site
06:19:05 is a vacant lot.
06:19:07 To the east is the apartments as David indicated.
06:19:14 Melrose court apartments.
06:19:16 Then across still on Cleveland but across Church Street is
06:19:21 another apartment complex.
06:19:22 And then at the other intersection a town home development.
06:19:27 Now coming back across Cleveland, across the street, a
06:19:35 series of single-family homes.
06:19:42 Because this is a request for a change from RS-60 to RS-50,
06:19:47 we did the proverbial REZ map.
06:19:57 We analyzed the residential single-family lots.
06:20:00 Everything that's in red are commercial properties.
06:20:03 Everything that's in yellow are apartments or townhomes.
06:20:08 And then the gray is a cemetery.
06:20:11 Based own Tampa red and the blue of the single-family
06:20:14 development, 82% is already conforming with the RS-50.
06:20:19 And then within the block face itself, 100% is RS-50.
06:20:28 So that in and of itself does not support this application.
06:20:31 However, if you look at the broader area, you will see that
06:20:36 the subject property is really at the corner of the existing
06:20:40 single-family neighborhood, and the transition to higher
06:20:44 density, as well as all of the multifamily higher median
06:20:52 density residential development.
06:20:54 Given the context of the surrounding area, particularly the
06:20:56 position of the subject property, at the corner, we felt
06:21:03 that the RS-50 was an appropriate zoning as a transition
06:21:08 from RS-50 to the higher density as it moves to north
06:21:16 The subject property is 15,560 square feet.
06:21:21 Any development that would occur on the property would be
06:21:23 required to comply with all of the RS-50 zoning district
06:21:27 standards.
06:21:28 It shows a 50-foot wide lot by 70 square foot lot area, set
06:21:34 back 20 feet, side yards 7 feet and the rear 20 feet.
06:21:39 There is an informational comment from natural resources
06:21:42 regarding the tree survey and tree protections that would be
06:21:47 required.
06:21:48 When and if this property is developed at the permitting
06:21:50 stage, but other than that, staff found the application
06:21:55 consistent with the Land Development Code.
06:21:58 Do you have any questions?
06:21:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions by council?
06:22:01 Thank you.
06:22:02 Petitioner?
06:22:02 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Again I'm here on behalf of the owner.
06:22:12 We believe that this is an appropriate use for this
06:22:15 location, providing single-family residences, and in
06:22:19 particular, it's adjacent to the back of the garage, the
06:22:23 parking garage, and service area for the auto dealership
06:22:28 across on Kennedy, and it's immediately adjacent on the east
06:22:31 side to an apartment complex.
06:22:34 There are only six houses on this side of the street that
06:22:37 are residential in nature, and this basically will stop any
06:22:41 commercial encroachment further to the south, which could in
06:22:45 fact begin to he rode the single-family and rest of the
06:22:50 townhouses that exist there.
06:22:51 It is compatible.
06:22:52 It's because it's a straightforward rezoning, it will have
06:22:55 to meet all of the codes with no waivers, and we'll have to
06:22:58 meet all the standards and technical standards regarding
06:23:00 stormwater, solid waste, transportation, and all of the
06:23:06 utilities, water, sewer, and stormwater.
06:23:09 We believe it's compatible, and as the staff has pointed
06:23:13 out, both the Planning Commission and the zoning staff, it
06:23:17 found it consistent with the plans.
06:23:18 So we respectfully request your approval.
06:23:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions of council?
06:23:22 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
06:23:24 item number 3, REZ 16-56?
06:23:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
06:23:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion to close from Mr. Miranda.
06:23:32 I have a second from Mr. Maniscalco.
06:23:34 All in favor of that motion?
06:23:36 Any opposed?
06:23:37 Mr. Reddick, would you kindly take item 3, sir?
06:23:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move an ordinance being presented for
06:23:45 first reading consideration, an ordinance rezoning property
06:23:48 in the general vicinity of 3911 West Cleveland Street in the
06:23:52 city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in
06:23:54 section 1 from zoning district classifications RS-60
06:23:58 residential single-family to RS-50 residential
06:24:02 single-family, providing an effective date.
06:24:03 >> Second.
06:24:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion from Mr. Reddick.
06:24:06 I have a second from Mr. Miranda.
06:24:08 All in favor of that motion?
06:24:10 Any opposed?
06:24:10 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
06:24:14 Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
06:24:17 9:30 a.m.
06:24:18 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Thank you, council.
06:24:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Item number 467.
06:24:22 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Item 4 is REZ 16-57, property at 84740
06:24:30 North Florida Avenue from RS-50 to commercial intensive to
06:24:35 commercial intensive.
06:24:36 >>DAVID HAY: Planning Commission staff.
06:24:42 I have been sworn.
06:24:42 We move up to the university planning district for this next
06:24:47 case.
06:24:48 More specifically the Lowry Park central neighborhood.
06:24:52 Due to the community mixed use 35 future land use
06:24:55 designation, it is located within a mixed use corridor as
06:24:59 defined by the comprehensive plan.
06:25:01 It is a -- Florida Avenue is a transit emphasis corridor,
06:25:05 and transit is provided along the segment of Florida Avenue
06:25:08 by Hart's route 45, and the subject site is not located
06:25:13 within an evacuation zone.
06:25:17 Onto the aerial.
06:25:19 You see the subject site right here is Florida Avenue and
06:25:23 Watters.
06:25:24 This is a Kmart, a Wendy's, a bunch of heavy commercial,
06:25:30 auto oriented type uses, auto sale uses, all along the
06:25:35 segment of Florida Avenue.
06:25:39 Then it abruptly goes to the west.
06:25:42 You get a mixture of single-family detached and some
06:25:45 attached and some older like duplexes, further to the west,
06:25:50 and then there's also some residential offices on Florida
06:25:54 Avenue corridor.
06:25:55 Onto the future land use map, it kind of demonstrates what
06:25:58 the current gist.
06:26:01 Before I forget, this may look familiar. This was recently
06:26:04 a plan amendment.
06:26:05 It was plan amendment 15-09.
06:26:10 It was approved to enlarge the 35 category.
06:26:16 Now they are coming and rezoning for that C I have
06:26:20 reflective of the underlying land use category.
06:26:23 All that red is TC 35.
06:26:27 You have actually done community mixed use 35, and you have
06:26:31 the more extensive density further to the south, south of
06:26:34 waters.
06:26:37 The applicant is requesting that CIU on the .43-acre subject
06:26:43 site. This portion of North Florida Avenue has historically
06:26:46 been auto oriented commercial corridor, proposed expansion
06:26:50 of an existing auto sales and leasing use would be
06:26:53 comparable and compatible with the surrounding commercial
06:26:55 uses if the property complies with all land related code
06:27:00 development standards.
06:27:01 The comprehensive plan supports nonresidential use as long
06:27:03 major corridors, that are sensitive and compatible with
06:27:07 adjacent residential uses.
06:27:09 The applicant should comply with all Land Development Code
06:27:11 requirements especially buffering and screening so as to
06:27:14 ensure the intensity of the proposed uses properly mitigated
06:27:18 for, and to provide consistency with the comprehensive plan.
06:27:22 Based on those considerations, the request for CI, the
06:27:26 Planning Commission staff does find that request consistent
06:27:29 with the provisions of the Tampa comprehensive plan.
06:27:32 Thank you.
06:27:32 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Thank you, David.
06:27:44 Here is an aerial photograph of the specific property.
06:27:50 As David pointed out again, it's an auto dealership along
06:27:54 Florida Avenue, north of waters and south of --
06:28:02 >> Here is a zoning map.
06:28:04 As you can see the majority of the site is already in the CI
06:28:06 commercial sensitive zoning district.
06:28:09 They want to expand the zoning back to the property which is
06:28:13 currently RS-50.
06:28:15 Again family business.
06:28:24 Here is a photograph of the subject property.
06:28:32 I am going to go up Florida and then come down.
06:28:35 Subject property on Florida is a car dealership.
06:28:40 Going south now, through here where the zoning line is, and
06:28:50 specifically the start of the area that the CI zoning.
06:28:55 This is around the corner in the back of the property on
06:28:58 Tampa Street.
06:29:00 This is one lot to the south, Florida Avenue.
06:29:06 Further to the south is Florida Avenue, another vehicle
06:29:09 repair.
06:29:11 Across the street, commercial shopping.
06:29:22 Further, commercial shopping.
06:29:24 A little bit further to the south is a Krispy Kreme.
06:29:28 Now across the street on Wood is another vehicular use.
06:29:41 Going west on wood there's a single family house.
06:29:45 Turn the corner on Tampa Street.
06:29:47 This is the existing house that I just showed you.
06:29:50 Now we are going to go down Tampa Street and you can see
06:29:53 it's all single-family residential.
06:29:56 Vacant lots on both sides.
06:30:02 And this is on the same side.
06:30:04 There are mobile homes and then a than vacant lot.
06:30:10 Directly south of the subject property.
06:30:19 We went through a comprehensive plan amendment, and we have
06:30:22 changed to the 35 land use category that allows
06:30:29 consideration of the CI zoning district.
06:30:32 Given the review of the subject property and the surrounding
06:30:35 areas, staff found it consistent with the Land Development
06:30:37 Code.
06:30:39 Again, as David said, if this property were to be rezoned to
06:30:44 commercial intensive, the property owner or any future
06:30:47 property owner two comply with all of the CI zoning
06:30:51 requirements including buffering up against the residential
06:30:54 uses.
06:30:55 Do you have any questions?
06:30:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from council at this time?
06:30:59 Petitioner?
06:31:00 >> Todd Pressman, East Lake Road, Palm Harbor, Florida.
06:31:12 So obviously I am not Steve Michelini, although I am better
06:31:16 looking than Steve Michelini.
06:31:18 (Laughter)
06:31:19 You can vote on that if you like.
06:31:24 The request before you is Tampa land use amendment was
06:31:27 approved to bring this into compliance.
06:31:30 We had no opposition.
06:31:33 I would like with the petition submitted to you that show
06:31:39 you we are in support of the land use amendment.
06:31:41 Nothing has changed but the zoning.
06:31:43 This is an existing business.
06:31:46 It's run very well.
06:31:47 The family business.
06:31:49 Every department in the city that reviewed the request
06:31:53 indicated no open situation or that it was consistent.
06:31:58 Happy to answer any questions you have.
06:31:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from council at this time? Is
06:32:01 there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item
06:32:04 number 4, REZ 16-57?
06:32:08 >> Move to close.
06:32:08 >> Second.
06:32:09 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion by Mr. Miranda.
06:32:10 Second from Mr. Cohen.
06:32:11 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
06:32:14 Any opposed?
06:32:15 Mrs. Capin, will you kindly take item number 4?
06:32:19 >>YVONNE CAPIN: An ordinance being presented for first
06:32:21 reading consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the
06:32:23 general vicinity of 84740 North Florida Avenue in the city
06:32:27 of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section
06:32:30 1 from zoning district classifications RS-50 residential
06:32:35 single-family to CI commercial intensive to CI commercial
06:32:40 intensive, providing an effective date.
06:32:45 I have a motion from Mr. Capin, a second from Mr.
06:32:48 Maniscalco.
06:32:49 All in favor of that motion are? Any opposed?
06:32:51 >>THE CLERK: The motion carried with Montelione being
06:32:55 absent at vote.
06:32:56 Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
06:32:59 9:30 a.m.
06:33:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
06:33:01 Item number 5.
06:33:01 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Number 5 on your agenda is SU-II-16-07.
06:33:11 It's a special use for off-street commercial parking in a
06:33:15 residential zoning district.
06:33:17 For the site located at 100 west Fern Street.
06:33:20 >>DAVID HAY: Planning Commission staff.
06:33:30 I have been sworn.
06:33:31 We move down into the central Tampa planning district for
06:33:34 this next case.
06:33:36 More particularly the Seminole Heights urban village.
06:33:41 The special use request is located adjacent to that mixed
06:33:45 use corridor, and it is off that portion of Florida Avenue,
06:33:49 transit emphasis corridor served by Hart route 1.
06:33:56 Onto the aerial.
06:33:59 It includes this portion of Florida Avenue, the commercial
06:34:01 uses align Florida Avenue and then most of the uses directly
06:34:06 behind the transition directly to single-family detached
06:34:10 residential uses on both sides of Florida Avenue.
06:34:15 This is Florida.
06:34:17 Fern.
06:34:19 Waters.
06:34:20 Lambright.
06:34:21 That segment right there.
06:34:23 But it's basically a commercial corridor.
06:34:28 Onto the future land use map, and future land use map kind
06:34:34 of demonstrates that this commercial, the subject site and
06:34:41 all the properties located to the south, west, and north,
06:34:46 are all that residential 10, to the east an array of
06:34:50 community residential 35, and then you can also see behind
06:34:54 somewhat the community commercial 35.
06:34:57 We actually have some community mixed use 35 to offer a
06:35:02 transition into the neighborhood, residential 20.
06:35:06 But the majority of the site, the whole site of the
06:35:09 surrounding Sawyer residential 10.
06:35:11 The applicant is requesting approval through this special
06:35:14 use petition to allow for off-street commercial parking lot
06:35:16 on a parcel designated by residential and zoned
06:35:21 single-family detached for Seminole Heights.
06:35:22 Vehicular access to the parking area will be provided from
06:35:25 the adjacent commercial parcel to the east.
06:35:29 So the commercial traffic will actually come to designated
06:35:34 35 and go in the parking lot that way, internally.
06:35:39 It doesn't create an accent point deeper into the
06:35:44 residential neighborhood.
06:35:45 The comprehensive plan does promote a mixed use development
06:35:48 pat earn long the city's major corridors in our urban
06:35:51 villages.
06:35:52 The proposed parking lot would serve a proposed cafe and
06:35:56 pharmacy development adjacent to the subject site at the
06:36:01 southwest corner much Fern Street and Florida Avenue.
06:36:04 The proposed site provides for appropriate buffering and
06:36:07 screening to residential uses located to the north and west
06:36:10 of the subject site.
06:36:11 Overall Planning Commission staff found the requested
06:36:14 special use is comparable and compatible with the
06:36:16 surrounding development pattern and would further promote
06:36:19 for the redevelopment of that Florida Avenue corridor.
06:36:23 Based on those considerations, the Planning Commission staff
06:36:25 finds the proposed special use request consistent with the
06:36:28 provisions of the Tampa comprehensive plan.
06:36:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
06:36:31 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Thank you, David.
06:36:47 Here is an aerial photograph of the subject property.
06:36:50 Specifically we are looking at this vacant lot.
06:36:52 Again, this is in the Seminole Heights RS zoning district.
06:36:57 This is within the code saying that whenever one asks for
06:37:03 commercial parking for any commercial use, instead of
06:37:09 residential zoning district, it requires a special use here,
06:37:12 which is a public hearing, so homeowners are notified, and
06:37:19 that's why the case is provided before you today.
06:37:25 Again, going north.
06:37:27 The CR portion, construction for a restaurant, as you can
06:37:36 see.
06:37:37 Directly to the south along Florida, the subject property,
06:37:42 single-family house.
06:37:44 I believe it's used for commercial use.
06:37:46 And further again to the south is another auto sale yard.
06:37:51 Across the street, some commercial and office uses.
06:37:55 And some retail uses.
06:38:00 Directly across fern is a vacant lot that serves as parking
06:38:05 for the restaurant further to the north.
06:38:09 And once we get back to here is when you begin the
06:38:16 single-family detached on either side of the road.
06:38:27 Here is a site plan.
06:38:35 Again, for the record, you are specifically approving the
06:38:40 parking lot in this area.
06:38:44 The Seminole Heights commercial, they already have the right
06:38:48 to use the lot from that zoning district.
06:38:50 However, finance City Council remembers a couple years back
06:38:56 staff required a special use for parking lot and didn't show
06:38:58 what the commercial use it was serving, so at that time,
06:39:05 council ... for how the approved parking lot would fit in
06:39:12 the commercial site.
06:39:16 As David said, the vehicular access will be basically two
06:39:25 rows of parking, that connect right here.
06:39:29 I will note that there are no waivers being requested, so
06:39:32 they are completely complying with all of the Seminole
06:39:34 Heights design standards for a parking lot.
06:39:43 This is for overflow parking for the facility.
06:39:46 It's not required parking, that the applicants are wanting
06:39:49 to install to ensure again adequate parking for the
06:39:53 facilities, so it doesn't necessarily start spilling over
06:39:57 into the neighborhood.
06:39:58 This went before the Development Review Committee, urban
06:40:04 design review.
06:40:05 They have a couple of small comments about things to be
06:40:07 changed between first and second reading.
06:40:10 Again, on the site plan and some informational comments
06:40:14 about things that will be required for land spacing at the
06:40:18 permitting process.
06:40:20 Natural resources again has another informational comment
06:40:23 about requirements would be required on the permit plan.
06:40:28 Other than that, they are compliant with all of the special
06:40:31 use criteria, specifically, they are adjacent to commercial
06:40:35 use.
06:40:36 The commercial uses are conforming in the current zoning
06:40:39 district.
06:40:40 And there will be noon allowed outdoor storage in the
06:40:45 parking lot.
06:40:46 Other than that, staff found it consistent with the Land
06:40:48 Development Code provided those changes are made between
06:40:51 first and second reading.
06:40:53 Do you have any questions for me at this time?
06:40:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from council?
06:40:56 Thank you.
06:40:57 Petitioner?
06:41:07 >> Ujwal Patel, owner of the property.
06:41:12 As presented we are requesting special use for property
06:41:15 located for our restaurant for the commercial parking
06:41:20 supporting 6308 North Florida Avenue which is a pharmacy,
06:41:26 and 6310 North Florida Avenue, which is a cafe.
06:41:29 We have spoken with the neighbors and we have spoken with
06:41:34 neighbors directly north of us, directly west of us, and
06:41:41 south, and they are all in full support of the parking.
06:41:46 Our goal is to keep our customers, our customers coming to
06:41:52 the cafe and pharmacy off the street, you know, and keep the
06:42:00 street clear and not park in front of anybody's houses.
06:42:03 Any questions?
06:42:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions of council at this time?
06:42:07 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
06:42:10 item number 5, SU-II-16-07?
06:42:14 If you have -- if you are going to speak, come forward.
06:42:17 Come along the side here.
06:42:18 But before we go, there are several people that have come
06:42:21 in, in and out.
06:42:22 Who has not been sworn?
06:42:25 Please stand up and be sworn in if you are going to speak to
06:42:28 any agenda on the item.
06:42:30 Anyone who has not already been sworn in.
06:42:31 (Oath administered by Clerk)
06:42:35 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
06:42:39 Sir, you are the first one.
06:42:43 Get to the microphone first.
06:42:44 >> My name is George Hinds, 103 west Fern street.
06:42:49 And I think they would be a great neighbor, an asset to the
06:42:52 neighborhood.
06:42:55 As long as they keep their customers out of the residential
06:43:00 area.
06:43:01 I have been living in the same place for about almost 40
06:43:05 years.
06:43:10 About six different owners, you can imagine.
06:43:13 Actually, I think probably you are familiar with Donald
06:43:17 Miller, Tampa Police Department.
06:43:19 >>MIKE SUAREZ: We have heard of him.
06:43:20 >> Oh yeah, I think you have. Anyway, we were standing on
06:43:23 my front door one day talking about parking problems from
06:43:26 the bar that exists, and he was sitting out, and, hey,
06:43:31 George, you got a busy street.
06:43:33 I said, yeah.
06:43:34 I said, and it's always
06:43:38 Yeah?
06:43:39 >> But we do have young kid on the street, you know.
06:43:43 And we like to maybe have some no-parking signs from west
06:43:52 fern all the way up to Florida Avenue, because, now, to keep
06:43:57 people from parking on the street.
06:43:59 It would be a help if there was nothing there, they'll park
06:44:03 there.
06:44:04 We have had the police department down there, cars park down
06:44:09 two blocks long before when there were special events.
06:44:15 But I think they will be a nice asset to the neighborhood.
06:44:19 In a-parking signs, we are happy.
06:44:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, sir.
06:44:22 Appreciate it.
06:44:24 Next, please.
06:44:24 >> Good evening.
06:44:28 My name is --
06:44:30 >> You can stand up straight.
06:44:31 The microphone is going to pick it up.
06:44:33 That type of microphone you are speaking into.
06:44:35 It's everywhere.
06:44:37 Go ahead, sir.
06:44:38 >> On behalf of the Old Seminole Heights neighborhood
06:44:42 association speaking on behalf of them, we also welcome the
06:44:49 parking lot and feel it would be a good addition, and
06:44:52 preventing street parking, but do have a couple of requests
06:44:56 in relation to the parking lot.
06:44:57 If you look at the design as it is laid out now, there is
06:45:01 really no sound barrier being put up between that and the
06:45:04 residents directly to its west. We would like to request
06:45:07 that some sort of cement wall be put in to help block the
06:45:15 noise going into the neighborhood, and the other request
06:45:18 that we had is that if they can possibly be constructed to
06:45:24 be a right-turn only so that the traffic doesn't flow into
06:45:27 the neighborhood but is directed out towards Florida Avenue.
06:45:32 Preventing unnecessary traffic of the folks, the business
06:45:39 from flowing in and causing more traffic.
06:45:43 Other than that, we are in full support of the parking lot
06:45:48 proposed.
06:45:49 It would help prevent parking along the street.
06:45:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, sir.
06:45:54 Is there anyone else from the public that would like to
06:45:57 speak on item number 5?
06:46:00 Rebuttal from our petitioner?
06:46:06 I apologize, I didn't realize you were coming on up.
06:46:08 Is there anyone else that's going to speak on this item,
06:46:11 please stand up so we can figure out who is going to be
06:46:13 coming up, if anyone speaks on item number 5.
06:46:16 Go ahead, sir.
06:46:17 >> I have been sworn in.
06:46:19 Colis Monlar, 308 East Jean Street, also the architect on
06:46:22 the project, also a neighbor, and we are thrilled to see
06:46:28 this street evolve into such a beautiful neighborhood.
06:46:32 Where once we had used car dealerships up and down.
06:46:39 Speaking on behalf of my client as well as a neighbor, we
06:46:42 are in full support of this project.
06:46:43 Thank you.
06:46:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
06:46:44 And you say you are the architect on this project?
06:46:47 >> That is correct.
06:46:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
06:46:49 Anyone else in the public like to speak on this item?
06:46:52 If the petitioner could come forward at this time, do you
06:46:55 have a question?
06:46:56 I was just going to ask.
06:46:59 Come on up.
06:47:00 Just sit right there.
06:47:01 Don't gone anywhere. Staff, come on up, she has a question.
06:47:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mrs. Samaniego, you said in your
06:47:11 presentation that it meets all of the requirements.
06:47:13 But can you -- can you run through what the buffer
06:47:20 requirements are?
06:47:21 Because this is not use to use, it's commercial to
06:47:26 residential.
06:47:27 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: One moment, please.
06:47:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Sure.
06:47:34 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Seminole Heights, it is technically a use
06:47:38 to use buffer.
06:47:40 Let me show you.
06:47:44 The commercial parking, commercial use.
06:47:47 Up against the residential.
06:47:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It's the commercial total residential
06:47:53 that I am asking about.
06:47:54 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Right.
06:47:57 I got you.
06:47:59 One moment, please.
06:48:04 Let me find it in here.
06:48:07 While I am looking for that, I will note that one of the
06:48:12 requests was about the right turn out only for the exit.
06:48:18 Of the property.
06:48:19 And I will remind the City Council that the access part is
06:48:29 not part of the subject property tonight.
06:48:32 It's already on the CI zoning.
06:48:35 And you are really only approving this, so you can't make
06:48:39 any determination on this.
06:48:44 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Understood.
06:48:46 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Getting back to answer your question, the
06:48:49 front yard along Berns street would require a 15-foot
06:48:53 landscape buffer that they are providing.
06:48:56 The side yard is the property along the west requires a
06:49:04 3-foot buffer with a continuous hedge.
06:49:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That's the 3-foot.
06:49:14 >> 3-foot with a continuous hedge as well as a 6-foot high
06:49:18 fence or wall.
06:49:19 They are proposing a 6-foot high wood fence.
06:49:24 And then along the rear of the property there was --
06:49:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That would be the west side that the
06:49:32 neighbors were --
06:49:34 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Yes.
06:49:35 This is an 8-foot landscape buffer with a 3-foot high wood
06:49:40 fence.
06:49:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: You ran through the photographs before.
06:49:46 What is to the south?
06:49:48 So what would be than the property owner's name?
06:49:53 What is that, another residential?
06:49:57 The side with the 3-foot buffer.
06:49:59 >> Yes.
06:50:01 It's a single-family lot.
06:50:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So the single-family residence on the
06:50:09 south.
06:50:09 But on the west, so why is the buffer only 3 feet on the
06:50:14 south and what did you say, 8 feet --
06:50:18 >> On the rear.
06:50:23 Minimum requirement of the Seminole Heights.
06:50:26 >> The commercial site, which is what the parking lot is.
06:50:31 To the residential site to the south.
06:50:34 Only a 3-foot landscape buffer.
06:50:36 >> A 3-foot hedge buffer with a wall or a fence.
06:50:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: With a wall or fence.
06:50:41 And the fence there is higher than the one on the south
06:50:43 side?
06:50:45 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: They are both 6-foot high wood fences
06:50:48 proposed.
06:50:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
06:50:51 Thank you.
06:50:52 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Another additional note.
06:50:56 All required -- is 4-inch minimum.
06:51:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So there will be a 4-inch --
06:51:07 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: So the trees that planted will be ...
06:51:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Gotcha.
06:51:14 Thank you.
06:51:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions at this time of staff?
06:51:18 Petitioner, rebuttal.
06:51:19 >> Yeah, in terms of the area we are trying to make sure
06:51:33 that the properties are surrounded and you can see we have
06:51:38 4-inch caliper trees, we have bushes that go across, all
06:51:41 around the north, the west and the south of the property,
06:51:45 and then wood fence in addition to the bushes, on the west
06:51:53 side and the south side.
06:51:54 6 F.W. Woolworth fence.
06:51:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from council at this time
06:52:00 concerning rebuttal?
06:52:01 Is there anything else you would like to add, sir?
06:52:04 Okay.
06:52:06 I am going to ask one more time if there's anyone else in
06:52:09 the public that would like to speak on item number 5.
06:52:12 I have a motion to close from Mr. Maniscalco, a second from
06:52:14 Mr. Cohen.
06:52:15 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
06:52:18 Any opposed?
06:52:18 Mr. Cohen, would you kindly take item number 5, sir?
06:52:22 >>HARRY COHEN: I move an ordinance being presented for
06:52:24 first reading consideration, an ordinance approving a
06:52:27 special use permit S-2 approving parking, off-street,
06:52:31 commercial in SH-RS Seminole Heights single-family detached
06:52:35 residential zoning district in the general vicinity of 100
06:52:39 west Fern Street in the city of Tampa, Florida and as more
06:52:43 particularly described in section 1 hereof providing an
06:52:45 effective date.
06:52:45 >> Second.
06:52:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion by Mr. Cohen.
06:52:48 I have a second from Mrs. Montelione.
06:52:50 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
06:52:53 Any opposed?
06:52:54 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
06:52:56 Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
06:52:59 9:30 a.m.
06:53:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes, ma'am.
06:53:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: To the gentleman who spoke about -- the
06:53:08 first one.
06:53:10 You spoke about the no-parking signs.
06:53:14 We couldn't talk about that during the hearing because it's
06:53:17 not part of the hearing.
06:53:18 But you can request those from the city.
06:53:21 >> From the city?
06:53:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Parking, right-of-way.
06:53:28 Transportation.
06:53:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Don't call officer Miller.
06:53:35 He can't help you on that one.
06:53:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Item number 6.
06:53:47 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Item number 6 on the agenda is REZ 16-44.
06:53:56 It's the Tampa Jewish JCC federation, INC, 522 North Howard
06:54:06 Avenue from planned development to planned development which
06:54:08 allows a daycare, appraise school, recreation facility,
06:54:12 commercial, private, place of assembly, and use of public
06:54:17 cultural facility.
06:54:18 >>DAVID HAY: Planning Commission staff.
06:54:24 I have been sworn.
06:54:26 We stay in the central Tampa planning district for this next
06:54:29 case.
06:54:30 More specifically the West Tampa urban village.
06:54:34 It should all be -- the site should be familiar to
06:54:37 everybody.
06:54:37 It's the armory.
06:54:42 There are -- there is a community mixed use 35.
06:54:47 It is a mixed use corridor village.
06:54:49 Both Armenia and Howard are designated as transit emphasis
06:54:54 corridor, even though there is not currently any transit on
06:54:57 the site plan.
06:54:58 Some day hopefully there will be.
06:55:00 It is located within the level D evacuation zone.
06:55:05 Onto the aerial, the subject site of course right in the
06:55:09 middle, you should all be familiar, the corridor is mostly
06:55:14 nonresidential.
06:55:15 Specifically the Howard Avenue is mostly nonresidential.
06:55:18 And then the main corridor are the residential uses, the
06:55:26 park to the northwest.
06:55:28 Onto the future land use map.
06:55:31 The subject site is right there in the center.
06:55:34 We have gray to the south, Howard to the east, Armenia to
06:55:39 the west, and there's lemon on the north.
06:55:43 And further north.
06:55:46 That's the subject site.
06:55:48 The subject site and all this pink color is that community
06:55:51 mixed use 35.
06:55:52 It gets more intensive as you go up Howard North Howard
06:55:56 Avenue and the interstate is off the map.
06:56:01 All that red is commercial 35.
06:56:04 And then to the west, we have the residential 20.
06:56:07 And then off of the Howard Avenue going -- the tan color is
06:56:13 the residential 10, except this which has that community
06:56:19 mixed use 35.
06:56:22 The planned development as originally proposed promoted
06:56:26 redevelopment of historic structure which is under
06:56:29 construction, set back to a continued public use.
06:56:36 Planning Commission staff did review those previous two
06:56:40 planned developments and did find them consistent.
06:56:42 However, within the current request, the addition of a
06:56:49 6-foot perimeter fence along the front of Howard Avenue.
06:56:53 Previous proposals included a fence at the face of the
06:56:57 existing building and was not placed along the face of
06:57:01 Howard Avenue.
06:57:01 Howard Avenue is identified as a transit emphasis corridor
06:57:05 and is one of the two major north-west arterials that
06:57:08 traverse through the West Tampa urban village.
06:57:11 As well as serving as the primary pedestrian entrance to the
06:57:14 proposed development.
06:57:16 The fence creates a barrier of entry to the front entrance
06:57:19 of the building which is inconsistent with policy direction
06:57:22 in the comprehensive plan.
06:57:24 There are other design alternatives which can be introduced
06:57:27 along the eastern perimeter of the project that are
06:57:31 important to the city's design standards.
06:57:33 Also, the subject site is located within that West Tampa
06:57:37 urban village.
06:57:38 The comprehensive plan states that the purpose of the you
06:57:41 are balling ban village is cultivating high quality built
06:57:44 environments, character represents Tampa's unique historical
06:57:48 context.
06:57:48 The former for the Homerly Hesterly -- it's going to be a
06:57:55 long night -- armory was a popular venue hosting several
06:58:02 cultural and political events.
06:58:04 It is recognized as an important asset to the West Tampa
06:58:06 urban village.
06:58:07 The introduction of a perimeter fence along Howard Avenue
06:58:11 diminishes the historic character of the building and does
06:58:15 not contribute to the high quality development in the West
06:58:17 Tampa urban village.
06:58:19 Overall Planning Commission staff found that the
06:58:21 introduction of this feature along Howard Avenue
06:58:23 significantly diminishes the original intent and historic
06:58:27 character of the proposed planned development and does not
06:58:30 reflect the sensitive and adaptive reuse of this historic
06:58:34 site due to scale and height of the fence along Howard
06:58:37 Avenue and does not promote the unique characteristic of the
06:58:41 West Tampa urban village.
06:58:43 Based on those considerations, Planning Commission staff
06:58:45 finds the be proposed planned development inconsistent with
06:58:49 the provisions of the Imagine 2040 Tampa comprehensive plan.
06:58:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
06:58:55 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Land Development Coordination.
06:59:04 Here is the subject property.
06:59:20 Howard, Armenia.
06:59:24 This is the orientation.
06:59:29 I believe this might have been approved multifamily
06:59:33 development.
06:59:33 Here is the subject property.
06:59:40 I am not going to take you all the way around the subject
06:59:43 properties again.
06:59:51 There has been some recent activity, fencing along the
06:59:54 property.
06:59:58 The exterior has been refurbished.
07:00:01 You can see architectural features, that I am sure the
07:00:05 applicant will go into more detail on.
07:00:09 And it is currently an active project.
07:00:13 This specific request -- has specific detail.
07:00:23 The first is that they are asking to add a use for public
07:00:27 cultural facility.
07:00:28 And the property owners have the opportunity to lease a
07:00:36 small portion of the building to the city to run some public
07:00:41 classes.
07:00:43 So therefore we add quote unquote public facility as a
07:00:48 permitted use to allow that to occur.
07:00:52 The second request as David indicated is for a fence along
07:01:03 this portion of the property.
07:01:07 Again for the record, in the 2014, building assembly, and
07:01:20 then over here.
07:01:21 So now they want a fence -- Howard Avenue.
07:01:33 The property is a local landmark structure.
07:01:38 Any requirements or any reviewer or application, the
07:01:44 Architectural Review Commission for a recommendation.
07:01:54 This has an architectural commission on June 8th and
07:01:59 specifically regarding the fence they recommended denial to
07:02:05 City Council based on the proposed rezoning, the fence
07:02:08 placement does not meet the secretary of interior standards,
07:02:11 and is not appropriate for historic properties for the
07:02:14 reason that existing PD was approved with a fence
07:02:18 terminating at the base of the existing building so as to
07:02:22 not give access to the ceremonial historic part of the
07:02:25 building.
07:02:26 Again, the front of the building facing Howard has been lost
07:02:30 and then direct access off of the sidewalk.
07:02:33 So felt when they made the recommendation they did not meet
07:02:37 the criteria placing the fence there.
07:02:43 The third part of the planned development amendment is for
07:02:48 waivers for signage.
07:02:50 There are three monument signs proposed at the location to
07:02:55 Howard, one on the corner, one at the entrance on Howard,
07:03:00 and the other one off of Armenia.
07:03:04 And then there's also a building sign in this location.
07:03:10 Given that the property is in the West Tampa overlay, and
07:03:14 the basic sign standards, there are a number of waivers that
07:03:17 are required.
07:03:18 First for the building sign.
07:03:22 Let me show you.
07:03:39 This building sign.
07:03:42 Square footage of 25 square feet, and is supposed to be 12
07:03:51 inches, and this is at 40 inches.
07:03:56 Based opt free-standing sign, they label the signs A, B and
07:04:04 C.
07:04:07 Sign A that will be, I believe, an exception.
07:04:17 Sign A, proposed instead of 15 square feet for the sign
07:04:21 property, they are proposing 21-foot square feet.
07:04:28 They want 18-foot high.
07:04:30 For sign C they are wanting a 22-foot sign as with an 8-foot
07:04:35 high as opposed to the 6.
07:04:40 Within staff review of the recommendation of the ARC, and
07:04:45 the West Tampa overlay, staff found it inconsistent.
07:04:52 Land development found it inconsistent.
07:04:54 Urban design found it inconsistent.
07:04:56 As well as like I said the Architectural Review Commission.
07:04:59 The historic and ceremonial sign of the property is along
07:05:05 Howard.
07:05:10 They have all the other property lines.
07:05:13 This area should be kept open with direct access from the
07:05:16 sidewalk into the front of the building.
07:05:18 And then the increase in the square footage of the signage,
07:05:24 given that along the street isn't appropriate scale.
07:05:32 For the project.
07:05:34 Do you have any questions for me at this time?
07:05:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from council?
07:05:40 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Actually let me clarify?
07:05:43 >>FRANK REDDICK: Clarify if there are any questions or
07:05:46 something else?
07:05:47 >> Something in the report. If city Council chooses to
07:05:48 approve the application, changes would be required to be
07:05:51 made between first and second reading that are found on the
07:05:55 revision sheet.
07:05:56 Now I'm through.
07:05:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
07:05:57 Any questions by council?
07:05:59 All right.
07:06:00 Petitioner?
07:06:30 You know, we did have an easel here so you didn't have to
07:06:34 bring your own.
07:06:34 You never want to presume.
07:06:36 Good point.
07:06:36 But that does not hold up.
07:06:38 There is an easel in the back left-hand side, my left
07:06:42 towards the back.
07:06:46 Either that or he's going to make a tent.
07:06:49 I'm not sure.
07:07:00 >> David Singer, Singer & O'Donniley, 712 south Oregon here
07:07:06 in Tampa.
07:07:06 For the record we have submitted the Power Point slides into
07:07:11 the record that you may review during the presentation.
07:07:15 As staff discussed we are here tonight with members of the
07:07:18 JCC to propose a few straightforward changes we would like
07:07:22 to make to the PD that's already been approved by City
07:07:25 Council.
07:07:27 For several years now I have had the opportunity to be a
07:07:29 part of this great public-private partnership that will
07:07:33 bring new life to the historic for the Homer Hesterly
07:07:37 armory.
07:07:38 As you are aware before the JCC together with the armory, a
07:07:43 planned development for approval, by City Council, this site
07:07:47 sat unused for many years.
07:07:49 Since then, we have come before you as a result of site
07:07:53 planning process to make necessary adjustments.
07:07:56 And we are hoping that this will be the final adjustment.
07:08:02 This plan here, as you can see, is a modest revision of the
07:08:07 already approved plan, is substantially the same, but
07:08:11 includes three changes.
07:08:13 First, the introduction of the public cultural facility of
07:08:16 the proposed allowable use.
07:08:19 Second, the inclusion of a new perimeter fence for the
07:08:21 safety of both the structure and its occupants.
07:08:25 And third, the inclusion of several monument signs, and a
07:08:29 building sign to demarcate JCC site.
07:08:34 In addition, I want to note that staff report and natural
07:08:37 resources requested that we adjust the sidewalk in the
07:08:41 southeast corner to accommodate a protected tree radius.
07:08:44 We have made that adjustment and it will be noted between
07:08:47 first and second reading.
07:08:49 To get to where we are today has been a true demonstration
07:08:52 of public-private cooperation and partnership.
07:08:56 Today members of the private communicating including the
07:08:59 Glazer familiar reply have donated millions of dollars to
07:09:02 make this project economically viable.
07:09:04 Florida State representative Dana young who currently
07:09:08 represents district 60 in the Florida legislature and
07:09:12 senator Jeff Brandon worked together with our legislature to
07:09:16 bring funds from our state budget to bring this historic
07:09:18 building back into the community.
07:09:21 The City of Tampa for the revitalization and will be
07:09:26 administering the art program from within the new facility,
07:09:29 and this inclusion, the city's art program is the reason we
07:09:32 are adding public cultural facility and allowable use.
07:09:36 I am joined this evening by jack Ross, Executive Director of
07:09:39 the Tampa Jewish community center as well as Craig Gunte
07:09:43 from the security firm CIF, will be discussing why the fence
07:09:48 is integral for security purposes.
07:09:51 If staff agrees, and I imagine you agree as well, the
07:09:53 inclusion of public cultural facility use is compatible with
07:09:57 the site, and I will not spend time discussing that
07:10:00 addition.
07:10:00 Instead, I will begin with the discussion about the monument
07:10:04 and building signs and why reasonable deviation from the
07:10:08 West Tampa overlay district is appropriate to this unique
07:10:11 site.
07:10:12 After that I will make comments about the location of the
07:10:15 perimeter fence, enhancing -- hand things over to Mr. Ross
07:10:19 and Mr. Gunte to discuss the importance of the location of
07:10:22 the fence for security of the property, it's members and its
07:10:26 visitors.
07:10:27 When we conclude, I will be happy to answer any questions.
07:10:30 On the monument sign, the plans are located here, sign A.
07:10:36 Here sign B.
07:10:38 Here sign C.
07:10:39 Only sign A and C we are asking for a waiver.
07:10:42 The West Tampa overlay district restrict the monument sign
07:10:45 to an area of 15 square feet and height of 6 feet.
07:10:49 Signs A and C are slightly larger than that.
07:10:51 A is 21.87 square feet and 8 feet in height.
07:10:55 The waiver requests a 6.87 square feet in area and 2 feet in
07:11:01 height.
07:11:01 Request for sign at 7 feet in area and 2 feet in height.
07:11:06 The fact is, this is a very large and unique site, and the
07:11:10 West Tampa sign regulations are not intended to be a
07:11:13 one-size-fits-all solution when it comes to what signs
07:11:18 should be allowed.
07:11:19 It makes sense that larger-than-average signs be placed on
07:11:24 our larger-than-average sites.
07:11:27 Allowing larger signs for larger historical sites for the
07:11:31 city is not a precedent.
07:11:33 And you can see the signs from the David Tippin water
07:11:36 facility.
07:11:37 This large site, which is 29 acres, proportionately larger.
07:11:43 The site for the Cuscaden park swim pool, another large sign
07:11:48 for a large site.
07:12:05 The monument signs we are proposing are not back lit and
07:12:09 will be illuminated from lights in the ground, and their
07:12:12 purpose for design to match the aesthetics of the
07:12:15 development.
07:12:16 I think it's also important to note they are not electronic
07:12:18 signs.
07:12:20 Finally, here are some renderings.
07:12:23 And you can see them proportionately depicted.
07:12:27 Slightly larger than normal signs for a larger than normal
07:12:31 site.
07:12:35 We are also requesting a waiver to the building signs, the
07:12:40 sign on the actual building.
07:12:42 This requires a waiver as a result of a minimal increase in
07:12:46 the square footage area.
07:12:47 Only 1.6 square feet.
07:12:50 And an increase in the text height.
07:12:53 The West Tampa overlay district required building sign text
07:12:57 to be limited to 12 inches.
07:13:00 Our building sign text is 40 inches.
07:13:03 Like the monument signs, it's a proportional increase for
07:13:06 the proportional size of the building.
07:13:08 As you can see on the rendering, it is not outlandish.
07:13:12 It's not ostentatious.
07:13:15 It fits the architecture.
07:13:17 And it makes sense.
07:13:19 Again, this is not a one-size-fits-all situation.
07:13:23 It simply doesn't make sense to rein to the scale of the
07:13:28 massive building to have a 12-inch sign on the building.
07:13:32 If it were a one-size-fits-all, we would be talking about
07:13:35 the same size signage on the small law firm as opposed to
07:13:41 the armory.
07:13:42 Different signs for billed different buildings.
07:13:44 Again, large buildings.
07:13:46 Large signs.
07:13:47 This is not a precedent, a matter of exception here, and we
07:13:52 ask that you waive it.
07:13:54 Now the fence.
07:13:54 As staff mentioned, ARC states location of the fence is not
07:13:58 consistent with the historical nature of the building.
07:14:01 They do not say that the fence itself is not consistent.
07:14:05 And that's important.
07:14:07 Only its location they have an issue with.
07:14:11 There's no debate about having a fence or not having a
07:14:13 fence.
07:14:14 We are only talking about where the fence is going to be.
07:14:17 For the reasons we are about to articulate involving safety
07:14:20 and security, the location of the fence needs to be at the
07:14:24 perimeter of the site along Howard.
07:14:26 Perimeter fences that historical structures within the city
07:14:30 again are not unusual.
07:14:31 And at least 22 historical sites within the city feature
07:14:35 perimeter fences.
07:14:38 Some examples include the following.
07:14:41 The Peter knight cottage with a perimeter fence, historical
07:14:46 structure.
07:14:48 Saint Andrews Episcopal church, historical building,
07:14:51 perimeter fence.
07:14:53 The Berriman Morgan cigar factory which is right up the
07:14:56 street from the JCC.
07:14:58 Historic structure perimeter fence.
07:15:01 Nearby Gorrie elementary on the corner of South Boulevard
07:15:05 and DeLeon.
07:15:06 Also note that like Gorrie, there are going to be children
07:15:11 on-site at the JCC with the addition of the preschool.
07:15:16 The example demonstrates perimeter fencing for the historic
07:15:19 site is not an usual request.
07:15:21 And more importantly, as Mr. Roth and Mr. Grande are going
07:15:25 to discuss, the JCCS are unfortunately targets for hate
07:15:30 crimes across the country.
07:15:33 This particular JCC, paired with a historic U.S. military
07:15:39 institution, can unfortunately very well be perceived as a
07:15:44 potential target for violence.
07:15:47 I want you to keep in mind when you hear from Mr. Roth, the
07:15:51 security expert, about the danger.
07:15:53 So I am going to hand the presentation over to them for a
07:15:56 moment, to discuss the importance of the location of the
07:15:58 fence on Howard Avenue.
07:16:00 >> Good evening, members of council.
07:16:05 Jack Ross, 522 Howard Avenue, Executive Director for the
07:16:10 Tampa JCC, now plural.
07:16:14 We come before you on not anesthetic issue but one of great
07:16:19 import to our programmatic purpose of our cultural center.
07:16:23 We were aware from the outset that we will have security
07:16:27 considerations to make in the development of this project.
07:16:30 And we were told that the regulations and guidelines would
07:16:33 not allow a perimeter fence, and as lay people, we moved on
07:16:40 with our architects, and we looked at technologies and other
07:16:44 components, and each set, every coordinated with homeland
07:16:48 defense, Tampa TPD, and convention services, we were told,
07:16:55 you have a problem.
07:16:55 You have a problem.
07:16:58 You have a problem.
07:16:59 At each juncture we said how do we remedy the problem?
07:17:02 Let's talk about the multi-factorial approach.
07:17:05 And without exception our experts said, you have to have a
07:17:09 perimeter fence.
07:17:11 It encompasses the entire property where you have your
07:17:15 programmatic activities.
07:17:16 To articulate a more specific conversation, Craig Gunte of
07:17:25 critical intervention services.
07:17:27 >> Good evening.
07:17:27 I'm the vice president of special projects for critical
07:17:29 interventional services and I also work quite a bit, about
07:17:32 80% of my work based as a security consultant particularly
07:17:36 with regards to mitigation of targeted violence, terrorist
07:17:38 attacks, active shooter, workplace violence, et cetera.
07:17:41 I have been working with the Tampa Jewish federation in
07:17:44 terms of physical security and emergency management planning
07:17:46 as relates to the new facility.
07:17:48 I know it's been expressed by some that this is just simply
07:17:53 a fence, that it really doesn't matter where it's located.
07:17:55 But that is actually quite false for two important reasons.
07:17:59 Number one, in a very large percentage of the attacks
07:18:03 directed against Jewish community and cultural sites
07:18:06 Internationally such as the 2014 attacks at the Overland
07:18:10 Park Jewish Community Center, the attack at Village Shalom
07:18:14 also located there, in 2012, and I could go on for 15
07:18:21 minutes with examples of this.
07:18:22 The attacks against human events located outdoors.
07:18:27 At the site that we are discussing right now we have a
07:18:29 school facility, where large numbers of families, children
07:18:32 and others are expected to be.
07:18:34 We also have an outdoor events area.
07:18:36 We are expecting a large number much people to be present
07:18:38 for special events during the course of the week.
07:18:40 According to some projections, 1500 at a time.
07:18:43 Not to mention visitors and other people coming on a regular
07:18:47 basis, and a future preschool that's going to be located
07:18:50 on-site.
07:18:51 Currently, the only real protective layer that we have to
07:18:54 protect those people outdoors and more effective response
07:18:59 and provide a basis for detection of intrusion is the outer
07:19:03 perimeter fence.
07:19:04 Now, setting that point aside for a minute, there's a number
07:19:08 of other measures that have been put in place at quite a bit
07:19:10 of expense to the JCC in order to provide for this kind of
07:19:15 protection.
07:19:15 For example, we added fencing a long three sides of the
07:19:19 perimeter.
07:19:19 We have vehicle entry control point with specific controls,
07:19:22 and access control that's going to be employed for all
07:19:25 vehicles entering the facility.
07:19:27 However, without this particular fence modification, we have
07:19:31 for all purposes a weak link in the chain.
07:19:34 And right now anybody could simply walk in from the street
07:19:37 directly inside the perimeter and bypass those access
07:19:39 controls at the gate located outside.
07:19:41 So for all purposes for all of the other measures to be
07:19:44 effective, this modification must be made.
07:19:47 Thank you very much.
07:19:48 >> Mr. Gunte will be available to answer questions if you
07:19:56 have them.
07:19:57 In conclusion, this is a very straightforward request.
07:19:59 Add the dwindle use to allow the art program for the City of
07:20:03 Tampa, allow the sign waivers for the signs, allow
07:20:08 construction for the perimeter fence for safety and security
07:20:11 of the members, structure, and public.
07:20:13 We appreciate your time.
07:20:15 We are here to answer any questions.
07:20:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
07:20:17 Mrs. Capin.
07:20:18 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.
07:20:20 For staff, I want to loop at the three-sided fence.
07:20:26 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Yes, ma'am?
07:20:31 >>YVONNE CAPIN: And how high is the fence and it closes in
07:20:37 on the building?
07:20:38 I see that.
07:20:39 >> The current proposed approved plan from 2014 has the
07:20:46 fence in the locations and it goes all the way around the
07:20:50 perimeter and the side of the building, with fencing.
07:20:57 So where it would be this area.
07:21:02 So this area would be -- as of right now --
07:21:10 >>YVONNE CAPIN: All right.
07:21:11 Thank you.
07:21:11 Leave that up there.
07:21:13 You know, it's very sad to me that when this was proposed,
07:21:18 it was proposed for community.
07:21:22 And now we are fencing it N.it's not very community
07:21:25 friendly.
07:21:25 I understand what you are saying about the security.
07:21:32 However, the way this is even right now is not user friendly
07:21:43 to the community, because of the fences.
07:21:46 But that was what we approved.
07:21:51 I have an issue with that fence.
07:21:54 I have an issue that you knew where you were coming, you
07:21:58 knew that -- this didn't start like, you know -- when this
07:22:04 started there were issues with security.
07:22:14 So I'm just having -- another way of securing which might be
07:22:20 more security or perimeters, I don't know, besides a fence
07:22:25 that would be -- but a fence is just, first of all, our
07:22:30 staff is recommending not to do it.
07:22:33 And secondly, it is just very sad, really to me, it's very
07:22:38 sad, because it was proposed from the beginning.
07:22:40 This is a community center, and this is going to be very
07:22:44 good for the community.
07:22:45 And now it's getting all fenced in, and the community is not
07:22:49 going to get in and out very easily.
07:22:51 >> I appreciate that.
07:22:55 What we have, first I acknowledge --
07:22:58 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Put your name on the record.
07:23:00 >> Jack Ross, Tampa Jewish community center.
07:23:03 You know, and we all know what happened in San Bernandino,
07:23:09 California.
07:23:10 They had security measures that were more welcoming than
07:23:13 they may have today.
07:23:14 The Orlando nightclub, prior to its massacre, may have had
07:23:20 security measures that were a little different than when and
07:23:23 if it would open again and other clubs.
07:23:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Stop right there.
07:23:28 The only security measure you have available to you is a
07:23:30 fence.
07:23:31 >> So what I would like to say, what I am trying to
07:23:37 articulate, security is -- I used the word earlier
07:23:41 multi-factorial.
07:23:42 Any one component may or may not be effective or mitigate
07:23:47 the danger.
07:23:47 But when properly planned and taken in the aggregate, each
07:23:52 of those components work together.
07:23:54 Each of those components work to raise an alarm.
07:24:00 To slow an intruder so they committee less harm.
07:24:03 And it's the thoroughness of this plan that they think to
07:24:08 take the weakest link and to strengthen it and each of our
07:24:11 security experts, Tampa PD, homeland security, said you have
07:24:17 a weak link.
07:24:19 And here we have had hundreds, I'm sorry, over the course of
07:24:23 the years, tens of thousands of our public come into this
07:24:27 FAP silt.
07:24:29 For regulations that were created in the pre9/11 world, we
07:24:34 are now in the post 9-171, post Orlando, post San
07:24:42 Bernandino, post Tel Aviv world.
07:24:46 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I'm perfectly aware of that.
07:24:49 Just stop right there.
07:24:50 We right here are exposed.
07:24:53 Just right here.
07:24:56 Anybody that came in here and looked at us for security
07:24:59 would say, you have a problem.
07:25:01 I guarantee you that they still do that.
07:25:06 My issue is, is there any -- is there any other way besides
07:25:12 a fence?
07:25:12 And I'm really, really concerned, because this area, this
07:25:18 community, you know, deserves enough fencing on.
07:25:29 Does not deserve fencing off.
07:25:31 Let me put it that way.
07:25:32 And that's what I am looking at.
07:25:33 >> I understand that.
07:25:34 My name is Craig again.
07:25:37 Can you see the actual diagram?
07:25:40 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I do.
07:25:41 >> I'm not sure what you can see.
07:25:44 The area that we are discussing right now, one of the areas
07:25:47 why that area specifically is very critical in terms of what
07:25:50 we are discussing is because the core with special event
07:25:54 facility is located in what will be for all purposes
07:25:57 unsecured area if we do not have a fence.
07:26:01 So a thousand, 500 people outside attending events at the
07:26:06 Jewish community center, that will not be provided with
07:26:09 adequate protection as without the barrier.
07:26:14 Really, there is not any other way that we can mitigate that
07:26:18 potential risk.
07:26:19 There has to be some way, number one, to allay and provide
07:26:25 for a response.
07:26:25 Then secondly some kind of way to recognize -- if there is
07:26:30 an open perimeter anybody can literally walk straight
07:26:34 through it and it is anticipated, not just by my judgment
07:26:38 but others, that the south fence, for special events, and
07:26:44 also a lot of activity inside the facility, you are likely
07:26:48 going to have lots of people parking.
07:26:51 They need to be channeled through the designated entry
07:26:55 control point into the facility.
07:26:56 Otherwise if you walk from the streets inside this perimeter
07:26:59 for what -- really to provide for adequate protection in
07:27:04 this circumstance is the measurement, I believe.
07:27:09 >>YVONNE CAPIN: There's no other place to put these
07:27:12 thousand people besides here?
07:27:14 You can't put them inside of the fence there?
07:27:21 >> The programming that will go on here of children and
07:27:25 after-school programming, people from the City of Tampa arts
07:27:29 center might recreate there, smoke a cigarette there, other
07:27:33 community members who are meeting inside may go outside and
07:27:37 retreat for a breath of fresh air. This is an area that
07:27:40 will be programmatically used in many ways.
07:27:43 When we had our security people come look they said when we
07:27:46 have large numbers, this is day and night, and weekends and
07:27:51 weekdays.
07:27:52 This is a critical area.
07:27:53 Again, we knew it was programmatic but we were told the
07:27:57 regulations say you can't.
07:27:58 Then every security expert said you had a problem.
07:28:02 We said what do we do?
07:28:03 And they said you seek an exception.
07:28:06 That's why we are here.
07:28:07 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.
07:28:10 So this is the most cost effective way that you can secure
07:28:15 this area?
07:28:18 >> Cost isn't the issue.
07:28:19 >> Well, that's what he said.
07:28:21 >> But using that terminology, the cost and our approach to
07:28:27 the aggregate of our security plan.
07:28:29 This is a component of that plan.
07:28:32 Whether that fence is made out of 8-inch plexiglas or what
07:28:37 we are proposing today, that could be a cost issue.
07:28:39 But the issue here is creating a barrier that distinguishes
07:28:44 the uninvited from the invited.
07:28:46 And maybe that's not the right vernacular especially with
07:28:49 your line of questions.
07:28:52 How do you prevent someone who would do harm from those who
07:28:56 would not do harm?
07:28:57 How do you distinguish and how do you create --
07:29:01 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Tell me how the fence will prevent that.
07:29:03 >> In several different ways.
07:29:07 Number one, Tampa value of any given barrier is
07:29:11 fundamentally if amount of time it delays adversaries
07:29:17 ingress or from accessing the potential risk.
07:29:21 Especially with an asset, two things, number one is slowing
07:29:25 down that adversary from ingressing, to have access, which
07:29:29 also keep in mind when we talk about acts of targeted
07:29:33 violence, shooter events, for example, we need.
07:29:39 I'm not sure if you are aware of the department of homeland
07:29:42 security's education program, but for run to be effective,
07:29:47 for people to be able to escape from the area, we need to be
07:29:51 able to delay that adversary from accessing those people.
07:29:54 So that first of all starts outside of the perimeter access.
07:29:59 Second, you need a basis to identify suspicious behavior.
07:30:02 We need to identify and know what that activity is and
07:30:06 intrusion into the facility.
07:30:07 Without that, there's no way that we can slow that.
07:30:11 >>YVONNE CAPIN: What is the fence made of?
07:30:15 >> It's still picket fence from what I understand.
07:30:17 >>YVONNE CAPIN: You feel a picket fence is going to do
07:30:20 that?
07:30:21 >> Yes, ma'am.
07:30:21 It requires delay because it requires an adversary to
07:30:24 physically climb over the fence to access the facility so
07:30:27 the delay time would be delay required to access that
07:30:31 barrier.
07:30:32 >> They could shat over it.
07:30:33 I mean, really?
07:30:34 >> That is possible too, ma'am, but it's also possible to
07:30:37 walk inside the perimeter and have undelayed unfettered
07:30:41 access to everybody inside.
07:30:43 Again, when doing physical security design, if it was in my
07:30:52 control the barrier would be a lot more robust, at least
07:30:55 eight feet high, and barbed wire.
07:30:58 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Well, that's what I would expect.
07:31:03 >> But the point is that still, within our spectrum of
07:31:08 capability, we would have to be able to create delay, we
07:31:11 have to buy time for people to effectively realize an attack
07:31:15 is underway and take response in that case.
07:31:17 In fact, I don't have a slide here to break it down to you.
07:31:21 But I can show you in previous attacks how this works.
07:31:24 Starting with the time of attacks initiated to the time that
07:31:28 mass killing is underway and in many cases you are talking
07:31:30 about 360 second or less under the circumstances the
07:31:33 circumstances.
07:31:34 It's critical to buy as much time as possible. And believe
07:31:37 it or not, ten to 15 second actually makes a huge
07:31:40 difference.
07:31:40 In fact according to the 2014 mitigating impact shooter
07:31:44 study, one victim is killed within every 15 second, and that
07:31:48 starts almost immediately the time the attack is initially
07:31:52 itself.
07:31:53 This is important.
07:31:54 And it may not sound very important, just 6-foot high
07:31:59 wrought iron fence, but that 15 second of delay time is very
07:32:02 important.
07:32:02 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay.
07:32:11 My first thought was, I don't think I want to go to an event
07:32:15 there with what you just said to me.
07:32:18 I'm serious.
07:32:20 I'm looking at it and I'm thinking, why would I open myself
07:32:23 up?
07:32:24 In an area like that when you are talking about -- when you
07:32:28 are talking about really, really serious --
07:32:36 >> May I say had.
07:32:37 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes, please do.
07:32:39 >> Your comments about security of our world today has the
07:32:41 same import.
07:32:43 Every day we walk in public facilities that are in measure
07:32:48 becoming more and more insecure based on the events of day
07:32:51 to day occurrences.
07:32:53 So our reality is more profound.
07:32:56 But the reality that you recognize for tonight, you are
07:33:02 right, I could have walked in here with a gun.
07:33:04 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Uh-huh.
07:33:06 We are very aware of that.
07:33:09 But thank you.
07:33:11 I think that's got the information I need.
07:33:13 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I'm afraid the order we are doing right now,
07:33:16 we are going Reddick, Mrs. Montelione, Mr. Miranda, Mr.
07:33:19 Maniscalco.
07:33:20 Mr. Reddick first.
07:33:21 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, chair.
07:33:24 You know, I truly believe that I can go out and find a
07:33:27 security expert and come in and tell me that that fence is
07:33:31 not necessary.
07:33:36 Get one that you are paying come in to say why that's
07:33:39 necessary.
07:33:39 I can go out and do the same thing and say that is not
07:33:43 necessary.
07:33:44 I can recall going to that armory when I was small, and
07:33:51 rassling events and concerts and all these different events
07:33:54 that took place at the armory.
07:33:57 And I never imagined that when we go through the transition
07:34:04 that there would this fence out front.
07:34:07 I can see the backside, and the other side, but you take
07:34:12 away from the beauty of what you are trying to attempt to do
07:34:18 by putting a fence down Howard Avenue.
07:34:24 And I look at the underlying factor.
07:34:27 You can talk about that you are speculating that somebody is
07:34:31 going to drop a bomb or truck is going to run into your
07:34:34 facility as soon as you build it.
07:34:35 But I look at the other factor.
07:34:38 I look at a demographic that just 50 feet away from you, and
07:34:45 those who walk that neighborhood day and night, I think
07:34:53 that's the underlying factor that you are really trying to
07:34:56 bring forward without using that but using the security
07:34:59 measure that you might have with some type of terrorist
07:35:03 threat, and going to hit your facility.
07:35:06 But that's not the case.
07:35:08 Because you can go two blocks east of your facility at
07:35:20 Albany.
07:35:20 That's the underlying factor that you are talking about.
07:35:24 That's who you want to keep out.
07:35:27 And I know it.
07:35:30 And you can go two blocks south, Cass, Albany and Rome.
07:35:38 That's the line you want to keep out.
07:35:41 You can go two blocks north, Cass, Rome, cypress.
07:35:49 Albany, Cass, or Albany, cypress.
07:35:53 That's the underlying factor that you want to keep out.
07:35:56 So when I hear your presentation about a fence, and you want
07:36:00 to put a fence in the middle, and you spend so much time
07:36:04 standing there talking about the door, and that's
07:36:09 speculation, that somehow you are going to have this
07:36:13 terrorist attack, they are going to hit the armory, we talk
07:36:17 about the underlying factor that is going to be 50 feet away
07:36:22 from you every day.
07:36:23 That's what you need to be talking about.
07:36:26 So when I sit up here, that's what I am looking at.
07:36:29 Because I know what I just described.
07:36:33 And I know what's going to be walking down Howard Avenue
07:36:36 from Kennedy Boulevard to north of cypress.
07:36:42 Every day.
07:36:45 That's what you get rid of.
07:36:48 So you can come here and make all of these excuses.
07:36:56 This much terrorist attack, the underlying factor, sir,
07:36:59 because I can go out tomorrow and get a security expert to
07:37:02 come back to you and tell this council, you can do
07:37:07 everything you want to do without having that fence on
07:37:12 Howard Avenue.
07:37:13 Now you want to challenge me on it?
07:37:15 I'll pay for it myself.
07:37:16 >> I'm not sure what to say.
07:37:18 I can't --
07:37:21 >> Well, I didn't pose a question.
07:37:22 I haven't posed a question to you that you can have a
07:37:26 response.
07:37:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Ross, I think that's what Mr. Reddick is
07:37:29 saying, you only have so much time for rebuttal.
07:37:33 He made a statement.
07:37:34 Do you have anything else, sir?
07:37:36 >>FRANK REDDICK: That will be it.
07:37:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mrs. Montelione.
07:37:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
07:37:40 In most other circumstances, you know, keeping with historic
07:37:43 preservation, you know, I would prefer not to see a fence.
07:37:48 But quite frankly, this isn't any other circumstance.
07:37:51 And this isn't, you know, 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago when we
07:37:56 used to go to concerts, you know, or football games, or any
07:38:01 other big public space where you walk through and you are
07:38:04 getting wandered for security purposes and your purse is
07:38:09 being checked to make sure you are not carrying anything in
07:38:12 that could be of harm to anyone.
07:38:15 We live in a different day and age.
07:38:17 And I think that whether it's ironic or symbolic that
07:38:22 tomorrow at 9:00 we are going to be having a September
07:38:26 11th remembrance at our fire department station one.
07:38:34 I have spent time at a lot of different religious
07:38:37 facilities, and the one I want to particularly bring up are
07:38:43 the mosques in the area, and every mosque I go to has a
07:38:46 fence around the mosque.
07:38:50 And it's unfortunate that we live in this day and age.
07:38:57 The one mosque has an old police car that they bought that,
07:39:00 you know, is beat up, white TORINO type car sitting outside
07:39:08 just as a visual.
07:39:09 Anybody who goes outside on a regular basis knows the thing
07:39:12 doesn't move and knows it's not a real police car, or active
07:39:15 one.
07:39:15 But nonetheless it sits there.
07:39:19 And they are open to the public.
07:39:22 They treat hundreds of people quietly for medical purposes,
07:39:28 free, in the neighborhood.
07:39:31 They have a medical clinic there.
07:39:38 This hasn't been widely publicized because they didn't want
07:39:41 it to be.
07:39:42 But there have been five incidents of arson at three
07:39:47 different facilities.
07:39:50 This is the world we live in.
07:39:52 And all of our aides just sat through one of those videos
07:39:59 for active shooter with bombs that you talked about because
07:40:04 I came in and thought where is everybody?
07:40:06 Nobody was in their offices.
07:40:08 They were all in here watching the active shooter response.
07:40:11 This is the world we live in.
07:40:15 And a short little fence may not seem like much but you
07:40:19 don't want to have something that Busch Gardens has, which
07:40:23 is a facility, a public facility where a lot of people go,
07:40:27 that it's more than an 8-foot wall with spikes at the top,
07:40:33 because as a zoo, they are allowed to have barbed wear.
07:40:41 Along any of their perimeters.
07:40:43 USF just recently, on the Bruce B. Downs side just north of
07:40:49 Fletcher, put in a similar wrought iron fence that used to
07:40:52 be completely open, and you could walk in and out of campus.
07:40:56 But USF is securing their border.
07:41:00 I don't like it.
07:41:02 You know, it closes off the campus from the community.
07:41:05 But it's necessary.
07:41:10 So if it's compromised in our location potentially for the
07:41:22 greater good, then I think it's what we need to approve.
07:41:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Miranda.
07:41:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
07:41:31 Thank you for not having monument signs that are electronic.
07:41:34 I would have voted against it.
07:41:36 I'm telling you now, I would have voted against it.
07:41:40 I am not too keen on them.
07:41:43 They start looking like Vegas everywhere.
07:41:45 But I do have a concern on the David Tippin facility, staff.
07:41:59 Is this David Tippin in any way violate the city sign
07:42:02 ordinance?
07:42:03 It's not in an overlay district.
07:42:05 It's next to a golf court by a railroad track that ends
07:42:09 dead-end by the river.
07:42:11 The sign here David Tippin that says -- the T sign that was
07:42:15 shown to us as a sign that is comparable to something, and
07:42:19 now I am going to go right to that one to the other sign at
07:42:24 Cuscaden park.
07:42:26 That's not an overlay district, is it?
07:42:28 In other words, has the city violated the sign ordinance
07:42:35 itself?
07:42:35 Because if so I am going to knock it down.
07:42:37 >> I can't spend to that.
07:42:38 I don't know the scale of the sign.
07:42:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And then the Morgan cigar factory there, was
07:42:44 a fence around Morgan cigar factory way back.
07:42:46 I remember this particular item came before council and was
07:42:50 only the front part of the factory that was a waiver on the
07:42:53 height of the fence, if I recall.
07:42:54 I don't know if any of you were here then in 1915.
07:43:02 You don't remember that?
07:43:04 Well, I remember that, and -- (Laughter)
07:43:08 I remember that.
07:43:10 The petitioner was JAMAL engineering.
07:43:14 And they came specifically for the front part of a gate that
07:43:17 they wanted to put a foot, foot and a half higher than what
07:43:21 was required.
07:43:21 And that was granted.
07:43:23 I just want to put in my own record and my own mind all the
07:43:28 statements that were made at that point.
07:43:30 And yes, fences do happen around what you suggested here, in
07:43:34 the Gorrie elementary, but also fences in high schools and
07:43:38 other schools that have a fence.
07:43:39 Jefferson high school has no fence.
07:43:42 Plant High School has some level of a fence.
07:43:47 Wilson has somewhat of a fence.
07:43:49 But most schools have fences, especially when elementary
07:43:55 kids so they don't run out -- from the property into a car.
07:44:02 I understand what you are saying.
07:44:04 But I look at your beautiful building, and I see this
07:44:07 picture here, and believe me, I am not trying to make fun of
07:44:10 it.
07:44:11 It's a wonderful investment.
07:44:12 What you all are doing is great for everybody, all religion,
07:44:16 all cultures, all ages, all races, but this here, it looks
07:44:20 like a prison with that fence.
07:44:22 I understand the fence is already on the backside and the
07:44:27 sides.
07:44:28 I understand that.
07:44:28 But to the point of the fence, really I am not an expert.
07:44:33 Let me say that for the record.
07:44:34 I am not an expert in terrorism, but I dodged a few bullets
07:44:38 in my life when I was young.
07:44:39 No fence of this type is going to stop anybody from getting
07:44:44 shot at.
07:44:46 None.
07:44:47 You are drive by with one or two vehicles, just spray the
07:44:51 hell with whatever you want.
07:44:52 It's not going to stop that.
07:44:55 I agree with than what was said here earlier.
07:44:57 Only another type fence would stop that.
07:44:59 And even then, when you look at much the guy, 15, 20 years
07:45:06 ago, he blew up a place with dynamite inside his vehicle.
07:45:13 I mean, it's sad, they are crazy people.
07:45:18 But I understand what you are trying to get at.
07:45:19 But the fence is bothersome, because I don't think it stops
07:45:23 what you want to stop.
07:45:25 It doesn't stop it.
07:45:27 Not that type of fence.
07:45:29 You need a fence with ballards that a tank can't go through
07:45:36 and you can't do that.
07:45:37 If you really want to do something that little fence isn't
07:45:40 going to do something.
07:45:41 I can run right through that fence with an MG, with a little
07:45:44 car.
07:45:46 I'm sincerely -- I understand what you are saying.
07:45:49 And I have been with this from the beginning.
07:45:52 I have been supportive and still am supportive.
07:45:54 But that fence, the location that it has, in my opinion,
07:45:58 just doesn't stop what you want to obtain.
07:46:02 In fact what we have done here today is create people's
07:46:05 crazy minds going forward.
07:46:07 And that's just my opinion, Mr. Chairman.
07:46:09 I'm not opposed to the sign change.
07:46:13 Especially the one inside.
07:46:15 The height and the foot and a half or two feet, whatever it
07:46:19 is.
07:46:19 The monument signs outside as long as they are not lit with
07:46:24 real, real bright lights, I can understand that.
07:46:27 But I am just not attuned to everything that we have heard
07:46:33 today.
07:46:34 Thank you.
07:46:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, sir Mr. Maniscalco.
07:46:37 >> If I could have like one comment?
07:46:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I would suggest that you withhold your
07:46:42 remarks until after it's time to do your rebuttal as opposed
07:46:46 to everything that was said that would just be a suggestion.
07:46:49 You can do what you want.
07:46:50 That's just a suggestion of mine.
07:46:52 And your counsel and everyone else.
07:46:55 >> Councilman Miranda --
07:47:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: They will take time from your rebuttal.
07:47:04 You haven't been asked a question so that is my opinion.
07:47:07 Mr. Maniscalco.
07:47:08 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: With regard to this fence, my family
07:47:12 has a jewelry store and the front door is all glass to
07:47:16 bottom and you have to be buzzed in in order to get in and
07:47:19 out.
07:47:20 Now, I thought of all these scenarios on a daily basis.
07:47:23 Somebody could run a truck through the glass door and come
07:47:26 in.
07:47:26 Somebody could take a baseball bat and smash the door and
07:47:29 come in.
07:47:30 But having said that, that buzzer to buzz the people in, and
07:47:35 what you have said about the delay in time, that gives you
07:47:38 whatever second or minutes that you need, it allows me
07:47:41 should a situation A rise like 20 years ago when we were
07:47:45 held up at gunpoint, it gives me the opportunity to push the
07:47:48 panic alarm, reach for a gun, duck and cover, run to the
07:47:51 back, whatever it is, with you it gives me the opportunity
07:47:53 instead of being ambushed of somebody just opening the door,
07:47:56 walking in because I turned my back on the front door, or
07:47:59 went to the bathroom, I went to the back office, so allows
07:48:02 that opportunity, is it perfect, no, but allows the chance
07:48:06 for that.
07:48:07 And I have had many situations where folks, whatever their
07:48:10 intentions were, that we did not let in, because it is part
07:48:14 of the property, I don't know what could have happened or
07:48:18 what was avoided.
07:48:19 So I can understand the fence is not perfect.
07:48:21 I look at it.
07:48:22 You go north on Howard Avenue.
07:48:24 Somebody with a truck bomb could come up, a car bomb cop
07:48:27 come up, a shatter could run up and start shooting.
07:48:30 But that fence allows -- it doesn't solve much but it allows
07:48:34 the opportunity for folks to run, duck, cover, are in my
07:48:37 situation, would have been as I mentioned push the panic
07:48:41 alarm, call police, reach for a gun, whatever it is.
07:48:43 So I understand the point for the fence, plus the type of
07:48:47 world that we live in.
07:48:48 I had this conversation at lunch today.
07:48:50 I will remember when I was a teenager a pre9-11 world.
07:48:56 I didn't know what al-Qaeda was.
07:48:58 I didn't know wanna shoe bomb was.
07:49:00 You remember going to Europe the summer before September 11
07:49:03 and security was black compared to what it is today.
07:49:07 After 9/11 everything changed.
07:49:10 And this is the post 9/11 world where al-Qaeda and ISIS are
07:49:15 common terms.
07:49:15 I understand the anti-Semitism.
07:49:18 I understand there's hate groups.
07:49:19 I understand towards so many different people.
07:49:22 Ignorant, stupid, but there's people that have this kind of
07:49:25 hatred in their heart.
07:49:27 But you have to protect yourself and the patrons and people
07:49:29 that come to visit this facility.
07:49:31 I can understand why you want this fence.
07:49:34 It's not an ugly fence.
07:49:35 I see it in the cigar factories that you showed, the schools
07:49:37 that you showed my old high school.
07:49:39 When I went to Tampa Catholic high school we didn't have a
07:49:42 fence.
07:49:42 Now they have this beautiful fence.
07:49:44 Jesuit high school they have a fence that wasn't there 15,
07:49:48 20 years ago.
07:49:49 I think it's aesthetically pleasing.
07:49:51 I don't think it's detrimental to the neighborhood.
07:49:54 It's a safety measure.
07:49:56 I can see it from a jewelry store perspective.
07:49:58 Your situation is different but it adds a level of security,
07:50:02 whether good or bad, or whatever level it is, but I see the
07:50:05 benefits of it.
07:50:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
07:50:08 Mr. Cohen.
07:50:08 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you.
07:50:13 You know, in a couple of weeks, I will be going to celebrate
07:50:19 the high Jewish holiday of rush Hashana and Yom Kippur.
07:50:25 My synagogue which is on Bayshore Boulevard.
07:50:27 It has a very ugly chain link fence around the building.
07:50:31 And at every service for the holiday, there is law
07:50:37 enforcement and the express reason for it is because of the
07:50:43 fear in the community of hate crimes and terrorist attacks,
07:50:48 and incidents that will be targeted at the Jewish community
07:50:53 or places of religion assembly or like we were talking about
07:50:57 earlier, places where people gather.
07:51:02 I wish that the lawn in front of this building could be open
07:51:06 and welcoming, and be the kind of gateway into our community
07:51:11 that we want it to be.
07:51:13 But I know from experience, I know from the experience of
07:51:18 going and visiting my grandmother at a Jewish nursing home
07:51:22 here in Tampa, that the security presence is always very,
07:51:26 very high because of the sense of vulnerability that the
07:51:30 community feels to terrorism.
07:51:34 And after the types of incidents in overland park, Dan sass,
07:51:39 and South America and all over the world, that occurred
07:51:42 against Jewish targets, particularly in France, in the past
07:51:46 year, these types of measures have become necessary.
07:51:51 And no one wants to take them.
07:51:52 No one wants to put up a fence when we could have an open
07:51:56 lawn.
07:51:57 But the reality of the situation is that nobody knows what's
07:52:02 going to be next, and who is going to be next.
07:52:04 And I am not an security expert.
07:52:11 I don't know if this could be accomplished in another way.
07:52:13 I wish it could be.
07:52:15 Because I certainly don't like the way it looks toward the
07:52:20 message that it sends.
07:52:22 But I do believe that the threat is real, and I believe
07:52:25 quite frankly that the threat to this chamber and to other
07:52:29 places of public assembly are real.
07:52:31 And I just hope that at some point more sensible people
07:52:36 prevail in this country and we stop seeing a lot of these
07:52:39 types of incidents that we have seen in recent years.
07:52:43 So I unfortunately understand why Tampa fence would be
07:52:48 needed, even though it's very unfortunate if that's the
07:52:54 case.
07:52:54 Thank you.
07:52:54 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Before we go forward, I would suggest that
07:52:57 we go to the public at this time so that -- do you want to
07:53:02 go now before we go to the public?
07:53:07 Mrs. Capin, go ahead and make your point.
07:53:09 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Someone from staff.
07:53:11 Please refresh my memory here on this.
07:53:14 When this fence was closed in here, do I recall that the
07:53:19 events were going to be inside of that fence? When did the
07:53:22 events start happening on the lawn from the beginning?
07:53:25 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Not that I am aware of.
07:53:28 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I didn't think so.
07:53:29 >> The existing facility, and it is on the site plan, but
07:53:36 the preschool, playground, and the expansion of the
07:53:40 preschool playground is within the fenced area.
07:53:42 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Right.
07:53:44 >> And the preschool activity, on the lot.
07:53:51 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I want to make that point.
07:53:54 Because I remember -- I started to look at it, and I said, I
07:53:58 remember asking, and I was followed -- and I am trying to
07:54:03 remember.
07:54:04 If I am wrong, please let me know -- that the events were
07:54:07 going to take place, and inside closing up here and here,
07:54:12 along the side, because all it was going to happen in here.
07:54:16 And now all of a sudden we have events happening out on the
07:54:19 lawn.
07:54:20 And to me, the events happening on the lawn from the
07:54:23 beginning, that was not explained.
07:54:30 You know, that is not something I remember.
07:54:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Hang on a second.
07:54:35 I am going to fell you, if you come up -- if she's asking
07:54:38 you the question then you can come up and do it.
07:54:41 If she's not asking you we are going to take time away from
07:54:45 you on rebuttal.
07:54:46 I want to make sure you understand it.
07:54:49 Finance she answers the question I won't take it away from
07:54:52 rebuttal but if she is not asking a question and is asking
07:54:55 staff and you want to say something that will be part of
07:54:57 your rebuttal.
07:54:59 So don't start talking.
07:55:02 I want to explain it.
07:55:03 Are you asking him --
07:55:04 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I want staff to come back up.
07:55:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I just want to know.
07:55:08 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Can anyone -- okay.
07:55:11 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: To answer your question, on the site plan
07:55:18 that's before you, and on previous site plan, that area was
07:55:22 never specifically labeled for activity.
07:55:24 >>YVONNE CAPIN: That was my point.
07:55:26 I understand the fence.
07:55:27 I understand the security.
07:55:28 But this did not happen from the beginning.
07:55:30 This came about when it was decided that they wanted to use
07:55:34 the lawn.
07:55:35 And to me, we went ahead and approved the fence closing
07:55:39 because of the activities that were going to be going on
07:55:43 where I am pointing to where the parking is, and the
07:55:48 children's area was going to be, and all the rest of it.
07:55:51 And it came to me then, and so -- I understand the security.
07:56:02 What I don't understand again, this was not presented to us
07:56:07 from the beginning.
07:56:09 This is not presented to us from the beginning.
07:56:11 Because of the way we closed that fence up.
07:56:15 So that's all I wanted to make a point.
07:56:17 I clearly remember but thank you for reminding me.
07:56:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
07:56:21 Mrs. Montelione, you have another comment you want to make
07:56:23 or a question?
07:56:24 >>LISA MONTELIONE: A question.
07:56:25 Mrs. Samaniego, don't go away.
07:56:29 Do we regulate where property owners can have events on
07:56:34 their property?
07:56:37 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: If I want to have -- if I want to have a
07:56:42 wedding at the Jewish community center, and I want to have
07:56:46 outdoor tents and have my wedding in that location, is there
07:56:52 anything to stop me from doing that?
07:56:55 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Yes, we regulate outdoor activity.
07:56:58 >> And by what process? By what process?
07:57:02 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Physically, by a special use, or fence
07:57:08 permits.
07:57:12 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: So if it's a wedding, if it's a bar
07:57:16 mitzvah, if it's any event, I can have it anywhere, I could
07:57:20 have it in the parking lot, I could have it on the front
07:57:23 lawn, I can have it anywhere on that piece of property as
07:57:26 long as I came to the city and I request a special use
07:57:30 permit to have the fence.
07:57:32 If I am going to have alcohol, we have also a regulation
07:57:36 where I can request a temporary alcoholic beverage permit to
07:57:40 serve champagne at my wedding.
07:57:43 >> But again that has to be within a designated specific
07:57:46 area.
07:57:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Right.
07:57:48 So that happens when you file a special use permit.
07:57:50 >> Right.
07:57:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Not necessarily we don't on every
07:57:53 rezoning, or every application that comes before us, we
07:57:57 don't specify in different areas you can do this here, you
07:58:02 can do this here, you can do this here, unless it's part of
07:58:07 that planned development, or like we -- if they came to us
07:58:13 with be this application and included that.
07:58:15 But for events if I want to have a wedding and I want to put
07:58:18 the tents on the front lawn, I would come to the city, ask
07:58:22 for a special use permit and it would go through review
07:58:25 process, an alcoholic beverage permit temporary to have my
07:58:30 event on that lot.
07:58:31 >> Correct.
07:58:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So whether or not it's designated on the
07:58:35 site plan right now as a special event site, or space, is
07:58:41 that necessary?
07:58:42 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: No, it's not required.
07:58:45 I think she pose add question is it on the site plan, this
07:58:50 property --
07:58:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Right.
07:58:52 >> On the site plan, no one knows the area designated for a
07:58:58 special event.
07:58:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And it doesn't have to be?
07:59:00 It is not required.
07:59:02 Thank you.
07:59:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
07:59:03 I would like to go to the public at this point before
07:59:07 petitioner gets a chance to rebut.
07:59:09 Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on
07:59:12 item number 6, REZ 16-44?
07:59:17 Are you coming up, sir?
07:59:18 Please come to the podium.
07:59:21 Is there anyone, before you go, is there anyone else in the
07:59:24 audience that wants to speak on any item on the agenda
07:59:27 tonight who has not been sworn in?
07:59:29 Please stand, raise your right hand, and be sworn in.
07:59:32 (Oath administered by Clerk).
07:59:42 >> I'm Bobby Wilson.
07:59:43 I live in West Tampa.
07:59:45 Old West Tampa neighborhood association.
07:59:46 And I also own the West Tampa CRA, and I stand in support of
07:59:52 the staff's recommendation.
07:59:54 First of all, I work with Bank of America.
07:59:57 And it's a financial institution.
07:59:59 And we do not have our branches or at our towers in the
08:00:10 community.
08:00:11 We have -- our security --
08:00:13 >> Speak to be just us.
08:00:14 That way we can hear you clearly.
08:00:17 >> I apologize.
08:00:18 Our security is layered.
08:00:21 So we want our customers to come into the Bank of America
08:00:25 centers to conduct their business in a comfortable manner.
08:00:30 And I think as I drive up Howard, and I look over and see a
08:00:34 cultural center, an event, I think it closes off from the
08:00:40 neighborhood, and this is the wrong message to the
08:00:43 neighborhood.
08:00:43 And we are talking about 9/11 and terrorist attacks.
08:00:47 The 9/11 terrorist attacks, it hit the financial district of
08:00:54 New York City.
08:00:54 When you go to New York, when you go down to world trade,
08:00:58 you don't see a fence.
08:01:00 Than the security is layered.
08:01:03 The New Yorkers said we will not live in fear.
08:01:06 We will take the proper security protocols, but we will not
08:01:11 have -- I am talk walking down the national mall.
08:01:19 You see the museums.
08:01:21 They are open.
08:01:23 The Capitol is open.
08:01:24 They have a layered security.
08:01:26 You go through security checkpoints.
08:01:28 I can walk up.
08:01:30 Coming into the cultural center, walk by a fence, I think it
08:01:36 takes away the beauty of the building.
08:01:40 It's a gorgeous building.
08:01:42 A fence will take away from it.
08:01:44 Again, my mom is from the low country of South Carolina,
08:01:48 right down the street from where the shooting took place in
08:01:51 Charleston, South Carolina.
08:01:53 They did not build a fence.
08:01:56 We need to respond back, we don't need a fence.
08:01:59 We don't need to operate in fear.
08:02:00 I understand the security.
08:02:02 Security is a concern.
08:02:02 But there are ways to handle the security that this allows
08:02:09 for the welcoming of people into the cultural center.
08:02:13 It's going to be a great asset.
08:02:14 (Bell sounds)
08:02:16 But we don't need a fence.
08:02:17 And as it relates to the signs, I think I'm okay with the
08:02:21 sign interior but the sign on Howard I think would be -- to
08:02:25 adhere to the overlay recommendations.
08:02:36 That was designed by the resident of West Tampa.
08:02:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:02:40 Next.
08:02:40 >> Rebecca move, Tampa, Florida, vice president of West
08:02:47 Tampa riverfront crime watch group, and also I worked on
08:02:54 that plan for that overlay.
08:02:56 Having a fence would just take away from the beauty of the
08:03:00 whole project.
08:03:00 I met with Mr. Ross before, and I told him I'm all for the
08:03:05 plan, but I'm not all for this fence, taking away from the
08:03:09 neighborhood.
08:03:10 If you are going to do something that's beautiful, then
08:03:13 lathe let it stay beautiful.
08:03:15 So the fence coming out to Howard, I disagree, because
08:03:19 Howard is a busy street.
08:03:21 I have problems trying to cross Howard onto gray as it is.
08:03:25 Now if the fence comes out any further, I think that might
08:03:29 obstruct the view also.
08:03:31 As far as signage, I am not agreeing with the signage that's
08:03:35 up front because it looks like it's toward the fence also.
08:03:38 So I would prefer the fence not being there and going along
08:03:42 with city planning, that because of the overlay that we
08:03:47 worked on so hard, not having that fence or anything to take
08:03:50 away from the beauty, and people being able to walk up to
08:03:54 the area.
08:03:56 Thank you.
08:03:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, ma'am.
08:03:58 Anyone else from the public like to speak on item number 6,
08:04:00 please come forward.
08:04:03 If there's anyone else that wants to be speak on this item,
08:04:05 if they are able to, stand on the right-hand side would be
08:04:08 terrific so we know how many more folks want to speak.
08:04:11 Yes, sir.
08:04:12 >>
08:04:17 I didn't come here for this presentation.
08:04:19 I come for something else. But I live in this area.
08:04:21 But since I live in that area, you know, it's good to hear
08:04:28 the people going to bat for the community, people that pass
08:04:33 that area.
08:04:37 In all honesty, I actually, you know, on this development, I
08:04:41 figure it wasn't for me, you know.
08:04:44 And I'm not Jewish.
08:04:47 But when I look at things, when I look at how well this is
08:04:51 going to mesh with the community, with the people, I mean
08:04:55 within the people who pass it, not necessarily the people
08:04:58 who live there, not necessarily people who might want to
08:05:00 gone in or have a way in, but just, you know, the other
08:05:07 witnesses.
08:05:09 I'm kind of, you know, I have my questions.
08:05:14 And when I saw the fencing up there the other day or the
08:05:17 other week, it hurt a little bit, but, you know, so thank
08:05:24 you for those of you honor represent a lot of people, I
08:05:29 believe.
08:05:31 On the other hand, the scripture does say whether you want
08:05:34 to call it the TORAH or call it the Old Testament, the
08:05:38 scripture does say to love your neighbor as yourself.
08:05:41 It doesn't same to require your neighbor to love you.
08:05:45 It's love your neighbor as yourself.
08:05:47 And if I were Jewish, you know, I might feel better, you
08:05:55 know, with a fence, you know, around the area.
08:06:01 I hear you talking about it.
08:06:05 In fact, there's a fence around the other school, the one
08:06:15 down south Rome.
08:06:20 I don't see that fence entirely closed.
08:06:25 It always seems to be open.
08:06:27 But maybe that gives them the option to close it.
08:06:33 When I looked at what Mr. Reddick was saying, in the way you
08:06:40 addressed it, it seemed to be like a tone to the black
08:06:45 people, but it may be economics, like you were speaking to.
08:06:49 You know, if you build something of great value, you would
08:06:54 do something, put up some sort of barrier for that.
08:07:01 I don't like it's going to hurt a lot of people.
08:07:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:07:05 Next please.
08:07:05 >> My name is Thomas King, and I have been sworn.
08:07:10 I didn't come here tonight to speak on this item.
08:07:13 I came for item 10 and 11. I own a rental property at
08:07:18 Carmen street, which as you know -- I'm 100% supportive of
08:07:24 this.
08:07:25 From anesthetic standpoint and.
08:07:28 My rental properties have been vandalized twice.
08:07:32 I put up a fence two years ago. ^
08:07:34 Had one issue with anything with my tenants.
08:07:36 They are very happy.
08:07:38 I just want to let you know real quickly that I support
08:07:40 this. It's good for the community.
08:07:42 Not going to take away.
08:07:43 It's aesthetically pleasing.
08:07:45 I hope you guys support this.
08:07:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:07:47 Anyone else on the public like to speak to this item, REZ
08:07:51 16-44?
08:07:53 Okay.
08:07:53 Petitioner, you have rebuttal.
08:07:54 >> Jack Ross, Tampa JCC.
08:08:00 I guess I will just go across.
08:08:03 Councilman Miranda, I just want --
08:08:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Ross, if you could, direct it to council
08:08:08 itself.
08:08:09 Whatever the questions were, just talk to us --
08:08:13 >> Regarding the remark that the fence couldn't stop a
08:08:16 perpetrator.
08:08:17 We are looking to mitigate.
08:08:18 We are looking to create a layered effect.
08:08:21 I would just ask you to consider whether the mitigation of
08:08:24 even one where would be worth the aesthetic value.
08:08:30 I'll let you answer that question.
08:08:32 It was also mentioned that this facility may not be for all.
08:08:36 The facility is open to all.
08:08:38 Let me remained everyone that the City of Tampa runs an art
08:08:41 center open to all.
08:08:43 Our meeting space, Councilman Reddick mentioned that many
08:08:45 times on many times it's open to the Civic Association.
08:08:51 It's open to all.
08:08:52 So we have many aspects of it.
08:08:54 Councilman Capin had mentioned was it ever intended that we
08:08:59 would have events outside?
08:09:00 I can tell you from the outside architectural plans
08:09:02 reflected our application for the wet zoning reflected.
08:09:06 But I would go further than that.
08:09:07 I would tell you that we are in discussions with the
08:09:09 performing arts center in town to have classes and drama
08:09:14 classes and athlete classes, yoga classes outdoors, and they
08:09:21 would be out there.
08:09:22 Staff wouldn't know about that.
08:09:24 So we would have many programs planned from the outset and
08:09:28 programs yet unknown that will be held there that will hold
08:09:30 all of the community, Jewish and non-Jewish alike,
08:09:34 socioeconomic not withstanding because there are programs
08:09:37 there that require no membership, and some have membership
08:09:42 with athletics and aquatics.
08:09:45 There was another point that I wanted to raise.
08:09:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Maybe you have people that could suggest it
08:09:55 to you if you like.
08:10:00 Come up to the podium before you speak.
08:10:02 And your name, please.
08:10:03 >> Craig Gunte, security consultant work.
08:10:08 Several people tonight used the term prevent, a fence
08:10:13 prevent.
08:10:14 First of all, I will tell you that word does not exist.
08:10:21 In physical measures.
08:10:23 All barriers are nothing but delaying measures.
08:10:26 And the performance measure of a physical protection system,
08:10:29 called the PPS, is the probability of interruption.
08:10:32 That should be quantitatively derived.
08:10:34 At the end of the day it is a mathematics problem.
08:10:36 And the mathematics is built around several terms one of
08:10:40 which is delayed time, and the second of which is response
08:10:43 time.
08:10:44 The response time both for response forces to intervene as
08:10:47 well as the response time for people to take action for
08:10:50 their own self-preservation for their own protection when an
08:10:54 event occurs.
08:10:55 From that perspective that fence that we are talking about
08:10:57 right now provides what's called a delayed time value, an
08:11:01 opportunity for recognition of the actual event.
08:11:03 I just want to clarify, I keep hearing the term prevent
08:11:08 quite a bit.
08:11:08 It's actually an erroneous concept in physical security.
08:11:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:11:13 Anyone else?
08:11:15 Mr. Singer?
08:11:15 >> Singer: I will close.
08:11:20 But I want to reiterate what Mr. Cohen said.
08:11:24 In a one on this team wants this fence.
08:11:27 Everyone would much prefer that this be an open aesthetic
08:11:32 facility.
08:11:34 But as Mrs. Montelione said, Mr. Maniscalco said, that
08:11:38 unfortunately it's not the world we live in.
08:11:42 Believe me, if we could have figured out a way to do this
08:11:45 differently, all of us would have pushed our team torch do
08:11:50 it differently.
08:11:52 This is the best circumstance we could come up with what we
08:11:56 have.
08:11:57 And we are excited about being part of the community, the
08:12:01 entire community.
08:12:01 We are excited about contributing to the culture of this
08:12:06 city.
08:12:07 And for my children to look back and say what a wonderful
08:12:11 asset this was, every time they go and bring their children
08:12:16 there.
08:12:18 Tonight we are asking your approval to help get us there.
08:12:22 And we ask for your approval.
08:12:25 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, sir.
08:12:26 Any questions or comments from -- Mrs. Kert, I apologize.
08:12:31 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
08:12:33 I know council knows this but for purposes of the record, I
08:12:36 just want to remained council, your decision must be based
08:12:42 on the record and from the evidence and testimony that is
08:12:44 presented to you from the evidence.
08:12:46 Thank you.
08:12:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:12:48 Any other questions or comments from council?
08:12:51 Mrs. Capin?
08:12:56 Of course from Mrs. Capin.
08:12:59 >>YVONNE CAPIN: From staff.
08:13:00 We talked about it being wet zoned.
08:13:02 Was that area included?
08:13:05 I need to know.
08:13:06 Because my recollection is asking if there was enough
08:13:09 room -- if you will put that drawing back up.
08:13:18 My recollection is asking, because they wanted to wet zone
08:13:22 the parking lot.
08:13:26 For special occasions.
08:13:28 I'm not clear on that.
08:13:29 And I remember asking, do you have enough room to park the
08:13:33 cars and have special occasions on that parking area?
08:13:38 What I want to know is, is the lawn -- was the lawn also
08:13:43 included in that wet zone or does it have to be a special --
08:13:48 I need to know that.
08:13:50 Because if it was included, that makes a difference to me.
08:13:53 But if it isn't, that also makes a difference to me.
08:13:57 The other thing is, the fence, the aesthetics of the fence
08:14:02 is obscuring the historic building is something that is
08:14:08 bothersome.
08:14:09 I also owned a jewelry store for 25 years.
08:14:12 I didn't have one buzzer, I had two.
08:14:15 They came in one was a totally glass encased area, and the
08:14:20 second button didn't open until the first one closed.
08:14:24 That's the security we had.
08:14:25 We were never, ever even attempted to rob.
08:14:31 So I understand security.
08:14:33 I also understand detectives saying to me never go to the
08:14:39 bank at the same time, never take the same route home,
08:14:43 always be very paranoid.
08:14:44 I remember that.
08:14:45 I did that for 25 years.
08:14:47 So it's not that I don't understand.
08:14:50 It's that I want to know, has this been included, the lawn,
08:14:56 in the first place, would we have approved the fence all the
08:14:59 way around?
08:15:03 So I need to know if that was -- if that part was included
08:15:09 in the permitting for alcoholic beverage like it was in the
08:15:13 parking lot?
08:15:14 >> I cannot answer that question.
08:15:18 I do not know.
08:15:19 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I think someone can.
08:15:21 So I want to hear it.
08:15:23 I want someone to be really ready to tell me what it is.
08:15:26 It makes a difference to me.
08:15:27 >> Singer: What you see before you in the shaded area is
08:15:40 what the pending application for wet zoning, which you will
08:15:43 hear at a future meeting; looks like.
08:15:46 >>YVONNE CAPIN: What about the parking lot?
08:15:51 >> The parking lot is not included in wet zoning.
08:15:53 >> What events were being held in the parking lot?
08:15:55 >> I am not aware.
08:15:57 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I am going to go back and get the
08:15:59 transcript because that question I remember asking very
08:16:02 succinctly, if there's enough parking to also have an event
08:16:06 there, and the parking spaces.
08:16:08 So that would be something I would want to know.
08:16:12 Go ahead about the --
08:16:14 >> This is the lawn area we are talking about in the shaded
08:16:17 area.
08:16:18 For wet zoning purposes -- and I am not your legal counsel,
08:16:22 and I will defer to your legal counsel -- but the wet zoning
08:16:26 purposes if you want to have an event in a parking lot we
08:16:29 would have to apply for a special permit for special
08:16:32 dispensation, and the city staff would decide at that time
08:16:34 if it was appropriate or not.
08:16:36 That will not be in the pending request that will come
08:16:41 before you.
08:16:43 Does that answer your question?
08:16:47 The lawn is included.
08:16:49 The lawn in the shaded area right here, yes, included.
08:16:52 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I really need to know about that parking.
08:17:00 I remember asking that question about -- they were going to
08:17:03 have events there, or parts of events.
08:17:07 That was very clear.
08:17:11 So it is not at this time, any of it, permitted for alcohol
08:17:17 beverage?
08:17:18 Not any of the area at all?
08:17:20 None of the building?
08:17:23 >> The wet zoning application is pending.
08:17:25 Nothing has been approved.
08:17:26 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
08:17:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Who else?
08:17:32 Mr. Reddick?
08:17:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Just a brief comment.
08:17:35 The young lady that spoke earlier, and said something very,
08:17:39 very important that stood out to me, and in the organization
08:17:46 two years with West Tampa overlay, and I looked at the city
08:17:54 recommendation, urban design, and found it inconsistent.
08:18:02 And when you have volunteers who have been working on a
08:18:06 project particularly like the overlay district, and then we
08:18:11 sit up here and try to find justification to overlook that,
08:18:16 for a fence, I mean, we are doing a disservice to these
08:18:19 people who are volunteers.
08:18:21 We got these departments that stood here and told city
08:18:27 staff, told us that this fence is inconsistent, but we find
08:18:31 justification to find it consistent.
08:18:33 And it bothered me when someone said they have been working
08:18:38 for two years to develop this overlay district plan, and
08:18:41 then -- or urban design, and find it inconsistent.
08:18:45 But we can find justification.
08:18:48 So I hope if this passes tonight, these same people who
08:18:53 supported it don't make excuses when these similar parts
08:18:59 come before us again and we have these people who work on
08:19:02 the overlay district and take away and turn out the way it
08:19:06 feels like it's going.
08:19:07 These all I want to say.
08:19:09 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other comments or questions at this
08:19:10 time?
08:19:11 I have not spoken so I have a couple of questions.
08:19:13 Mr. Singer, if I could have you come forward.
08:19:17 You know, what happens when we are looking at something like
08:19:20 this, when we are having an original application and it
08:19:22 comes back for other changes, it causes a little bit more
08:19:26 anxious than we typically get.
08:19:29 Am I correct in saying -- and I am basing this based on what
08:19:33 has been said by members of your team and you, that
08:19:37 originally that you did not think that there was going to be
08:19:43 a security issue with the open lawn as originally presented.
08:19:48 Is that correct?
08:19:49 >> No, that is not correct.
08:19:54 As an overview to what I think some of your questions might
08:19:56 be, this is the first time that this group has undertaken
08:20:01 something of this magnitude.
08:20:03 And over time, different things become apparent during the
08:20:09 process.
08:20:10 I can tell you as a lawyer representing developers in many
08:20:12 projects that when you go through a large development such
08:20:16 as this, it's very difficult to anticipate every single
08:20:21 detail.
08:20:23 And so the process afforded to the JCC, the applicant in
08:20:28 this case, is to come back and say, we missed something.
08:20:32 And in this case we are telling you, we missed something.
08:20:35 >>MIKE SUAREZ: During the course of the ARC hearing, what
08:20:39 were some of the discussion items dealing with it?
08:20:42 Was it just because of the historical nature of the building
08:20:45 itself?
08:20:46 Did any of the arguments concerning security, was there any
08:20:51 discussion of that during the ARC?
08:20:53 >> There was discussion of it.
08:20:55 The ARC process is different from the process when we come
08:20:58 in front of council.
08:20:59 The ARC's responsibility is to look at the code, look at the
08:21:03 historical guidelines standards and say, does your
08:21:06 application meet the standards?
08:21:08 There's no subjectivity to it.
08:21:11 It either does or it does not.
08:21:13 And in this case, it clearly did not but that's the point of
08:21:17 having the ability to come to council to say, but wait,
08:21:20 there's a reason why we need to look past what is written
08:21:23 down in the code and say, but it fits what we are asking for
08:21:29 and here is why.
08:21:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And some of the discussion concerning the
08:21:33 overlay district portions of this, obviously when they were
08:21:38 doing overlay district, my guess is that Fort Homer Hesterly
08:21:44 has always been different, meaning that not that they did
08:21:48 not include it but, you know, it lay fallow for so long and
08:21:54 empty for so long, I don't think there were many people that
08:21:57 thought about what was going to happen in that location.
08:22:00 There were so many fits and starts.
08:22:02 Are you familiar with what the overlay district says in
08:22:05 terms of development previous to having been engaged to do
08:22:10 the Fort Homer Hesterly project?
08:22:13 Because I know the project has been going on for at least
08:22:17 two years, I think.
08:22:18 And I am not sure if it went -- if both processes were in
08:22:24 conjunction with each other, they were parallel.
08:22:27 So I -- my guess is that probably some of it was already
08:22:31 finished prior to the rest of the design standards being
08:22:35 met, or adhered to after the project had already started.
08:22:40 I'm not sure about that but do you know any of the time
08:22:42 frame?
08:22:43 >> There was some overlap.
08:22:44 The first time we were here in front of you was 2013.
08:22:48 And so things have changed.
08:22:54 Things have changed since that time.
08:22:57 I don't know if that answers your question.
08:23:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: It doesn't, but I guess -- I'm not sure that
08:23:03 you can answer that question anyway.
08:23:04 I was going to ask, well, you know, we have got two great
08:23:08 minds in the back of the room right now.
08:23:11 Mike?
08:23:12 Make?
08:23:14 Can you come up?
08:23:15 Do you think you can answer that question that I just posed?
08:23:17 Did you hear the question that I made?
08:23:20 Mr. Callahan, if you could.
08:23:23 Because there is some question as to the process of this
08:23:27 project going forward, and then also the overlay district.
08:23:30 My point is that we are not going to do a chicken or egg
08:23:36 discussion, but there is some question as to whether or not
08:23:38 the overlay district was already in place prior to the
08:23:40 project starting, and was there some overlap?
08:23:45 What was going on?
08:23:46 >> Mike Callahan, urban design.
08:23:50 Mr. Chairman, I believe the overlay came into effect in 05.
08:23:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: 05.
08:23:57 >> Yes.
08:23:58 So there has -- there might have been slight code
08:24:02 amendments, but nothing substantive.
08:24:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Were you around when the 05 --
08:24:08 >> I was barely born, I think.
08:24:10 (Laughter)
08:24:10 I was not here then.
08:24:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
08:24:13 The reason I am asking is because I think that even in 05,
08:24:17 it had just closed, the armory.
08:24:19 And I don't think anyone had any idea what was going to
08:24:23 happen.
08:24:23 And correct me if I am wrong, whenever you have done these
08:24:26 overlay district, it is not about what might be repurposed
08:24:30 per se, it's about primarily, you know, aesthetics for
08:24:35 either new construction, or repurposed construction on
08:24:38 probably smaller parcels.
08:24:40 Most parcels aren't as large as this one is.
08:24:43 And that would be my guess.
08:24:44 I'm just asking you.
08:24:45 >> I think so.
08:24:46 I think that's a very wise assumption.
08:24:50 I think for us, and referring to Mr. Reddick's assertion
08:24:55 that we found it inconsistent, was really following the
08:24:58 historic preservation.
08:25:00 We agree that aesthetically, it's consistent.
08:25:03 But there's a lot of mitigating issues here.
08:25:07 I realize that.
08:25:08 >> Mrs. Samaniego, you made a comment during your first
08:25:12 presentation, many, many minutes ago about the department of
08:25:15 interior standards.
08:25:18 And I assume that is the U.S. department of interior
08:25:21 standards because it is on a sort of list, is that correct?
08:25:26 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Yes.
08:25:27 The Architectural Review Commission because it's a locally
08:25:29 designated property, they review it based on the criteria
08:25:33 established by the secretary of interior.
08:25:35 >>MIKE SUAREZ: In terms of the design standard for the
08:25:41 historic aspect of the building itself, is there something
08:25:45 that is significantly changed because of this?
08:25:49 Because this fence may be asked for or passed?
08:25:54 Is there any danger that the historic nature of the building
08:25:58 or the historic designation of the building changes because
08:26:02 of that?
08:26:04 Do you know?
08:26:05 >> I don't think that it would compromise the designation of
08:26:08 the property.
08:26:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
08:26:10 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: The ARC did find it -- recommended denial
08:26:14 because they felt like it would change the ceremonial
08:26:19 entrance of the property, it would change the character of
08:26:22 the property.
08:26:24 But to the extent of it becoming undesignated because of
08:26:28 that, had I would think not.
08:26:32 Ron villas, historic preservation department, is in
08:26:35 attendance if you want to pose any questions.
08:26:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That is a great way to pass the buck,.
08:26:43 >> Ron Villa, historic in any case.
08:26:49 The landmark would not be in jeopardy with the inclusion of
08:26:53 this fence.
08:26:54 The board reviewed the request that was in front of them in
08:27:00 June prior stating that it was inconsistent with secretary
08:27:04 of interior standards and federal guidelines.
08:27:07 If you look at the historic shot of the building the front
08:27:11 yard, the view corridor was always uninterrupted and the
08:27:15 guidelines state that that view corridor should remain in
08:27:19 place.
08:27:20 And for that reason, they forwarded their recommendation to
08:27:25 deny.
08:27:28 Their scope is very limited in review as Mr. Singer stated,
08:27:31 to review the secretary of interior standard and the request
08:27:34 be that was in front of them.
08:27:36 There was some discussion about security at that time, but
08:27:39 it was very limited, and then our legal counsel advised them
08:27:43 to stay focused on their task at hand.
08:27:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Villa, do you know the history of the
08:27:48 building when it was built and so on?
08:27:49 Wasn't it built in the 1930s?
08:27:53 >> I don't know the correct date.
08:27:55 I believe around '39.
08:27:58 And then there was many great events that happened there
08:28:01 through the years.
08:28:02 And then the building fell in --
08:28:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Well, back to the original use of it which
08:28:06 was as an armory.
08:28:08 >> Correct.
08:28:09 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The reason they built it was not because we
08:28:11 needed to make Tampa safer for democracy.
08:28:13 It was because they wanted to approximate put people to
08:28:16 work, primarily men at that time, to build a building, and
08:28:20 use some federal dollars so that people were not unemployed,
08:28:23 or I should say underemployed at that time.
08:28:26 And so the ceremonial lawn is a ceremonial lawn because it
08:28:33 happened to be a lawn, not because it necessarily had
08:28:35 ceremony.
08:28:36 It's just the way that it looked at the time.
08:28:39 My point in saying that is that the historical aspect of
08:28:43 what a ceremonial lawn is, is that they train people there.
08:28:47 They train people to march up and down.
08:28:49 They probably trained people behind it, inside of it, and
08:28:53 then eventually became a depot for equipment, primarily as a
08:28:58 place where people went to do their reserve training, and
08:29:02 reserve meet-ups before they went off to do any kind of
08:29:07 maneuvers later on.
08:29:09 So I guess my point is that when it comes to the historical
08:29:12 aspect of what the ceremonial lawn is, there really is no
08:29:16 real discussion of that as to why they designed it the way
08:29:20 they did.
08:29:20 They had the land.
08:29:21 They used it.
08:29:22 They had a lawn because essentially like most installations,
08:29:27 military installation as round the country, had that kind of
08:29:30 lawn available where the entrance is at.
08:29:33 It looks very typical, as most armories across the country
08:29:39 do, and it was not meant for the use that it started to get
08:29:43 after the war when they didn't use it as much for an armory,
08:29:46 they used it more for all Elvis concerts and everything
08:29:51 else.
08:29:51 That's just my suggestion based on the history that I know.
08:29:54 Is there anything that I have said that is contradictory to
08:29:56 what you have seen in your research?
08:29:58 >> No, you are not incorrect in your assessment of the
08:30:01 project in front of you.
08:30:03 But with the initial PD, we did review the site.
08:30:06 We looked at the location of the fencing.
08:30:08 There was some discussion about bringing the fence around to
08:30:10 the front at that time and we had it terminated at the face
08:30:13 of the building, what we are calling the front, which is
08:30:17 Tampa most aesthetically pleasing elevation on the
08:30:21 structure.
08:30:21 So at that time, when the original PD came forward the fence
08:30:25 was brought back and terminated at the body of the building,
08:30:28 and through prior discussions with the team at hand today,
08:30:32 they felt that they needed to come forward with additional
08:30:34 security.
08:30:35 >>MIKE SUAREZ: One last question for you.
08:30:36 Have you ever dealt were a historical structure that had the
08:30:39 unique aspects of maybe having more need for security in the
08:30:44 past?
08:30:45 I mean, any other project that you have worked on here in
08:30:47 the City of Tampa that you know of?
08:30:49 >> You know, just down the street, the Argosy university
08:30:53 that Mr. Miranda had made mention to that was denied through
08:30:56 the ARC and then it came to City Council under appeal and
08:31:01 was ultimately approved and 6-foot high fence behind the
08:31:03 perimeter wall that they have there now.
08:31:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So they came forward with the same kind of
08:31:08 security concerns that the folks from the JCC came up, that
08:31:12 there they may be target go ahead because people dislike
08:31:16 Argosy university?
08:31:20 >> No, I don't know finance there's a parallel description
08:31:23 with security issues, but Mr. Jamal at the time said they
08:31:27 had some security issues and that's why ARC was consistent
08:31:30 in their interpretation in bringing the fence to the front
08:31:33 facade, and then it was denied through the process, and then
08:31:37 ultimately came in front of the board.
08:31:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Terrific.
08:31:39 I appreciate your comments.
08:31:41 And before we go on to another second round, let me finish
08:31:47 one of my thoughts on this particular issue.
08:31:50 Just day was listening to National Public Radio and there
08:31:53 was discussion about the writer of the book called the
08:31:56 looming tower which discussed what was September 10th of
08:32:00 2001, and what was interesting is that there was a lot of
08:32:03 discussion about what you were able to do in an airport
08:32:06 previously, which is be able to walk in, say good-bye to
08:32:09 your loved one, go all the way to the terminal, and then say
08:32:12 good-bye, and that now my children and all the other
08:32:15 children that were born after 2001 aren't ever going to see
08:32:20 that because we live in a different society.
08:32:23 This is one of the few things that I know of that has a
08:32:27 unique name and character, and again I know that the JCC did
08:32:35 not invest and did not try and raise money in order to keep
08:32:39 people out of this place that are in the neighborhood.
08:32:42 All the security concerns that I have heard them talk about,
08:32:45 and as Mr. Cohen mentioned, whenever you are in a facility,
08:32:49 in which people who worship, and they are not looked at in a
08:32:56 way that most other people may look at you, it is a
08:32:59 dangerous place sometimes.
08:33:00 I have been to both your temple, I have been to all the
08:33:05 other temples here in Tampa, and there is always a security
08:33:08 presence there.
08:33:09 So there is a real issue with what the security aspects of
08:33:15 this are going to be.
08:33:19 I am like I mentioned earlier, there is angst whenever we
08:33:22 have to change a plan.
08:33:23 We don't like it because we like to have the thing decided
08:33:26 and go forward.
08:33:28 I understand why this probably came up during the
08:33:31 discussions.
08:33:32 People started saying, you know, you might want to have a
08:33:34 fence around it because it's going to be a little bit
08:33:36 dangerous.
08:33:37 And I looked at the fence and I thought to myself, you know,
08:33:39 that looks very similar to a fence that I know of is pretty
08:33:42 famous which is in front of the white house.
08:33:44 Now, you are not going to have snipers on the roof that I
08:33:46 know of and you are not going to have bomb squad, but the
08:33:50 fence does have a deterrent factor in there be that it does
08:33:53 take time to climb that fence and get through to it.
08:33:57 And your security expert made some mention of that, and I
08:34:02 tend to agree that there is something that's a little bit
08:34:05 different begun this location than other locations in the
08:34:08 City of Tampa.
08:34:09 So I think that as we go forward, we have to think about
08:34:14 these things a little bit deeper before we have -- and I
08:34:19 would suggest this to those members of the land use
08:34:21 community -- think more about what may be significant
08:34:25 questions that come up prior to bringing these things
08:34:29 forward, because I think we could have talked about this a
08:34:31 lot.
08:34:32 Behind the scenes before and maybe come up with a design
08:34:36 that would have fit in from the first time out as opposed to
08:34:39 coming up a second time.
08:34:41 So any other questions before we go forward?
08:34:43 I think Mrs. Montelione high pressure her hand up first.
08:34:46 Mrs. Montelione.
08:34:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
08:34:48 Mr. Callahan?
08:34:52 You work with all of our districts across the city?
08:34:58 >> Every single one of them.
08:35:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And has this body granted exceptions to
08:35:06 the overlay district in other cases?
08:35:08 >> Yes. They.
08:35:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I know one that comes to mind is right
08:35:12 down the street, on Kennedy, where the primrose day school
08:35:19 where they were required by the overlay to underground
08:35:23 utility lines.
08:35:24 And we allowed them to not have to do that.
08:35:31 But there are many instances.
08:35:32 I know I myself have heard complaints from the volunteers
08:35:37 who spent time on creating these overlay plans that people
08:35:42 come here and we overturn them, so I know it happens.
08:35:45 And it's all on a case-by-case basis.
08:35:48 And some overlay districts never contemplated like this one,
08:35:54 maybe never contemplated this particular use of the armory,
08:35:59 and maybe thought that it would go back to being a concert
08:36:02 venue at some point.
08:36:03 So certain circumstances require different decisions.
08:36:08 But I just wanted to put on the record that this is not the
08:36:11 only time we have --
08:36:12 >> That's correct.
08:36:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay, thank you.
08:36:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mrs. Capin?
08:36:15 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Okay, here we go.
08:36:18 I want to ask, why does the fence go all the way to the
08:36:22 sidewalk?
08:36:23 Why isn't it set back?
08:36:24 Why does it go all the way to the sidewalk?
08:36:27 If it's for security, it could be set back four feet, or
08:36:30 just so that it does not have -- I understand the security.
08:36:34 I'm following your train of thought here.
08:36:38 But that it has to go to the sidewalk.
08:36:41 I'm not sure.
08:36:42 Wouldn't the fence do the same thing four feet in, or three
08:36:47 feet in?
08:36:48 Wouldn't it provide the same thing?
08:36:49 And yet you still have an open area to the community.
08:36:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Go ahead.
08:36:58 >> Jack Ross, Tampa JCC.
08:37:04 One of the tasks over the last four years, and with amazing
08:37:08 collaborative process, to maximize the envelope that has
08:37:12 been sort of bestowed upon us, maximize it in ways that
08:37:18 other Jcc's around the country are taking note.
08:37:21 Other communities centers are taking note, whether they are
08:37:24 entrepreneurial, cultural, athletic, et cetera.
08:37:27 I mentioned the arts and it's going on and on and on.
08:37:30 We want to maximize this area.
08:37:33 So whether it's dramatic movement, after-school children,
08:37:38 whether it's a reception for a wedding, whatever it is, we
08:37:42 want to maximize the envelope for the communal purposes.
08:37:46 So I think that the technical answer is, the fence serves a
08:37:52 purpose if it were one foot off of the building, perhaps
08:37:56 less, and perhaps more when it's further away, and
08:37:59 maximizing its effectiveness in terms of time, response, and
08:38:03 our ability to use the envelope of the property in the best
08:38:07 way.
08:38:08 It makes the most sense.
08:38:09 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Mrs. Samaniego,
08:38:15 She has a great name.
08:38:19 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Samaniego.
08:38:21 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.
08:38:21 You have to say that anyway. So here we go.
08:38:25 This was first approved when, that fence?
08:38:28 Do you have it there?
08:38:29 Was it 2013?
08:38:31 The one that's on there now?
08:38:34 I should have asked that earlier because my aide would have
08:38:36 looked up the transcript.
08:38:39 I'm sorry I didn't.
08:38:39 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Yes, the PD was approved on 2013 and the
08:38:46 amendment in 2014.
08:38:47 >>YVONNE CAPIN: 2013, exactly what date?
08:38:53 >> I don't have the exact date.
08:38:55 >>YVONNE CAPIN: You don't have the date.
08:38:57 Okay.
08:38:57 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: No.
08:39:01 I don't know the exact date of the 2013 hearing.
08:39:09 >>YVONNE CAPIN: The other thing is, one of the things that
08:39:12 was brought up, it was 9/11 and pre9/11, we traveled to
08:39:19 Europe for 40 years.
08:39:21 Where in 1970, 69.
08:39:25 At least 20 years prior to 9/11, could you not go airside in
08:39:29 Europe.
08:39:30 You could not go airside.
08:39:32 It was not lax.
08:39:33 I orphan thought coming into the U.S., how comfortable we
08:39:37 were and how easy it was to come in and out.
08:39:40 In Europe you could not do that.
08:39:41 So when they bring up the 9/11, it just -- anyway, I'm
08:39:49 having a very difficult time with this.
08:39:52 Very difficult.
08:39:53 I must say.
08:39:55 But, anyway, thank you.
08:39:56 These it for me.
08:39:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any more questions or comments from council
08:40:02 members at this time?
08:40:05 Okay.
08:40:07 Mr. Singer, if you want, we have a minute left for you to
08:40:10 rebut.
08:40:11 Any other things that you would like?
08:40:13 Or you can stand pat.
08:40:14 This is where the poker game starts.
08:40:16 >> I think you have heard enough from us.
08:40:18 We will waive our rebuttal.
08:40:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay, terrific.
08:40:23 If there's no more questions or comments, can I get a motion
08:40:27 to close at this time?
08:40:28 I have a motion from Mr. Maniscalco.
08:40:30 I have a second from Mrs. Manatee Montelione.
08:40:32 All in favor of that motion indicate by saying aye.
08:40:34 Any opposed?
08:40:36 Mr. Maniscalco, will you kindly take item number 6, please.
08:40:39 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I have an ordinance being presented for
08:40:42 first reading consideration, an ordinance rezoning property
08:40:44 in the general vicinity of 522 north Howard Avenue in the
08:40:47 city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in
08:40:49 section 1 from zoning district classifications PD planned
08:40:52 development, daycare, appraise school, recreational
08:40:55 facility, commercial, private, and place of assembly, to PD,
08:40:58 planned development, daycare, appraise school, recreational
08:41:01 facility, commercial private place of assembly, and public
08:41:04 cultural facility, providing an effective date with any
08:41:06 revisions made between now and the second reading.
08:41:09 >> Second.
08:41:10 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion from Mr. Maniscalco.
08:41:12 I have a second from Mrs. Montelione.
08:41:14 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
08:41:17 Opposed?
08:41:17 >>THE CLERK: The motion carried with Miranda, Reddick and
08:41:22 Capin voting no.
08:41:24 Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
08:41:26 9:30 a.m.
08:41:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:41:31 All right.
08:41:31 Item number 7.
08:41:32 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Item number 7 on your agenda is REZ
08:41:43 16-59.
08:41:46 Rezoning required for the property at 800 south Harbour
08:41:48 Island Boulevard, from planned development to planned
08:41:52 development, to allow bank and business professional office
08:41:55 uses.
08:41:56 >>DAVID HAY: Planning Commission staff.
08:42:02 I have been sworn.
08:42:03 This site is located within the central planning district,
08:42:07 more specifically right on Harbour Island.
08:42:11 It is located, since it is on Harbour Island, it is a level
08:42:16 A evacuation zone, and there is transit on the island, the
08:42:24 trolley.
08:42:26 And bus.
08:42:27 We have the subject site right here in the middle.
08:42:33 It runs east-west.
08:42:34 Harbour Island Boulevard runs north-south.
08:42:37 We have the Harbour Island athletic club back to the east
08:42:41 and south of the subject site.
08:42:44 It's residential multifamily, condominiums to the southwest.
08:42:50 And then we have Tampa office and hotel uses to the north.
08:42:56 One harbour place and two harbour place.
08:42:59 Onto the future land use map.
08:43:01 The subject site is the entire Harbour Island, mixed use
08:43:07 100, intensive land use categories on the west coast of
08:43:10 Florida.
08:43:12 The Planning Commission staff reviewed the request for the
08:43:14 additional uses and found them comparable and compatible to
08:43:18 the surrounding development pattern and overall found the
08:43:24 request consistent with the Tampa comprehensive plan.
08:43:27 Thank you.
08:43:27 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Here is the subject property on Harbour
08:43:38 Island at the corner of Harbour Island Boulevard.
08:43:47 In the zoning map you can see the property is, the majority,
08:43:51 surrounding property is all zoned prime development.
08:43:57 Here is the subject -- planned development.
08:43:59 Here is the subject property as it currently exists, found
08:44:01 the existing planned development was approved in 2004, only
08:44:11 allowed for one use.
08:44:14 There's. An existing bank on the approved site.
08:44:20 There's the parking lot.
08:44:28 Across is harbour place.
08:44:31 And then further down, the plaza, and residential towers.
08:44:41 Currently under construction.
08:44:42 The current Harbour Island Boulevard is a parking garage.
08:44:47 Further, towards the security house, the retention pond
08:45:00 right here.
08:45:04 Security.
08:45:06 South.
08:45:08 The athletic club is directly to the south of the specific
08:45:13 property.
08:45:14 And this is the parking lot.
08:45:17 Down here.
08:45:17 Here is the site plan.
08:45:30 Proposed.
08:45:33 It is pretty much the exact same site plan from 2004.
08:45:38 The applicant is not proposing any site improvements or site
08:45:41 changes.
08:45:41 They are just asking for one additional use of business
08:45:45 professional office with consideration of that additional
08:45:48 use, there is no requirement for increased parking or other
08:45:53 improvements to this site.
08:45:54 So really the site will remain as S.however, the applicant
08:46:00 and the property owner, and at their discretion -- that's
08:46:08 currently allowed.
08:46:09 And there were no existing waivers, no other proposed
08:46:14 waivers to the site plan.
08:46:19 So everything meets the current requirements.
08:46:22 There's one informational comment.
08:46:25 For when they go to permitting for any changes, they would
08:46:27 have to provide tree changes for natural resources.
08:46:33 There are no required changes between first and second
08:46:37 reading if this is approved.
08:46:39 So staff found it consistent with the Tampa Land Development
08:46:43 Code.
08:46:44 Thank you.
08:46:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Petitioner?
08:46:56 >>DAVID MECHANIK: 305 South Boulevard here on behalf of the
08:46:58 applicant.
08:47:01 As Mary just indicated, we have an existing building.
08:47:04 The site ironically was originally zoned for office back in
08:47:11 the 80s.
08:47:11 I handled the rezoning application then.
08:47:15 At some point, a subsequent owner changed the zoning to only
08:47:19 a bank.
08:47:20 So we are now simply asking that office be again permitted
08:47:25 as a use, and we are not proposing any changes to the
08:47:31 building whatsoever.
08:47:32 So we are just simply adding office as a permitted use.
08:47:36 With that I will be happy to answer any questions and
08:47:39 request your favorable consideration.
08:47:42 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
08:47:43 Any questions from council at this time?
08:47:46 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
08:47:48 item number 7, REZ 16-59?
08:47:52 I see no one.
08:47:53 >> Move to close.
08:47:54 >> Second.
08:47:55 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion to close by Mr. Miranda.
08:47:57 Second from Mr. Reddick.
08:47:58 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
08:48:01 Any opposed?
08:48:02 Mrs. Montelione, will you please take item number 7?
08:48:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move an ordinance being presented for
08:48:10 first reading consideration, an ordinance rezoning property
08:48:12 in the general vicinity of 800 south Harbour Island
08:48:15 Boulevard in the city of Tampa, Florida and more
08:48:17 particularly described in section 1 from zoning district
08:48:20 classification PD planned development, bank, to PD, planned
08:48:24 development, bank and office, business/professional,
08:48:28 providing an effective date.
08:48:29 >> Second.
08:48:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion from Mrs. Montelione.
08:48:32 I have a second from Mr. Maniscalco.
08:48:34 All in favor of that motion?
08:48:36 Any opposed?
08:48:37 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Capin being absent at
08:48:42 vote.
08:48:43 Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
08:48:45 9:30 a.m.
08:48:46 >> Good catch, Mr. Crew, that you saw that he came in under
08:48:49 the wire.
08:48:50 Item number 8.
08:49:00 Before we go on, hang on a second.
08:49:03 Mr. Crew, did you need a break?
08:49:05 Okay.
08:49:06 Mrs. Samaniego, why don't we take a quick three-minute res?
08:49:11 We are in recess for three minutes.
08:49:13 [Sounding gavel]
08:49:14 >> (Brief Recess.)
08:49:15
08:49:16 [Sounding gavel]
08:56:03 Tampa City Council is called back into order.
08:56:05 Roll call, please.
08:56:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
08:56:12 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.
08:56:13 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Here.
08:56:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.
08:56:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.
08:56:18 We are back on item number 8.
08:56:20 We will start that.
08:56:21 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Number 8 is REZ 16-60, for property at
08:56:28 1300 south Dale Mabry from CG to PD, restaurant with
08:56:37 drive-in facility.
08:56:38 >>DAVID HAY: Planning Commission staff.
08:56:43 I have been sworn.
08:56:45 We move down to the South Tampa planning district for this
08:56:49 next case.
08:56:50 The subject site is located on Dale Mabry Highway.
08:56:53 Which is designated mixed use corridor and a transit
08:56:56 emphasis corridor within the comprehensive plan.
08:57:00 There is transit on that section of South Dale Mabry
08:57:03 Highway.
08:57:05 And the subject site is located within a level D evacuation
08:57:10 zone.
08:57:10 Onto the aerial you see the subject site here, Dale Mabry,
08:57:18 Neptune, of course we are all familiar with this section of
08:57:21 Dale Mabry.
08:57:21 We have the Publix right across the street.
08:57:24 And there is a lot of commercial activity occurring at that
08:57:29 intersection of Henderson and south Dale Mabry.
08:57:33 Immediately to the east, it transitions very quickly down
08:57:37 into larger-lot single-family detached residential uses.
08:57:44 Onto the future land use map, here is the subject site right
08:57:48 here.
08:57:49 It's within this large community 35.
08:57:56 Immediately to the west is residential 6.
08:58:00 Then we do have some pockets of residential 20 scattered
08:58:03 throughout.
08:58:06 The applicant is proposing to develop a 2,200 square foot
08:58:11 restaurant with drive-through located on south Dale Mabry in
08:58:14 the South Tampa planning district.
08:58:17 The surrounding uses along that portion are south Dale
08:58:22 Mabry.
08:58:23 Directly to the east, we have single-family detached,
08:58:27 residential.
08:58:27 The proposed floor area ratio is well below the maximum of
08:58:31 2.0 that can be considered under the community mixed use 35
08:58:36 future land use category.
08:58:41 Before staff gets into our report we would like to bring to
08:58:46 your attention that one file, there was an error in our
08:58:51 description of the alternative that the applicant had
08:58:54 provided.
08:58:58 Hopefully I can clarify and correct for the record, under
08:59:03 the staff analysis section, the second paragraph, it should
08:59:07 read: The organizational tern tiff development number 1 has
08:59:11 the drive-through queuing Lane within 15 feet of the
08:59:14 property line adjacent to a residential lot but preserves
08:59:19 the grand tree on-site.
08:59:21 Alternative development 2 provided in late July moved the
08:59:26 queuing Lane away from the adjacent residential uses with
08:59:32 the removal of the grand tree.
08:59:34 Planning Commission staff would like to apologize for any
08:59:36 confusion this error in wording within the staff report has
08:59:39 caused but the overall facts remain the same.
08:59:43 Neither site plan is consistent with the goals, objectives
08:59:46 and policies of the comprehensive plan.
08:59:49 The subject site is located within a mixed use corridor and
08:59:53 along a transit emphasis corridor.
08:59:56 Looking at the overall intent of the mixed use corridor,
08:59:59 objective 6.1 of the comprehensive plan is to promote the
09:00:02 transformation of major corridors to include a broader mix
09:00:05 of uses, both horizontal and vertical, that provides
09:00:10 opportunities for medium and higher density housing, also
09:00:13 addressing local and city-wide demand for retail and
09:00:17 services.
09:00:18 Another objective of the city's comprehensive plan is to be
09:00:20 promote the use of public transit on those mixed use
09:00:23 corridors.
09:00:24 The protection of single-family neighborhoods is a current
09:00:27 component of the City of Tampa's comprehensive plan.
09:00:30 The organizational tern tiff development scenario 1 place it
09:00:34 is drive-through queuing Lane within proximity to
09:00:37 single-family detached residential uses within that
09:00:39 residential 6 future land use category.
09:00:43 Planning Commission staff originally advised the applicant
09:00:46 in late June of the Planning Commission staff's concerns
09:00:50 regarding the potential negative impacts to adjacent
09:00:53 residential uses that the organizational tern tiff design
09:00:57 number 17 proposed.
09:01:00 Planning Commission staff also advised the applicant in June
09:01:04 that policies within the comprehensive plan promote the
09:01:07 protection of the city's tree canopy, especially when it
09:01:10 comes to trees being grand.
09:01:13 In response to Planning Commission staff and other staff
09:01:16 concerns, on August 11, the applicant provided alternative
09:01:20 design 2 which moved the drive-through queuing Lane further
09:01:23 away from the adjacent residential uses but now required the
09:01:28 removal of the grand tree.
09:01:30 No significant changes were provided to the organization
09:01:32 alternative design 1.
09:01:35 Now, Planning Commission staff has what staff would consider
09:01:40 two inconsistent options.
09:01:42 One option potentially impacting adjacent residential,
09:01:48 alternative design number one, and another calling for the
09:01:50 removal of a grand tree, which is alternative design two.
09:01:54 Both the protection of trees and the protection of
09:01:56 residential homes are important components of the
09:01:59 comprehensive plan.
09:02:01 Planning Commission staff based on policy language could not
09:02:04 pin a higher value on saving a tree over potentially
09:02:08 impacting residential homes or vice versa.
09:02:12 That decision is better suited for an elective body.
09:02:16 (Laughter).
09:02:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you for throwing us under the bus.
09:02:21 Go ahead.
09:02:21 >>DAVID HAY: Planning Commission staff would have preferred
09:02:25 a potential third option that would have probably provided a
09:02:30 shorter queuing Lane but put the queuing Lane in front of
09:02:33 the tree.
09:02:33 There is policy language within the comprehensive plan that
09:02:37 does promote parking reductions when you are saving a tree.
09:02:42 So staff would have -- that would have potentially been an
09:02:48 option that the applicant could have thought.
09:02:50 That third option was never provided or never submitted into
09:02:54 the record for any review.
09:02:56 Therefore, based on those considerations, the Planning
09:02:59 Commission staff finds both proposed options under the
09:03:05 planned development inconsistent with the provisions of the
09:03:07 Tampa comprehensive plan.
09:03:10 Thank you.
09:03:12 That is the longest one you ever had.
09:03:15 Pretty good.
09:03:15 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Land Development Coordination.
09:03:32 Here is an aerial photograph of the subject property.
09:03:36 It's currently a strip commercial center that is actually
09:03:41 part of one large building, and this specific property, as
09:03:47 you can see.
09:03:48 The remaining portion, we zoom, this building will remain.
09:03:53 And then in the back is a yard for a storage.
09:04:01 Are you saying that those are two buildings there? A second
09:04:06 building?
09:04:06 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: No.
09:04:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I apologize.
09:04:09 >> It's okay.
09:04:10 It's one building.
09:04:11 Okay.
09:04:12 But the property line and the application site is this
09:04:15 portion of the site.
09:04:18 This portion is a different lot here that will remain.
09:04:27 Then the existing building thusly.
09:04:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That's what I wanted to figure out.
09:04:33 Because what was stated, I thought they are not going to cut
09:04:37 the building in half.
09:04:38 And obviously they are going to cut the building in half.
09:04:41 Thank you.
09:04:41 I am apologize for interrupting.
09:04:42 >> Here is the subject property again no large area of
09:04:49 commercial general.
09:04:49 This is the front of the building. This is the subject
09:04:51 property.
09:04:52 The portion of the strip commercial center that would be
09:04:55 removed if constructed.
09:04:58 This is north.
09:04:59 This portion of the building will remain.
09:05:07 This is the rear of the subject property again, kind of a
09:05:09 storage area, the parking, solid waste refuge.
09:05:14 This is to the rear of the property.
09:05:18 Existing 8-foot-tall, high, rather, masonry wall up against
09:05:23 residential.
09:05:24 This is another shot of the same wall.
09:05:28 Again the second house which will I will go through in more
09:05:32 detail in one moment.
09:05:33 Here are cars parked along this back wall, and then parked
09:05:41 at the very back here. This is all residential.
09:05:45 Currently cars parked back there.
09:05:47 This is the large grand tree that is proposed to be
09:05:51 retained, protected under option one.
09:05:59 Property to the north is another strip commercial center,
09:06:03 with facilities, an office.
09:06:04 Further to the north on the corner, this is currently under
09:06:10 remodeling.
09:06:11 On the corners is another shot on Watrous. Across the
09:06:17 street is a Publix with various uses in the strip center as
09:06:21 well as a bank.
09:06:24 Now I am going to be taking you, show you the adjoining
09:06:30 properties.
09:06:32 You go down Dale Mabry, down Watrous, Sterling.
09:06:35 Here is a cul-de-sac and a little dead-end, and specifically
09:06:40 looking at these two houses that are within close proximity
09:06:45 of the subject property.
09:06:47 This is one house.
09:06:50 Which is located here.
09:06:52 And then here is the second house.
09:06:55 Which is located in this general area.
09:06:59 This is a view from the cul-de-sac looking back towards the
09:07:03 subject property.
09:07:03 You can see there's a small landscape island, a cul-de-sac,
09:07:07 and then this is the other side of that large 6-foot high
09:07:12 masonry wall.
09:07:14 Now, they are proposing again the restaurant with a drive-in
09:07:20 facility.
09:07:25 Here is the restaurant as proposed, the square footage of
09:07:30 the restaurant is approximately 2200 square feet, on the
09:07:35 western portion of the property, up against Dale Mabry
09:07:39 Highway, the queuing, and the parking.
09:07:45 Here are some parking spaces as well as here.
09:07:49 And then some angled parking here.
09:07:51 The drive-through.
09:07:52 You come up and go around the tree.
09:07:59 Let me zoom in a little better.
09:08:03 You can see the drive-through.
09:08:04 Go around the protected tree.
09:08:07 Here is the menu board.
09:08:08 Here is the order window.
09:08:10 Or order box.
09:08:13 Where you give your order into.
09:08:16 Here is the pickup window.
09:08:17 So you would come here, you would go all the way around,
09:08:20 order, pick up, and exit.
09:08:23 And then this is parking.
09:08:25 And then here is your solid waste dumpster.
09:08:30 Here are several additional parking spaces.
09:08:33 Because of the proximity to the grand tree, protection there
09:08:36 required to be pervious pavers.
09:08:42 Prosecute as David requested the proposed two alternatives,
09:08:51 with plan development.
09:08:55 With Development Review Committee, we review what the
09:08:58 requirements are for their specific use.
09:09:00 One of the requirements is that a drive-in facility becomes
09:09:06 the queuing Lane shall be at least 50 feet from any
09:09:09 residential property.
09:09:11 As proposed, here is the edge of the property line shared
09:09:14 with residential properties that I showed you the picture
09:09:17 of.
09:09:17 This is the cul-de-sac.
09:09:19 It's only 15 feet.
09:09:21 Staff acknowledges the applicant's intent to preserve the
09:09:26 tree, which staff supports.
09:09:28 So at the Development Review Committee we encouraged the
09:09:32 applicant to try to find an alternative to meet all code
09:09:35 requirements, 50-foot distance from the residential
09:09:41 property, as well as the to protect the tree and have the
09:09:45 drive-through Lane come in this way, which would reduce the
09:09:49 amount of queuing that they have, but again it one meet all
09:09:54 the code requirements, retain the tree and meat the 50-foot
09:09:58 setback buffer from the residential property.
09:10:02 We did ask that they complete a queuing study from other
09:10:05 facilities that they have in town, which they did complete.
09:10:12 Staff was concerned that if they reduce queuing the Lane
09:10:17 with backup traffic off of Dale Mabry which obviously would
09:10:19 be detrimental.
09:10:23 After reviewing the two alternatives, the Land Development
09:10:27 Coordination staff recommendations alternative one, on pages
09:10:33 1 and 2, and is requesting finance this were to be approved,
09:10:37 the complete removal of option 2, pages 3 and 4.
09:10:41 So if the planned development would be approved it would be
09:10:44 the first two within the additional setback.
09:10:50 Staff is recommending option one, and not supporting option
09:10:54 two, pages 3 and 4.
09:10:57 The justification for staff's recommending approval, again
09:11:00 land development staff, the houses are located at either end
09:11:04 of the cul-de-sac as opposed to the backyard directly
09:11:09 abutting the residential commercial property.
09:11:12 There is an existing 8-foot high masonry wall as I showed
09:11:17 you on the site plan -- I'm sorry -- in the pictures.
09:11:22 There is an existing well established tree line along the
09:11:33 perimeter wall, as you can see, which will be retained
09:11:39 within this application.
09:11:40 They are providing a 15-foot landscape buffer as well, and
09:11:45 then the than queuing Lane begins, as well as protecting the
09:11:48 tree.
09:11:49 We are putting a condition that between first and second
09:11:53 reading the setback be moved to require that the call box or
09:11:59 the order box rather can move no closer than 75 feet which
09:12:06 is in the general location that it currently exists.
09:12:09 Because I think part of our professional opinion, the
09:12:12 requirement for the queuing Lane and the call box separation
09:12:15 is to make sure that it's not a noise issue for properties.
09:12:21 And again the call box and the menu box is approximately 130
09:12:27 feet from the wall of the residential property.
09:12:31 So with all those elements combined, we feel that those
09:12:37 offset any adverse impact that the drive-through lane might
09:12:41 have on the residential property.
09:12:42 And so staff recommends approval of option one.
09:12:49 There are a couple waivers for option one.
09:12:52 Again, the first would be to reduce the drive-in queuing
09:12:57 distance from any property in which a residential use is
09:13:00 located from 50 feet to 15.
09:13:04 And then the applicant is also requesting to allow building
09:13:11 design on the southern elevation not fronting a street.
09:13:16 The current code only allows you to have building signs on
09:13:19 your building face that addresses the street so they would
09:13:25 be normally allowed one sign.
09:13:28 They are asking to allow for a maximum of a 37 square foot
09:13:32 wall sign on the southern elevation, which staff supports
09:13:39 those two waivers.
09:13:47 There are some changes between first and second reading
09:13:47 mainly to again correct the call box to be no closer than 75
09:13:53 feet to the far eastern property line shared with the
09:13:55 residential uses.
09:13:57 The third by the front setback has to be 10 feet or 45 feet
09:14:01 from the center line of Dale Mabry Highway, whichever is
09:14:05 more.
09:14:06 And a couple of things in the site plan. Natural resources
09:14:11 found it consistent with they found option one consistent,
09:14:18 they found option two with removal was inconsistent.
09:14:23 There are just a couple of things that need cleaned up.
09:14:27 On the site plan for option one if it's approved,
09:14:29 specifically making sure Tampa adequate protected res radius
09:14:34 provided for a couple of trees with impervious pavement
09:14:42 And other than that had weep reviewed all the special use
09:14:45 criteria designed with than the criteria, mainly being that
09:14:48 they have direct access to an arterial collector, Dale Mabry
09:14:51 Highway is an arterial, has adequate space for queuing for
09:14:56 the drive-in window.
09:14:57 Again they established a queuing study, and based on the
09:15:02 design in option one, they should have more than enough
09:15:05 queuing provided to eliminate any backing up of traffic on
09:15:11 Dale Mabry Highway during the peak hours.
09:15:14 And then the waivers they are requesting for the 50-foot
09:15:17 setback.
09:15:22 I think that completes my presentation.
09:15:23 The development review compliance staff found option one
09:15:27 consistent provided the changes are made between first and
09:15:31 second reading.
09:15:31 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from council?
09:15:35 Okay.
09:15:38 Before you start your presentation, during the presentation
09:15:41 by staff, I was informed that Mrs. Capin had to leave.
09:15:45 She will not be here for the rest of our hearing.
09:15:48 So I just wanted to make sure you were aware of that before
09:15:51 you started your presentation, Mrs. Grimes.
09:15:55 >>GINA GRIMES: Thank you. Law firm of Hill, Ward,
09:16:54 Henderson, 101 East Kennedy Boulevard.
09:16:57 And I have been sworn.
09:16:58 I represent J. Square Developers tonight.
09:17:02 They are the contract purchasers for this parcel.
09:17:06 Jay is in the audience.
09:17:09 He will address you late later on tonight.
09:17:12 I wanted to first start off by acknowledging the fact that
09:17:16 this part of Dale Mabry highway over the last 10 to 12 years
09:17:24 has really been under a revitalization, started with the
09:17:27 Publix.
09:17:28 You also had the south shore commons, buildings were
09:17:32 demolished and rebuilt.
09:17:34 You also had the Chase Bank on the corner here.
09:17:38 Lykes as you know is undergoing renovation.
09:17:40 And you recently approved further to the south.
09:17:44 This parcel that is the subject parcel is also requesting
09:17:49 the ability to revitalize.
09:17:51 What you have right now is an older lot, strip center.
09:18:03 This had several tenants in and out.
09:18:05 It doesn't comply with parking.
09:18:07 It doesn't comply with current design requirements.
09:18:09 Doesn't comply with current signage requirements.
09:18:11 It doesn't have any neighborhood protections in it.
09:18:13 So we believe what we are proposing is a vast improvement
09:18:17 over all of that.
09:18:18 In fact, our proposal does meet the code, with the exception
09:18:22 of two areas.
09:18:23 And you heard Mary's review than the two waivers that we are
09:18:27 requesting.
09:18:28 One is the signage.
09:18:29 The other waiver depends on which option is selected.
09:18:32 Under option one, the grand tree in the rear is preserved.
09:18:37 Then we need a waiver to reduce the 50-foot setback from the
09:18:41 residential.
09:18:42 If option two is selected, and we provide the 50-foot
09:18:46 setback from the residential property, then we need a waiver
09:18:49 to remove the grand tree.
09:18:51 So it's not an easy choice and we recognize that.
09:18:57 We ask you to keep in mind that if we could meet the 50-foot
09:19:01 setback, and preserve the grand tree as staff has requested,
09:19:05 we wouldn't need a PD.
09:19:07 You wouldn't be here tonight.
09:19:08 What we need and what we are reason is the reason that you
09:19:11 have PDss and that's to recognize unique conditions an
09:19:16 provide flexibility.
09:19:17 Otherwise we wouldn't be in front of you.
09:19:19 But in designing this site we have to deal request several
09:19:21 different competing factors.
09:19:23 The first factor are the design requirements in the comp
09:19:27 plan which require the building to be pushed closer to the
09:19:29 street.
09:19:31 The second requirement is a parking requirement.
09:19:34 We are not asking for a waiver of the parking requirements
09:19:36 because of the concern that you heard in one of the earlier
09:19:39 petitions, and that is that if you don't have sufficient
09:19:41 parking on-site for certain restaurants, then you are going
09:19:45 to have to spill over into the neighborhood, and it's not
09:19:47 just into the residential area but onto the other commercial
09:19:49 properties as well.
09:19:50 And we didn't want to have that kind of impact.
09:19:53 The third competing interest that we have to deal with is
09:19:56 the queue requirements.
09:19:58 H heard from Mary we had the DOC meetings and had special
09:20:04 requests that we evaluate two other Starbuck's sites to
09:20:07 determine whether or not the city's requirement for the
09:20:11 queue lanes was sufficient.
09:20:13 We have a transportation engineer.
09:20:15 She's going to address you later on that point.
09:20:18 On the other issue we had to deal with is the tree
09:20:21 retention.
09:20:22 We also had the special use requirement with the 50-foot
09:20:25 setbacks.
09:20:25 And last but not least, is Starbuck's itself.
09:20:28 As you can imagine Starbuck's has its own prototype for its
09:20:32 building.
09:20:32 They have their own standards for just like the city does.
09:20:35 So parking and for queuing and for hours of operation,
09:20:39 et cetera.
09:20:39 So we have had to, in designing this project, balance all of
09:20:43 those different mitigating factors.
09:20:46 And we came up with two options.
09:20:49 The only reason that we had a second option was to address
09:20:53 the DRC comments from the Planning Commission and also from
09:20:56 city staff.
09:20:58 To be honest with you, this is just a judgment call.
09:21:01 We didn't want to present two options but we didn't want to
09:21:04 select one option over the other.
09:21:06 And what I thought was most important is staff before we
09:21:10 came here tonight was able to review both options, and to
09:21:13 give you feedback about which one they preferred the most.
09:21:17 I didn't want it to be -- we present one option and then
09:21:22 staffer preferred a different option.
09:21:23 We wanted everybody to be all aware of all the intricacies
09:21:27 of each different option.
09:21:28 In making this decision, there are certain other facts that
09:21:33 we would like for City Council to consider.
09:21:35 And one of those is the fact that the lot is three quarters
09:21:39 of an acre.
09:21:40 We are talking about three quarters of an acre on Dale Mabry
09:21:44 Highway.
09:21:44 You can't often find that.
09:21:46 And while some have said this is a small site it's really
09:21:50 not.
09:21:50 Three quarters of an acre on Dale Mabry Highway and we are
09:21:53 asking for a 2200 square foot restaurant. If we can't fit a
09:21:57 2200 square foot restaurant to comply with code on a three
09:22:00 acre site then there's a problem somewhere.
09:22:02 And it isn't the intensity of the development.
09:22:04 It has to be all these design regulations and code
09:22:08 requirements that I talked to you about that present all
09:22:12 these competing interests.
09:22:15 Dale Mabry Highway.
09:22:16 Whenever you build anything on Dale Mabry Highway you are
09:22:18 always going to have commercial abutting residential.
09:22:21 We think can't get away from it.
09:22:23 All we can really do is mitigate.
09:22:25 The other thing that complicates the situation is the
09:22:28 building location design requirements.
09:22:31 As you heard, they want you to build closer to the street.
09:22:33 Well, when you do that, all the parking has to either be on
09:22:37 the side or in the rear.
09:22:38 It can't be up front.
09:22:40 So on Dale Mabry if you push the parking lot inside or in
09:22:43 the rear you are pushing it up right against the
09:22:46 residential.
09:22:47 Is also want to point out that we have an existing tree
09:22:51 spleen in the back of the property.
09:22:52 I know Mary showed you some pictures.
09:22:54 Quickly, I would like to show you some different viewpoints
09:22:58 of it.
09:22:58 As you can see, this is the wall that runs along the back of
09:23:01 the property.
09:23:02 You already have cars parking along there.
09:23:06 Those are employees that park there.
09:23:10 They have an easement to park there.
09:23:12 Also there's a driveway that runs along this wall and
09:23:15 services all the different commercial businesses that front
09:23:18 along Dale Mabry.
09:23:19 And here is just another shot of that tree screen.
09:23:29 So when you evaluate all these different requirements, I
09:23:31 think most people agree that option number one is the
09:23:34 preferred option.
09:23:35 And that's the one that saves the tree.
09:23:38 However, with that we have to ask for a setback reduction to
09:23:42 the 50-foot requirement for the tree Lane.
09:23:45 As you can see on this drawing, this is option one.
09:23:55 The queue Lane would come around in here.
09:23:58 And there would be the landscaping in the rear.
09:24:02 And the one thing that we are doing in order to mitigate for
09:24:05 that impact that it might have to the residential area is we
09:24:09 are willing to plant in that 15-foot area, so it's this area
09:24:14 in here, we are willing to plant an bamboo screen.
09:24:18 That's generally the size of the bamboo plants they would be
09:24:23 at the time of planting.
09:24:24 They would be 25-gallon 10-foot high planted five feet
09:24:27 apart.
09:24:28 What we did was we overlaid the bamboo screen in the back,
09:24:33 in the rear, around the tree.
09:24:35 You can see it covers the 8-foot fence.
09:24:38 That's at the time of planting.
09:24:39 3 to 5 years later that bamboo screen will be probably 15
09:24:44 feet high.
09:24:45 The other thing I want to point out is bamboo grows not only
09:24:49 vertically but grows horizontally, so what you are going to
09:24:53 have is basically a 15-foot high and 15-foot wide hedge that
09:24:58 runs along the entire back of the property.
09:24:59 And again the purpose of that is to mitigate for any
09:25:06 potential site or sound impact to the property.
09:25:09 The other thing that's really significant to point out, and
09:25:11 that is the increase in the distance that we have presented
09:25:15 to the menu board, and to the actual drive-through window
09:25:21 itself.
09:25:22 Those are topples be 50-foot away.
09:25:26 This is the 50-foot line.
09:25:29 This is the 50-foot line right here.
09:25:33 The order board is 130 feet away.
09:25:36 That's two and a half times the distance required.
09:25:39 The drive-through window itself where you pick up the food
09:25:41 is 230 feet away.
09:25:43 That's four New Hampshire times the required distance from
09:25:45 the residentially zoned property.
09:25:47 We think those go a long way to mitigating for any impact
09:25:52 that the reduction to the buffer might have on the adjacent
09:25:55 residential area.
09:25:57 I know we have a couple residents here, most important of
09:26:02 which is Mr. Sheridan.
09:26:06 He has been very willing to sit down and work with us and I
09:26:09 know that he has some special requests of you.
09:26:11 And I will let him make his own presentation.
09:26:14 At this point I would like to call on Jane Calavera, our
09:26:19 transportation engineer.
09:26:20 She's the one that conducted the queue study.
09:26:22 And I want her to just explain to you why we were required
09:26:26 to have a longer-than-normal queue Lane.
09:26:32 Jane.
09:26:32 >> Thank you.
09:26:38 For the record, Jane Calavera, a professional traffic
09:26:42 engineer, 25 years of experience, and I have been sworn.
09:26:46 Within a question by the FDOT personnel, the city and the
09:26:52 review meeting that they one like some validation of what
09:26:57 type of queuing goes on in a coffee shop with the
09:27:01 condition, the queuing requirement of the city we clearly
09:27:03 can meet but they wanted to go out and actually do some
09:27:06 field verification to make sure what the city's requirement
09:27:09 are will be adequate.
09:27:10 So just so you understand what we did is we went to two very
09:27:14 similar sites, one on West Kennedy Boulevard, a free
09:27:17 standing Starbuck's, and the other one on North Dale Mabry,
09:27:21 a free standing Starbuck's.
09:27:22 We were out there over the course of four mornings from
09:27:25 7 a.m. to 11 a.m. to monitor the queue.
09:27:29 So the information that you are seeing on our queue exhibit
09:27:32 which is part 6 B of the handout reflects actual measured
09:27:38 data over four days over four-hour period.
09:27:42 So 16 hours worth of data.
09:27:44 And what we found at the site, the cue experienced from
09:27:51 where the menu board begins to where the queue would send
09:27:54 end, was ten vehicles.
09:27:56 And that was the max.
09:27:57 And that probably occurred twice over the four-hour period.
09:28:01 The average was 3.7 or you could say four vehicles.
09:28:05 So the planning that you see on this site for alternative
09:28:10 one shows that we can start at the menu board, if we can go
09:28:14 to the -- when you start at the menu board here, you can go
09:28:18 all the way around and get your ten cars to that point, and
09:28:21 you wouldn't have any interference with your traffic
09:28:24 circulation or your pedestrian on-site.
09:28:28 So for that reason I think alternative one is the best plan
09:28:31 to accommodate a max queuing position.
09:28:35 Alternative 2001 Also accommodate ten cars in the --
09:28:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Could I interrupt you for a second? Do you
09:28:42 want her to finish first? I apologize.
09:28:45 Continue.
09:28:45 >> Alternative could two can also accommodate ten cars but
09:28:50 the last five cars would be in the edge of the parking field
09:28:54 on the south end and could have been some competing for the
09:28:58 parking spacings.
09:29:00 Other than that I am here for questions.
09:29:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mrs. Montelione.
09:29:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
09:29:05 Mrs. Calavera, when you say maximum of ten and then the
09:29:09 average worked out to 3.7 or 4, that was the location on
09:29:13 West Kennedy Boulevard.
09:29:14 >> Actually, I think that was the North Dale Mabry location.
09:29:19 >> The North Dale Mabry location is the second one?
09:29:23 And that's the total vehicle max is 13.
09:29:26 >> Well, we are looking at the columns.
09:29:30 Those are the totals when you add the 2001 together.
09:29:33 But they don't occur at the same time.
09:29:36 We probably shouldn't have those added.
09:29:38 It should really be the max that occurred at any one time.
09:29:41 >>LISA MONTELIONE: It says from pickup window to menu
09:29:44 board, 3.3.
09:29:48 I'm sorry, it's 5.
09:29:50 It's the maximum.
09:29:51 And from the menu board to the end of the queue is 9.
09:29:55 So what you are saying is --
09:29:58 >> That's correct.
09:30:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That's the whole line.
09:30:01 So really from the pick up window to the menu board is being
09:30:06 counted twice, if you add them together.
09:30:08 >> It's 6 to 7.
09:30:11 Which store are you talking about?
09:30:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Kennedy and Dale Mabry.
09:30:17 >> >>GINA GRIMES: It's 6 or 7 in the queue average, 13 to
09:30:19 14, then it goes into being queue max.
09:30:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm seeing 5 and 9, total vehicles 13.
09:30:26 >> Okay.
09:30:27 >> That was on Tuesday.
09:30:29 You are correct.
09:30:29 And then the second day we did it was Wednesday.
09:30:32 And you will see a 5 and a 10.
09:30:34 And that's the information.
09:30:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE: But we are looking at 14, which is a lot
09:30:44 higher.
09:30:45 >> 14 would reflect the total of both of those, which
09:30:49 occurred -- I have to have go back and find that one hour.
09:30:55 But even 14 can be accommodated.
09:30:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE: All right.
09:31:05 A little confusing.
09:31:08 >>GINA GRIMES: Is your competent whether or not the two
09:31:11 lanes is sufficient?
09:31:12 >> Yes.
09:31:13 >> For both scenarios is more than sufficient.
09:31:17 One more than what was the max on North Dale Mabry.
09:31:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
09:31:23 Nothing else.
09:31:27 >>GINA GRIMES: The other presenter that we have this evening
09:31:28 is Jay Miller who is president of J.square and he wants to
09:31:34 address you regarding the neighborhood outreach that he
09:31:36 undertook.
09:31:37 >> My name is Jay Miller, president of J. Square Developers,
09:31:45 and I have been sworn in.
09:31:47 I'm pleased to be here before you tonight.
09:31:50 As you know, we are here tonight to obtain approval for
09:31:53 redevelopment of a 1950s ERA strip center on south Dale
09:31:58 Mabry with a new Starbuck's coffee shop, and drive-through
09:32:03 window.
09:32:04 As a developer, I have learned a long time ago that when
09:32:07 introducing change to a neighborhood it's important to be a
09:32:09 good neighbor and to address the concerns created by that
09:32:13 change.
09:32:15 My written remarks here have an example of how it's the
09:32:18 tradition of our company to reach out to our neighbors and
09:32:22 to work collaboratively with them, to come up with plans
09:32:27 that work for everybody.
09:32:29 And it's been a long night and I think I am going to spare
09:32:32 you the details.
09:32:35 I do want you to know that we have taken the same approach
09:32:38 with this small Starbuck's project, which is try to be a
09:32:42 good neighbor and to be address concerns created for our
09:32:45 neighbors both commercial and residential.
09:32:48 We started by working with the city to save and protect a
09:32:52 grand oak in the rear parking area.
09:32:55 Not the only tree on this property that you saw on the
09:32:58 images, there are several other large oak trees that are
09:33:01 right along that wall.
09:33:02 This tree is further into the site.
09:33:06 Saving the tree materially reduces the area available to us
09:33:09 for parking and for circulation.
09:33:13 We also presented an alternative plan if the city determined
09:33:18 it's more important to keep Tampa drive open through Lane a
09:33:21 minimum of 50 feet from Tampa abutting residential property
09:33:24 in the back.
09:33:26 We also located the drive-through window as Gina told you
09:33:29 and the order box closer to Dale Mabry.
09:33:32 230 feet and 130 feet respectively from that rear property
09:33:36 line.
09:33:39 I reached out very early to the most affected neighbors,
09:33:44 Mr. and Mrs. Sheridan, who are here tonight, and we have
09:33:47 met twice to talk about what we proposed to do and how we do
09:33:53 mitigate any potential negative impacts on them.
09:33:57 As a result of --
09:33:58 (Bell sounds)
09:34:01 Okay.
09:34:02 As a result of those meetings we agreed tore do two things.
09:34:04 First of all to use low baller lighting along the drive
09:34:08 through Lane rather than traditional parking lot lights so
09:34:13 they shouldn't see the lights.
09:34:15 And second to plant to hedges, one on our property side as
09:34:17 Gina showed you and the other on their side. So we have
09:34:20 offered to plant either bamboo or palm on their side of the
09:34:23 wall as well to screen any view that they would have.
09:34:27 (Bell sounds)
09:34:29 And I'm finished?
09:34:30 I guess I'm going to have to stop.
09:34:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Well, we appreciate it.
09:34:34 Okay.
09:34:37 Any questions of council right now of the petitioner?
09:34:41 Okay.
09:34:43 If there's anyone in the public that would like to speak at
09:34:45 this time on item number 8, REZ 16-60, please come up, state
09:34:50 your name and address, please.
09:35:10 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Mr. Sheridan has a petition from the golf
09:35:13 view civic and garden association that I will enter into the
09:35:16 record.
09:35:16 As well as minutes which I will let Mr. Shelby discuss.
09:35:23 >> All right.
09:35:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you are here please acknowledge your
09:35:35 presence Mr. Steadman.
09:35:36 Thank you.
09:35:37 Bryan Gillet.
09:35:38 Thank you.
09:35:39 And Linda Sheridan.
09:35:41 Three additional minutes for a total of six, please.
09:35:43 >> Go ahead.
09:35:50 >> My name is Tom Sheridan, 3708 Palma Ceia court here in
09:35:54 Tampa.
09:35:55 I own one of the houses that adjacent to the wall that will
09:35:58 be backing up onto Starbuck's.
09:36:01 First of all, I will concede what Jay Miller was saying.
09:36:05 They have been very helpful.
09:36:06 They have met with us.
09:36:07 They have acceded to various requests to be try to mitigate
09:36:12 anytime impact on the residential area.
09:36:14 However, I feel like a sandbag, twice, once by J.middler and
09:36:20 once by the city.
09:36:22 Jay Miller never mentioned about the objections that the
09:36:25 first gentleman raised wherein about the 50-foot setback
09:36:30 from residential property.
09:36:31 So I up in about the grand oak tree.
09:36:34 And as the first gentleman, I strongly support, strongly
09:36:38 support what his recommendation was for option number 3.
09:36:42 No one -- the attorney casually put that aside and said,
09:36:47 well, let's just deal with one and two.
09:36:51 As well as I'm hearing here that development, development,
09:36:54 development.
09:36:57 The needs of the residents of this city have to come into
09:37:00 consideration.
09:37:02 The city in its codes has a 50-foot distance requirement,
09:37:08 and that was, oh, just wait, it doesn't mean anything,
09:37:13 because we are going to have just what the city needed,
09:37:15 another Starbuck's.
09:37:20 Why do you need another Starbuck's?
09:37:22 You can't go a half mile in this city without finding a
09:37:26 Starbuck's.
09:37:30 I don't know if anyone has even looked at the impact that
09:37:34 this will have on the traffic in the area.
09:37:38 This is something to consider.
09:37:42 Franklin.
09:37:43 SoHo.
09:37:44 Neptune.
09:37:46 And I don't even want to consider Dale Mabry, as people
09:37:50 change their commuting habits, to stop by Starbuck's.
09:37:54 Now, Starbuck's will tell you, AH, we don't do any business
09:37:58 from 5:00 in the morning till, you know, when they want to
09:38:03 open.
09:38:05 Until whenever they want to close.
09:38:07 Maybe it's a 24 hour drive through.
09:38:09 Maybe it's a 24 hour restaurant at some point in time.
09:38:12 Never say never.
09:38:15 Because things happen in stages.
09:38:18 But when the people will be coming back and they will be
09:38:21 driving around, think of Dale Mabry.
09:38:24 People are trying to make a left-hand turn into the
09:38:27 Starbuck's.
09:38:29 Think of the traffic that is normally there.
09:38:31 Now you have got people trying to get out and everyone in a
09:38:34 rush to get to work.
09:38:35 Boom.
09:38:36 And then what is the impact of that going to be in your
09:38:40 area?
09:38:40 Now, they are looking to put a drive-through in whichever
09:38:45 option that they talk about.
09:38:47 Whether hits one, two, or what we recommend more like to
09:38:50 see, three.
09:38:52 What about the impact on the homes? Now they are saying we
09:38:56 want to open at 5 a.m. and we will stay open until -- could
09:39:00 be midnight.
09:39:01 You know what?
09:39:02 We are requesting that the hours be limited, that no earlier
09:39:09 they can -- not the restaurant.
09:39:11 The restaurant they can do.
09:39:12 The drive-through no earlier than 7 a.m., and no later than
09:39:17 10 a.m -- 10 p.m., excuse me, seven days a week.
09:39:22 We think the people who signed the petition, other people in
09:39:26 the area, the golf view Civic Association, that this
09:39:31 represents a reasonable compromise on the time for the
09:39:36 drive-through.
09:39:38 This will satisfy -- should satisfy their needs.
09:39:41 We won't have that noise.
09:39:43 I took the liberty, regardless of what the transportation
09:39:46 person said, as somebody up here said, I can pay somebody to
09:39:50 get me any result I want.
09:39:53 I took the liberty of going down to the store on Gandy
09:39:57 Boulevard in the Publix shopping center about a few days
09:40:01 ago, and about 6:15 in the morning.
09:40:05 They were backed up.
09:40:08 And there were several horn beeps because everyone is
09:40:11 impatient, they have got to get to work, or something like
09:40:14 that, they have got to get down there, and so the person in
09:40:17 front of you or two or three cars is not fast enough, they
09:40:20 hit the horn, and let's get going.
09:40:23 So we would think it is abutting.
09:40:28 Most of their other stores they've seen are really in
09:40:31 commercial areas.
09:40:31 They are really in commercial areas.
09:40:33 Now, they changed their look and they are actually going to
09:40:36 be abutting a residential area.
09:40:39 As the people and N that residential area need to be
09:40:42 respected.
09:40:44 And what's his name?
09:40:53 When I look online to the missions statement of Starbuck's,
09:41:00 it says, our mission is to inspire and nurture.
09:41:04 Nurture.
09:41:05 The human spirit, one neighborhood at a time.
09:41:09 This is not nurturing us when you are going to have
09:41:12 drive-throughs on a block that's a quiet cul-de-sac with
09:41:16 families running from young to old, with young kids, infants
09:41:20 trying to sleep, and you are going to have people coming
09:41:23 through at 12:00, maybe later.
09:41:25 You know, beeping their horn.
09:41:27 Additionally, they also say in that statement, we make sure
09:41:31 everything we do is through the lens of humanity from the
09:41:36 way we engage with our customers and community to do
09:41:40 business responsibly.
09:41:43 That's all we are asking for.
09:41:44 Being responsible, and let's look at option number three.
09:41:48 But if we are not going to have that or even if we do, limit
09:41:51 the hours.
09:41:52 Howard Shultz, CEO, in his book, how Starbuck's --
09:41:59 (Bell sounds)
09:41:59 They talk about balancing profit with social responsibility,
09:42:03 footprints supporting and enhancing the community that they
09:42:05 serve.
09:42:08 Let's support and enhance.
09:42:10 Thank you.
09:42:10 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
09:42:11 I appreciate it.
09:42:12 Is there anyone else in the public that is not part Mr.
09:42:17 Sheridan's presentation that gave up time that wants to
09:42:20 speak at this time? Anyone in the public that would like to
09:42:22 speak at this time that has not given up time? If you
09:42:27 haven't given up your time to Mr. Sheridan and you want to
09:42:30 speak, you may.
09:42:31 If you gave up time to Mr. Sheridan, you cannot speak.
09:42:35 No, there's somebody behind you, that's all.
09:42:37 I just want to make sure.
09:42:39 Noon one else from the public would like to speak at this
09:42:41 time, correct?
09:42:42 Okay.
09:42:42 Rebuttal from the petitioner.
09:42:45 Go ahead.
09:42:46 Before you start the time, Mr. Cohen.
09:42:48 >>HARRY COHEN: I would like to answer Mr. Sheridan's
09:42:52 question.
09:42:52 No, I am going to ask your question of Mrs. Grimes.
09:42:55 And that is, why was option three not something that you
09:42:58 were able to consider?
09:43:01 And my understanding of option three, to be clear, is that
09:43:04 it would be a little bit of a smaller queue, it would
09:43:06 preserve the tree, and the queue would come on the Dale
09:43:09 Mabry side of the tree.
09:43:13 >>GINA GRIMES: The queue would be on the Dale Mabry side.
09:43:15 Let me put option 2 up there so we can all be looking at
09:43:19 what happens if we save the tree.
09:43:20 That's your question, right?
09:43:22 >>HARRY COHEN: No.
09:43:23 My question is about option three.
09:43:25 And what I understood option three to be would save the tree
09:43:29 but have the drive-aisle be up close on the building side of
09:43:35 the tree rather than -- is that option three?
09:43:38 >> That's option two.
09:43:42 It's option two.
09:43:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Sheridan, let her talk now.
09:43:47 >>GINA GRIMES: Let me answer your question directly, and
09:43:49 that is we considered whether or not to ask for a reduction
09:43:52 to the number of requested parking spaces.
09:43:53 If of we asked for a reduction of more than three, which
09:43:56 would be -- if we asked for reduction of more than three
09:44:00 spaces, transportation would be here objecting.
09:44:02 Okay? That's number one.
09:44:04 So again, that's one of the competing factors.
09:44:07 Also, just reducing it to the 10% or three wouldn't really
09:44:13 save us any kind of queue Lane in and around this area here.
09:44:19 It was -- it wouldn't benefit us at all.
09:44:22 We wouldn't be able to -- if we just reduced it by three we
09:44:26 wouldn't be able to save the tree and provide than the 50
09:44:28 feet.
09:44:29 But one of the most important reasons that we couldn't
09:44:32 reduce the queue Lane, in addition to not wanting it to
09:44:35 spill over on adjacent commercial property, including the
09:44:38 strip center that's right next door, is that Starbuck's has
09:44:41 their own standards, just like the city has their standards,
09:44:45 for how many parking spacings they have to have for each
09:44:48 store.
09:44:48 And we didn't think that a reduction to the parking for the
09:44:54 Starbuck's would go over very well.
09:44:56 So it was a judgment call while we were weighing all these
09:44:59 factors.
09:45:00 >>HARRY COHEN: So the issue really wasn't that you needed
09:45:02 the queue line to be so long, it war more that you needed
09:45:05 the parking spaces it on the inside of the cue.
09:45:11 >> Can I?
09:45:12 Jay Miller.
09:45:13 So option three that was suggested to us early on would have
09:45:18 eliminated this area -- I'm sorry about that -- would have
09:45:24 eliminated this portion of the drive-through Lane and would
09:45:26 have made this the drive-through Lane.
09:45:30 And we would have had to move the dumpster over here.
09:45:34 So the reason that this doesn't work is because you would
09:45:37 have ended up with only about four cars from the order board
09:45:42 before the line -- before the queuing line turned here and
09:45:46 started to block parking space.
09:45:49 So not only would we not have met the code, to the number of
09:45:54 parking spaces, we would have ended up with 22, and it
09:46:00 required 25.
09:46:00 But we only would have had the queuing capacity for about 5
09:46:04 cars before started bottlenecking the parking locality by
09:46:10 queuing in front of parking spaces.
09:46:13 Starbuck's has a lot of experience here in this market.
09:46:18 They have got other stores that have similar conditions and
09:46:23 they basically said to us it doesn't work.
09:46:25 So it would have created tremendous bottleneck in the
09:46:28 parking lot, and the backup, we wouldn't have had the
09:46:31 queuing capacity for the parking spaces, and essentially we
09:46:34 wouldn't have been able to meet code for parking.
09:46:37 It just didn't work.
09:46:38 >>HARRY COHEN: When I saw some of the pictures that you
09:46:40 showed about the way the property is being used now, it
09:46:44 looked as though people were parking along the back wall.
09:46:48 That the back wall has a strip of parking.
09:46:50 Correct?
09:46:51 Why couldn't you still have that if the queue line moved
09:46:54 out?
09:46:55 >> That is option number two.
09:46:57 What we did is instead of putting the queuing Lane back we
09:47:03 put parking which doesn't require the 50-foot setback.
09:47:08 >> But you also removed the tree under option two.
09:47:10 >> Well, there is not enough room to get a -- right now,
09:47:16 people maneuver as they are driving over the roots of the
09:47:18 tree.
09:47:20 If we were to build new parking back there, we still have to
09:47:24 be respect the 15-foot landscape buffer, and there is not
09:47:27 enough room for a parking space, and code compliant drive
09:47:32 aisle before we get to the tree.
09:47:35 >>HARRY COHEN: Excuse me, let me -- it does look to me like
09:47:44 if you had parking along the back wall, the tree would have
09:47:47 to come out.
09:47:50 You can't have both.
09:47:52 Is that right?
09:47:54 >>GINA GRIMES: It's not just that H.at this time 50-foot
09:47:56 setback.
09:47:57 If you are going -- if your option two provides the 50-foot
09:48:01 setback.
09:48:02 >> Option two has parking back there which requires a
09:48:05 15-foot buffer.
09:48:08 >>GINA GRIMES: Right.
09:48:08 >> You still have the 15-foot landscape buffer and the area
09:48:14 between that and the tree, the natural resources department
09:48:18 in order to protect the tree requires a radius from that
09:48:20 tree before you can have any pavement, even though it's not
09:48:23 there now, so by the time you subtract that radius --
09:48:27 >>HARRY COHEN: So the short answer to be my equip is you
09:48:30 can't have the parking in the rear.
09:48:31 >> You can't have been the parking.
09:48:33 So that's why we presented option two.
09:48:36 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you.
09:48:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions from council at this
09:48:39 time?
09:48:41 Okay.
09:48:42 Before you start your rebuttal, I want to make sure that we
09:48:46 didn't have any other questions.
09:48:47 If you are ready to start your rebuttal you are going to
09:48:50 start taming you now.
09:48:52 So he will ask you a question and.
09:48:56 >>HARRY COHEN: My assumption is that Starbuck's hours are
09:48:59 consistent throughout the chain.
09:49:00 Is that correct?
09:49:01 >> They are consistent throughout the chain.
09:49:05 They are an early morning business.
09:49:07 They are peak hours are from 7:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.
09:49:11 >> Do the hours ever deviate?
09:49:14 >> There are some stores that deviate a little bit.
09:49:16 For example the one at Azeele and Dale Mabry closes at 10.
09:49:20 Most stores close at 11.
09:49:22 So in limitation they deviate.
09:49:26 But that's something they decide based on their business.
09:49:29 >>HARRY COHEN: Is your answer yes or no?
09:49:34 >> Yes.
09:49:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ: If there's no other questions, I have a
09:49:37 question before you do your rebuttal, ma'am.
09:49:40 We made a comment about scenario three and it being -- would
09:49:45 have the queue in front of parking spaces.
09:49:48 And I think you had made a comment that this doesn't work.
09:49:57 Is it a contractual requirement for the franchisee that it
09:50:01 has to not block queuing, or is it just as a business
09:50:06 practice you probably should do it.
09:50:08 So which is it?
09:50:09 >> Believe me, we have presented option number three to
09:50:13 Starbuck's, and under no uncertain conditions their response
09:50:19 was we cannot move forward with the location.
09:50:22 >> Okay, you can't move forward with the location if there
09:50:24 is any possibility of queuing in front of parking spaces.
09:50:27 >> Right.
09:50:28 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That are used as part of your franchise
09:50:31 agreement with them.
09:50:31 >> They want to make sure that the parking lot functions,
09:50:35 that the doesn't block traffic, and from experience in other
09:50:39 indications, and they said five is not enough.
09:50:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I wanted to make sure because you said they
09:50:48 suggest.
09:50:48 I wasn't sure if it was a suggestion or a contractual issue.
09:50:52 Because with some of these franchise agreements, they are
09:50:55 very strict, he special reply Starbuck's, they are a company
09:50:58 that does not deviate very much from their way of doing
09:51:02 business.
09:51:02 And I wasn't sure if you can't move forward as a Starbuck's
09:51:05 unless you get that particular thing.
09:51:06 Franchises are different, as you know, in different
09:51:09 contractual things.
09:51:10 In addition to that, the option number three presented and
09:51:14 it sounded to me based on what you all have been saying, it
09:51:17 presented a lot more sticking points from not only our land
09:51:24 use code but also from Starbuck's.
09:51:26 So the only two were the ones that could fit all the
09:51:33 conditions were one of those two.
09:51:35 And then based on what staff said, staff made the
09:51:39 recommendation that number one was the best recommendation.
09:51:42 And then we of course have to make that decision.
09:51:45 So before you go, Mrs. Grahams, is there any other questions
09:51:48 before she does her rebuttal?
09:51:51 You have a question, Mrs. Montelione?
09:51:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I was going to ask Mr. Hay, scenario
09:51:57 number three was something he talked about.
09:52:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes, did he.
09:52:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Can you run us through your reasoning
09:52:05 for --
09:52:08 >>DAVID HAY: Scenario three was the discussion at the
09:52:10 Planning Commission.
09:52:11 It was not ever submitted for review.
09:52:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Rate.
09:52:14 Understood.
09:52:14 >> Or presented --
09:52:21 >> Well --
09:52:29 >> When we moat with DRC, and tiff DRC comments if you would
09:52:35 like to review them, we said to them, there's a concern
09:52:37 about neighborhood protections, and our policies that lead
09:52:41 to the protecting of our residential neighborhood.
09:52:44 That was given to her at the hearing.
09:52:47 Also, we had mentioned in our DRC comments about the section
09:52:54 of the tree.
09:52:55 Whale staff reviewed and now that we are provided with two
09:53:00 options of really the same development, which is kind of
09:53:02 rare -- I don't think that usually occurs.
09:53:05 Usually you have option one for one type of development and
09:53:08 another.
09:53:08 But it was a little -- the Planning Commission staff had to
09:53:13 look at these two individually.
09:53:15 So when we got as a group, we looked, and when staff
09:53:20 discussed related to the policy, we looked at option two.
09:53:34 Here is their option two as submitted built applicant.
09:53:37 We looked at -- because of our neighborhood protection
09:53:40 policies, the waiving of parking in this area to create this
09:53:47 queue that they say meets their standards.
09:53:52 If they say standard two meets it, that's why they submitted
09:53:55 it.
09:53:56 But it doesn't meet parking.
09:53:57 And there is policy language in the comp plan about, you
09:54:00 know, the reduction of parking is encouraged when you are
09:54:03 protecting a tree.
09:54:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: But then it doesn't preserve the tree.
09:54:08 >> If you remove this parking area right here, the tree
09:54:15 would be saved.
09:54:16 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, I'm thinking just from
09:54:18 experience -- and Mary is here to address that -- the queue
09:54:22 would be too close to the tree.
09:54:26 The protective radius of the tree wouldn't allow the queue
09:54:28 to be where it's located.
09:54:29 >> Mary Daniels, Natural resources, and I have been sworn.
09:54:37 Basically what is exiting in this area right now is broken
09:54:40 asphalt.
09:54:45 So this would work fine.
09:54:47 We would probably require maybe feeders, you know, something
09:54:53 along that line to be utilized, possibly a combination of
09:54:58 pervious material.
09:55:00 But we did look at that and we thought --
09:55:04 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So they could have the queue there and
09:55:06 save the tree?
09:55:10 >> I believe so.
09:55:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: But without the parking.
09:55:12 >> If they lost the parking, correct.
09:55:14 >> And how many parking spaces would they lose?
09:55:18 One, two, three --
09:55:27 I mean, would all nine have to go?
09:55:30 I mean, the three that -- those look like they could
09:55:35 probably stay.
09:55:35 >> Yes.
09:55:44 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm counting six.
09:55:50 Six would go.
09:55:51 Three would stay.
09:55:56 So how many would that -- Mrs. Samaniego, it's not that we
09:56:01 don't have enough people standing at the podium.
09:56:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I would suggest people sit down and relax
09:56:09 except anyone we are talking to at any one time.
09:56:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: What would that do to the parking
09:56:15 requirements?
09:56:15 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: They record 25 parking spaces.
09:56:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And if they went with option three, the
09:56:31 parking that is shown really on two with the tree removed,
09:56:39 they would maybe be able to tan three, lose six?
09:56:44 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Right.
09:56:45 21.
09:56:47 >>LISA MONTELIONE: 121.
09:56:48 >> Four short.
09:56:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So they would have Tom ask him for the
09:56:53 PD, it would be a waiver for four parking spaces.
09:56:58 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Correct.
09:57:00 Provided that three retained meet code.
09:57:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So they are shown there now.
09:57:06 So I don't see why they would --
09:57:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Could you move it up, please?
09:57:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: They keep sliding down.
09:57:16 There we go.
09:57:20 No.
09:57:20 You slid down again.
09:57:22 We can't see you.
09:57:23 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: So here is the tree.
09:57:25 The tree requires a 20-foot protective radius.
09:57:29 So from here to here is 24 feet.
09:57:33 Which I don't have a scale.
09:57:35 But roughly here.
09:57:38 So the protective radius would be something in the
09:57:40 neighborhood of this.
09:57:42 And I can't say right now if this would meat code.
09:57:48 >> It's possible?
09:57:49 >> Right.
09:57:56 These six would be gone.
09:57:57 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I don't know.
09:58:02 It may be possible to reconfigure that.
09:58:05 I'm just saying.
09:58:08 So that it would be three or four.
09:58:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I am get it.
09:58:34 Thank you.
09:58:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any more questions of petitioner or staff?
09:58:40 Okay.
09:58:43 Are you coming back up?
09:58:44 You can continue your rebuttal.
09:58:49 She didn't ask you a question.
09:58:51 I want to make sure you preserve your time.
09:58:54 And if you want to keep asking questions, I will put you on
09:58:56 the clock but she didn't ask you a question.
09:58:59 That's why.
09:58:59 So if you are ready to continue your rebuttal, Mrs. Grimes.
09:59:05 >>GINA GRIMES: Hill, Ward, Henderson representing the
09:59:10 petitioner.
09:59:12 Let me begin by saying if we could save the tree and provide
09:59:15 50-foot we would have done that.
09:59:17 If there was any way to Don that.
09:59:19 Why would we present option two but not option three?
09:59:22 We have no incentive to not present you that option.
09:59:24 The only reason that we -- the only remaining reason if you
09:59:28 assume that this plan that David concocted works, Starbuck's
09:59:36 has already reject it.
09:59:37 We have tried.
09:59:38 We wouldn't even be before you today if we didn't have to
09:59:41 have a waiver of some of these requirements.
09:59:45 And nobody wants to come before you and ask for a waiver.
09:59:50 If we could meet the 50-foot setback and save the tree, we
09:59:54 wouldn't have to come before you.
09:59:56 And I would like to address a couple of Mr. Sheridan's
09:59:59 comments real quick.
10:00:00 I know he said he felt like he was blind-sided by the
10:00:05 objections he heard from the Planning Commission.
10:00:08 That he wasn't aware of that.
10:00:09 Let me tell you nobody was more blind-sided by that than I
10:00:13 was.
10:00:14 I have worked with planning complication for a long time,
10:00:16 and I have had other cases Mace where we waived the 50-foot
10:00:20 setback from residential for a Burger King right up the
10:00:23 street.
10:00:23 No comment from the Planning Commission.
10:00:25 I have been involved in cases where we removed grand trees.
10:00:28 That's the first proposal, proposed to remove two hazardous
10:00:33 and one nonhazardous grant tree.
10:00:37 Not a word about the tree from the Planning Commission.
10:00:39 Secondly, in this one they find this is not consistent.
10:00:43 The traffic study, he asked Mr. Sheridan asked the question
10:00:47 why a traffic study wasn't done.
10:00:49 Because this is a decrease in intensity as far as what is
10:00:54 existing there now and no traffic study was required to be
10:00:56 done.
10:00:57 The other thing I point out is there's parking and traffic
10:00:59 along that wall rate now with no neighborhood protection.
10:01:02 Remember, we are willing to put in a 15-foot wide and
10:01:06 15-foot high buffer that will -- bamboo that will completely
10:01:10 shield that from any kind of light spillover onto his
10:01:13 property.
10:01:14 There are people driving up and down that easement right now
10:01:18 at 4:00 to 5:00 in the morning because they are employees of
10:01:24 Lykes.
10:01:24 And then the other thing keep in mind the CG zoning on the
10:01:28 site right now allows a variety of uses that have a lot more
10:01:32 impact to residential than this would have.
10:01:35 I'll let Jay -- I know he wants to address you regarding the
10:01:38 parking issue.
10:01:39 >> The elimination of the four or five parking spaces would
10:01:45 take us down to 21 to 22 so not only would we not meet the
10:01:51 code which requires 25 but Starbuck's made it very clear
10:01:54 that they would deny us in this location if they are under
10:02:00 par.
10:02:00 It's just not an option.
10:02:03 If the primary concern is the proximity to the residents
10:02:07 behind, I would encourage you to take a serious look at the
10:02:10 option two which is why we presented it.
10:02:12 And I want to point out to you -- and I know how important
10:02:15 it is, and how much an integral part of the City of Tampa's
10:02:20 policies to preserve grand oaks. This tree three or four
10:02:25 years ago probably wouldn't have been a grand oak.
10:02:28 There's a very substantial tree canopy in the back of this
10:02:31 property.
10:02:32 This is not the only tree.
10:02:33 There are three or four, I think, if you saw, if you
10:02:37 remember correctly, the wall, I am going to show you the
10:02:41 images that are in here.
10:02:44 That wall and the other trees.
10:02:47 The whole wall is lined with very sizable oak trees.
10:02:51 So if we took this one out, there's still going to be a very
10:02:55 substantial buffer, a visual buffer, at the wall.
10:02:59 Here.
10:03:05 The whole length of the wall is like this.
10:03:07 And these are not the grand trees.
10:03:14 There is a canopy along this wall.
10:03:16 So if we take this tree out, we would be obligated to
10:03:20 plant -- how many?
10:03:24 We would be obligated to plant four or five larger than
10:03:27 normal new oak trees that would grow in this parking area.
10:03:33 We would also plant the bamboo hedge.
10:03:35 There would still be a very, very substantial tree canopy.
10:03:39 (Bell sounds).
10:03:46 >>GINA GRIMES: I just want to close by saying we have
10:03:48 narrowed it down to two waivers.
10:03:50 One for the sign.
10:03:51 The one that we presented within the two options would
10:03:54 either be tree removal or reduction to the 50-foot setback.
10:03:59 We all think option one, to preserve the tree, is the best
10:04:03 option.
10:04:03 The bamboo screen and the existing tree cannon I would more
10:04:08 than mitigate for any spillover as a result of that
10:04:11 reduction in the setback.
10:04:13 And with that we would request your approval of this
10:04:17 application.
10:04:17 Thank you.
10:04:17 (Bell sounds).
10:04:19 Thank you, Mrs. Grimes.
10:04:20 Any questions or comments by council at this time?
10:04:23 Mr. Cohen.
10:04:23 >>HARRY COHEN: Mrs. Grimes, any comment regarding the
10:04:27 hours?
10:04:28 Did you want to address that at all?
10:04:30 >> As a result of my conversation with the Sheridans, and
10:04:39 their question about whether or not Starbuck's would
10:04:42 consider restricting hours, I didn't did talk to Starbuck's
10:04:48 twice about this and their response was we need to serve our
10:04:50 customers starting early in the morning and unlike with you
10:04:55 and I that would more than likely be there at 8:30 than a
10:04:59 person going to the hospital on their way to share shift at
10:05:02 6 a.m., we do -- the other thing they made very clear to me
10:05:07 is we don't differentiate between the drive-through hours
10:05:10 and the store hours.
10:05:11 So we have uniform hours for the business.
10:05:14 The drive-through is open the same hours.
10:05:16 So I appreciate and understand Mr. Sheridan's suggestion.
10:05:20 But it just -- it's not compatible with the way Starbuck's
10:05:27 does business.
10:05:27 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions?
10:05:33 Just one last question talking about the hours.
10:05:35 What are the hours that you are requesting?
10:05:37 I looked on the site plan.
10:05:38 I did not see them.
10:05:40 It doesn't mean that they weren't there.
10:05:41 I just didn't see them.
10:05:42 What were the hours they are requesting?
10:05:45 >> They may or may not.
10:05:47 5 a.m. to 11 p.m.
10:05:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: 5 a.m. to 11 p.m.
10:05:51 Thank you.
10:05:52 Okay.
10:05:52 Any other questions by council?
10:05:55 Okay.
10:05:55 Thank you very much.
10:05:57 Can I get a motion to close?
10:05:59 >> So moved.
10:06:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion to close by Mr -- Mr.
10:06:02 Sheridan, you cannot speak at this time.
10:06:04 I just want to make sure you know that.
10:06:06 Thank you, sir.
10:06:07 I appreciate it.
10:06:07 Okay.
10:06:08 No, sir.
10:06:09 I didn't -- no, Mr. Sheridan.
10:06:12 Thank you.
10:06:12 Thank you.
10:06:14 Mr. Maniscalco, you have a motion to close.
10:06:16 Who had the second?
10:06:18 We have a second from Mrs. Montelione.
10:06:20 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
10:06:22 Any opposed?
10:06:24 Okay.
10:06:24 What is the pleasure of council?
10:06:29 Anyone want to tap this one?
10:06:34 Somebody has got to say something.
10:06:38 Mr. Miranda?
10:06:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, you got three options.
10:06:44 Lead, follow or get out of the way.
10:06:47 You know, I understand what was presented and I understand
10:06:51 the difficulty of the site.
10:06:53 I understand the neighbors.
10:06:56 I understand O and there is not a correct answer right now.
10:07:10 One says they were blind-sided and the other says she was
10:07:13 blind-sided so everybody was blind-sided.
10:07:15 How do you think we feel?
10:07:19 It's just difficult.
10:07:21 And I just don't know exactly what to do with it right now.
10:07:25 I haven't spoken much.
10:07:27 I have an upset stomach and I have just been listening.
10:07:30 So I just don't know exactly how to tackle this right now.
10:07:34 Starbuck's got their own rules.
10:07:36 The city has got their rules.
10:07:38 And Starbuck's doesn't want to give in.
10:07:40 And it's not the developer, Mr. Miller.
10:07:43 It's whoever Starbuck's.
10:07:47 I have voted against Starbuck's before.
10:07:54 I understand Tampa plea of both sides.
10:07:56 And I want to listen to council discussion whatever they
10:08:01 want to do.
10:08:02 I don't want to make a motion right now one way or the
10:08:05 other.
10:08:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Does anyone want to make a motion for denial
10:08:08 a motion to go forward, a motion for one of the options?
10:08:13 I want to make sure you know, this is not a silent movie.
10:08:17 Someone has to say something.
10:08:18 So I would hope that somebody will come forward and start.
10:08:21 >>HARRY COHEN: I am just going to say, you know,
10:08:29 5:00 in the morning, drive-through, I mean, you are going to
10:08:34 have cars at 5 a.m.
10:08:38 You know, I understand the place has to open early in order
10:08:45 to serve customers that are going early.
10:08:49 But, you know, and people also need to sleep.
10:08:52 And there's got to be a balance.
10:08:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: A neighborhood that I know in parking
10:08:59 garages they can come anytime they want.
10:09:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
10:09:16 Does anyone have any comment?
10:09:17 Anybody want to go forward?
10:09:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm just as conflicted.
10:09:21 I mean, a waiver for any other business of 3 or 4 parking
10:09:30 spaces is not a big deal.
10:09:33 We grant those waivers all the time.
10:09:37 And the idea that it would say that Starbuck's, the
10:09:47 corporate, wouldn't consider it if they were underparked.
10:09:52 Well, I don't -- I don't know if we heard what Starbuck's
10:09:59 concept of underparked is.
10:10:02 I mean, yes, Mrs. Kert is like dying to say something here.
10:10:08 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
10:10:09 I just need to Lee maned council as a land use decision it
10:10:12 doesn't run with the business, it runs with the land.
10:10:14 So you need to concentrate on whether or not the use and the
10:10:17 operation of any of these -- I don't know what it's limited
10:10:22 to in the PD but it's not limited to a Starbuck's.
10:10:24 So you need to look at the uses that are allowed under the
10:10:27 PD, and allowed to operate that would be compatible in the
10:10:31 area, because I'm sure it is planned to be a Starbuck's,
10:10:35 but --
10:10:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE: If it were not a Starbuck's, though, I
10:10:39 mean, the issue, Mrs. Kert, was put to us --
10:10:44 >>REBECCA KERT: I agree there is a lot of testimony about
10:10:47 business.
10:10:47 But when you are making your decision, you all can't base it
10:10:51 upon an theme of Starbuck's because it's not required to be
10:10:53 a Starbuck's.
10:10:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, my decision was to grant them a
10:10:56 waiver for three parking spaces.
10:10:58 And move on.
10:11:00 But that's not what they are asking for.
10:11:01 >>REBECCA KERT: And that's the other thing.
10:11:09 You have two options.
10:11:10 But the third option isn't what is presented to you.
10:11:13 And so the two options are what is presented to you for, I
10:11:17 guess, up or down on one of them.
10:11:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So option two, if you move the queue,
10:11:33 but there would still be parking within proximity to the
10:11:37 adjacent neighborhood to Mr. Sheridan and his neighbors.
10:11:42 And we would be removing the tree.
10:11:44 So, I mean, to me it wouldn't satisfy either, because if the
10:11:55 idea of the protection of the neighborhood is to keep than
10:12:02 the peace, the Kuwait, if you have got people getting in and
10:12:07 out of their cars at 5:00 in the morning, or 6:00 in the
10:12:10 morning, and they are parked right up against your backyard,
10:12:13 you are going to hear that as much as you are going to hear
10:12:15 the cars and the queue.
10:12:17 Or at least that's how I feel.
10:12:19 So I don't think option two makes anybody happy.
10:12:23 It removes the tree and it keeps the cars right up against
10:12:27 that wall.
10:12:29 And with the grand oak, with the canopy, I think it's a
10:12:34 natural sound barrier in addition to the bamboo that's
10:12:37 proposed to be planted, which would be option one.
10:12:44 So since we seem to be in a quandary here, I'll move
10:12:47 approval of option one.
10:12:49 >> I'll second that.
10:12:50 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Because it just seems to me that you
10:12:54 have got a sound barrier.
10:12:58 It preserves the tree.
10:13:00 And we can move forward with option one.
10:13:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
10:13:06 We now have a motion.
10:13:08 From Mrs. Montelione.
10:13:10 And a second from Mr. Maniscalco.
10:13:12 All in favor -- on option one is what she had mentioned.
10:13:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The question is under what process?
10:13:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I have to read number eight.
10:13:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is it the same ordinance title?
10:13:30 Between first and second reading you do the revision sheet
10:13:34 option, and then choose the revision sheet?
10:13:36 >> to reflect option one.
10:13:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Correct.
10:13:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That's solved.
10:13:41 Mrs. Montelione.
10:13:42 There is a second from Mr. Maniscalco.
10:13:45 Much.
10:13:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I have got to read the ordinance.
10:13:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay, I apologize.
10:13:48 I am so confused.
10:13:50 We have gone all over the place here.
10:13:51 Go ahead.
10:13:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I present an ordinance for first reading
10:13:54 consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the general
10:13:56 vicinity of 1300 South Dale Mabry Highway in the city of
10:13:59 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1
10:14:01 from zoning district classifications CG commercial general
10:14:04 to be PD planned development, restaurant with drive-in
10:14:06 window providing an effective date.
10:14:07 With the revision sheet between first and second reading to
10:14:10 reflect option one as provided by the applicant.
10:14:12 >> Second.
10:14:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ: We have a motion from Mrs. Montelione.
10:14:16 We have our second from Mr. Maniscalco.
10:14:18 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying yay.
10:14:21 Opposed?
10:14:22 >>THE CLERK: The motion failed with Miranda, Reddick,
10:14:28 Suarez and Cohen voting no, and Capin being absent at vote.
10:14:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
10:14:38 Now, we need a motion.
10:14:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No.
10:14:44 It failed.
10:14:45 You need a motion to deny.
10:14:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That's where I was going.
10:14:48 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Sorry.
10:14:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Now we need a motion to deny based on the
10:14:54 factors that made you make that decision.
10:14:57 Who is going to take that up?
10:15:00 I don't think that you can speak at this time.
10:15:04 >>GINA GRIMES: Can I ask be a question?
10:15:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I don't know about that legally.
10:15:09 I'm asking something of the legal department.
10:15:12 >>REBECCA KERT: I believe she's asking a process question,
10:15:19 and as long as it's not a substantive thing I don't think it
10:15:22 would be inappropriate.
10:15:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, legal department.
10:15:24 Mrs. Kert.
10:15:25 Mrs. Grimes.
10:15:27 >>GINA GRIMES: Given the vote that just occurred my client
10:15:30 would like the opportunity to gone back to Starbuck's and
10:15:32 ask them, it's not a question of whether we would be willing
10:15:35 to do any of these things.
10:15:36 It's a question of whether they would allow us under the
10:15:39 existing contractual arrange.
10:15:40 We would like to be go back and everyone express how
10:15:44 important this is and come back one more time.
10:15:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Now we need to go back to our lawyer and
10:15:49 find out where are we at in terms of the process at this
10:15:52 point if we allow that?
10:15:55 Or do we even have the power to allow that?
10:15:57 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
10:15:59 Where you are at this exact moment is much the hearing has
10:16:02 closed, and there is no motion on the table because the
10:16:05 previous motion did not get four votes.
10:16:07 Therefore you have a request for a continuance.
10:16:10 You do have the ability to grant that request.
10:16:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So do we have to open up and then go forward
10:16:16 with the continuance and then close again? Not close again
10:16:19 but continue the hearing.
10:16:20 >> Yes, sir.
10:16:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: That is the process.
10:16:24 So we have a motion to open the hearing again from Mrs.
10:16:26 Montelione, a second from Mr. Cohen.
10:16:28 All in favor of that motion?
10:16:30 Any opposed?
10:16:32 Okay.
10:16:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Move to continue Mrs. Grimes, a date for
10:16:38 a continuance?
10:16:40 How long do you think you need?
10:16:42 Grimes not long.
10:16:43 A week.
10:16:44 >>LISA MONTELIONE: A week?
10:16:45 Can we schedule this -- our next evening session of council
10:16:49 is the 21st.
10:16:52 Of September.
10:16:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: If I could make a suggestion.
10:16:55 Let us also -- if we could have it in an evening session
10:16:59 again.
10:17:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: At the budget work shown as a special
10:17:02 call.
10:17:02 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I'm saying if you could find an evening
10:17:05 session.
10:17:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: A regular session?
10:17:08 Yes.
10:17:08 >> The 22nd.
10:17:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: September 22nd at 5:30.
10:17:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Hang on.
10:17:23 Now, I am going to go back.
10:17:26 Before we take the vote, Mr. Sheridan, sit down.
10:17:29 You will probably get some of your answer ifs you sit for a
10:17:32 moment.
10:17:32 Now, legal, considering the number of times that -- not the
10:17:36 number of times but the number of folks that have spoken
10:17:39 already on this issue, now that it's on a continuance, do
10:17:43 those folks get a chance to come back and talk again?
10:17:46 >>REBECCA KERT: If anything has changed yes, they have
10:17:49 ability to speak to the changes.
10:17:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Terrific.
10:17:51 I think that might answer Mr. Sheridan's question because he
10:17:54 gets a chance to talk again about this particular issue.
10:17:57 Okay.
10:17:57 We have a motion on the floor from Mrs. Montelione.
10:18:00 Who was the second?
10:18:02 Mr. Cohen.
10:18:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Question.
10:18:07 On the motion, I am not going to support this motion and I
10:18:09 am going to tell you why.
10:18:13 I think it was stated to us on different occasions, and we
10:18:16 have reached out to Starbuck's, and the policy and
10:18:20 procedures was not allowed, to modify or do anything.
10:18:25 I don't see what the justification is going to be if I heard
10:18:32 three or four times tonight saying each attempt they have
10:18:36 made to talk with Starbuck's, they turn them down.
10:18:40 Now, we are going to give any indication they are -- Mr.
10:18:46 Miller is going back and talk to Starbuck's and they are
10:18:48 going to modify if they get these procedures and protocols
10:18:53 that they are not changing.
10:18:56 It's either going to be their way or no way at all.
10:19:00 He made it known to us tonight, he was very clear in
10:19:03 discussing taint, and so basically what they are doing is
10:19:08 wasting a lot of time here, because giving him additional
10:19:12 time, and if he had not stated that each time he gave his
10:19:17 testimony tonight, I would be supportive of this.
10:19:19 But he stated it.
10:19:21 Each time he opened his mouth about Starbuck's, he stated to
10:19:25 us they would not change.
10:19:28 And when we asked him about the -- Starbuck's said about the
10:19:35 hours, not going to expand the hours.
10:19:39 Everything he tonight was Starbuck's is not going to change.
10:19:43 So give me an indication that we are going back and he goes
10:19:47 back to Starbuck's they are going to change.
10:19:49 If this is standard protocol, for all of the Starbuck's
10:19:53 stores throughout the city.
10:19:57 He made this known.
10:19:58 So it's not nothing new.
10:20:01 You know, we have given time, and if he already made it
10:20:06 known on every attempt he attempted to make with Starbuck's,
10:20:10 and they are refusing to work with him, and about having
10:20:17 this location for this particular store, they have to work,
10:20:21 because he -- we have city policies, they have their
10:20:25 standard policy.
10:20:26 Somebody got to give.
10:20:27 And FM they wanted to work at this location, it just seems
10:20:35 to me that anyone that would be willing to compromise
10:20:39 somewhere.
10:20:41 And I admire you for what you were attempting to do, but it
10:20:46 seems like you are bounded by Starbuck's and their protocol.
10:20:51 And their procedures.
10:20:53 So this is the only reason why I just want to state this is
10:20:56 why I am not going to support it because he made his
10:21:01 position known that you had a difficulty time dealing with
10:21:04 Starbuck's and I don't see what's going to happen in the
10:21:06 next week or two.
10:21:07 So that's my position.
10:21:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Reddick, I appreciate what you had to
10:21:13 say about this.
10:21:14 I think regardless of what happens in the next two weeks,
10:21:17 you still have a losing vote if he comes back with the same
10:21:20 iteration.
10:21:21 So I guess allowing it to go forward is to give them a last
10:21:29 ditch effort, but again, I'm with you in terms of what
10:21:33 probably is going to be said.
10:21:35 I am not with you in terms of not allowing this to go on a
10:21:39 continuance.
10:21:40 We have a motion on the floor.
10:21:42 All in favor of -- oh, Mr --
10:21:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And I appreciate him saying that.
10:21:50 It makes me understand what he said.
10:21:54 That doesn't mean however that when you tell a big
10:21:56 corporation, listen, I don't care who you are, and what you
10:21:59 stand for, and what your hours are, either take it or leave
10:22:02 it.
10:22:03 I don't know what they are going to do.
10:22:06 This time, Mr. Miller, I ain't speaking for Mr. Miller and
10:22:10 J. Square, whatever the company is, J. Square, he's thinking
10:22:16 Tampa City Council, Starbuck's you either want it or you
10:22:19 don't want it.
10:22:20 That's what I think it is.
10:22:21 And I am willing to say listen, I'll listen to it again,
10:22:25 even though my stomach is telling me to get up and go home.
10:22:28 But it is what it is.
10:22:29 And I understand that.
10:22:31 But I appreciate Mr. Reddick standing up as a man.
10:22:36 That's all.
10:22:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any more discussion on the motion itself?
10:22:39 >> (off often).
10:22:50 >> we have or motion on the floor Mr. Crew, tough motion.
10:22:53 Who made it and who the seconder is, right?
10:22:56 >>THE CLERK: Motion by Montelione.
10:22:57 Second by Cohen, to continue the public hearing to September
10:23:01 22nd at 5:30 p.m.
10:23:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ: All in favor of that motion please indicate
10:23:05 by saying aye.
10:23:07 Any opposed?
10:23:08 >>THE CLERK: The motion carried with Reddick voting no and
10:23:13 Capin being absent at vote.
10:23:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you for attending.
10:23:18 Item number 9.
10:23:21 Are you ready to go?
10:23:27 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Item number 10.
10:23:30 Item number 10 and 171 are rezoning requests for properties
10:23:40 on gray, Oregon, and I believe the applicant has something
10:23:42 to request.
10:23:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Can I stop you for a second?
10:23:45 You say it is not number 9?
10:23:48 >> No, sir.
10:23:48 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Oh, that's right.
10:23:49 We did continue it.
10:23:50 I apologize.
10:23:51 I got it right now, too. 10 and 171.
10:23:53 Go ahead.
10:23:54 I apologize.
10:23:54 >> The applicant has a request for 10 and 11.
10:23:58 >> Applicant?
10:24:00 >>MARK BENTLEY: 201 North Franklin Street.
10:24:09 I represent the applicant in connection with item 10 and 11.
10:24:12 And I have been advised by the city attorney that not only
10:24:16 is Mrs. Capin now absent, but Mr. Cohen intends to recuse
10:24:20 himself in connection with these two items.
10:24:23 Is that correct?
10:24:24 >>HARRY COHEN: That is.
10:24:26 And since up asked, the reason is because my father's office
10:24:30 building, which he owns, is located at 1313 Gray Street
10:24:33 which is directly across the street.
10:24:36 >>MARK BENTLEY: I understand.
10:24:37 I just wanted to get that out there.
10:24:39 So in light of that fact and our client's entitlement to due
10:24:44 process, and I know under your rules it's swan
10:24:47 discretionary, it's not mandatory if there is only four, but
10:24:52 we received a lot of letters in support I think over the
10:24:54 last couple of days in connection with this project and I
10:24:57 think no one will be prejudiced by continuing this case for
10:25:00 a couple weeks.
10:25:01 So if you do that and allow us to continue with the
10:25:03 opportunity to come back and participate in the proceedings,
10:25:06 we would appreciate it.
10:25:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mr. Bentley, before we go forward, just for
10:25:10 your information, I will not be in attendance on the 22nd
10:25:15 for the morning meeting.
10:25:17 For both the morning and evening meeting.
10:25:19 I just want you to nobody that.
10:25:21 Hopefully, you will still have six members -- well, Mrs.
10:25:27 Capin should be back, I hope.
10:25:29 Right?
10:25:31 Five.
10:25:32 That's right, five.
10:25:33 >> I ask when are you available, Mr. Suarez?
10:25:39 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You mean like lunch or something?
10:25:42 (Laughter)
10:25:45 I will be back at the next meeting.
10:25:48 That's the only time.
10:25:49 So whatever date that is.
10:25:52 October 13th.
10:25:53 Would you lake to continue till October 13th?
10:25:56 >> Sounds good.
10:25:57 Thank you very much.
10:25:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Condition I get a motion to that effect?
10:25:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
10:26:01 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And that is a morning session, Mr. Cohen, I
10:26:04 think.
10:26:06 An evening meeting.
10:26:06 Is that okay with you?
10:26:08 Okay.
10:26:08 We have it moved -- what is the complication?
10:26:15 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, depending on what happens on
10:26:17 October 22nd, and looking to the future, if it passes on the
10:26:27 22nd, what's the next reading?
10:26:30 The next day reading?
10:26:32 Oh, October 13th.
10:26:34 Okay.
10:26:34 So I think we are okay.
10:26:36 Because my last meeting with council is November 3rd.
10:26:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ: But that still shouldn't have any reflection
10:26:44 on it.
10:26:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE: We have enough people here?
10:26:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.
10:26:47 I think it would be fine.
10:26:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: As long as I have a pledge from everybody
10:26:50 they are going to show up.
10:26:54 There's a pledge on TV, so we'll try to figure it out.
10:26:58 Mr. Reddick, you have the motion?
10:27:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: (Off microphone) Yes.
10:27:01 The motion to continue to October 13th.
10:27:07 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And the second from Mrs. Montelione.
10:27:11 Mr. Reddick.
10:27:13 For both item number 10 and number 11.
10:27:16 Do you have that, clerk?
10:27:17 Motion by Mr. Reddick.
10:27:18 Second from Mrs. Montelione.
10:27:19 >>THE CLERK: For October 13th at 6 p.m.
10:27:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ: All in favor of that motion indicate by
10:27:25 saying aye.
10:27:28 All opposed?
10:27:29 Thank you.
10:27:29 Item number 12.
10:27:30 >>HARRY COHEN: Just so I can make everyone's night more
10:27:37 pleasant, I have to have recuse myself from number 12 and
10:27:40 from item 13.
10:27:43 Item number 12 is because my father is part of the
10:27:49 petitioner group.
10:27:50 Item number 13, I recused myself from the original hearing
10:27:54 on this matter because the applicant is someone I am in a
10:28:01 contractual relationship with.
10:28:03 They are currently building a house for me.
10:28:06 And this is related to the same matter.
10:28:10 It's a follow-up to the same matter that I recused myself
10:28:15 from a couple of months ago.
10:28:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I was going to suggest, are they building a
10:28:22 good house?
10:28:26 >> That is not part of the discussion.
10:28:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I know that.
10:28:30 Mr. Cohen, thank you.
10:28:34 Thank you for attending, Mr. Cohen.
10:28:44 Mrs. Samaniego, go ahead.
10:28:46 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Number 12 is REZ 16-49, a rezoning
10:28:52 request for properties located at 5011, 5013, 5015, 501 and
10:29:01 5021 South MacDill Avenue from CG to planned development for
10:29:10 residential single-family attached.
10:29:11 >>DAVID HAY: Planning Commission staff.
10:29:20 I have been sworn.
10:29:21 We move down to the South Tampa planning district for this
10:29:25 next case.
10:29:28 It is located, the subject site, on South MacDill Avenue.
10:29:32 It is also within the Ballast Point neighborhood.
10:29:38 The closest public recreational facility is Ballast Point
10:29:41 park.
10:29:42 The applicant site is in an area with public transportation,
10:29:48 access to heart's route 4, commonly serves the area, and the
10:29:52 site is located within a level B evacuation zone.
10:29:55 Here we have the aerial, MacDill Avenue here.
10:30:02 We have got single-family detached.
10:30:06 To the left.
10:30:07 And then we have got this portion of South MacDill, there's
10:30:11 a lot of multifamily redevelopment that's occurring over the
10:30:15 past about five, six years.
10:30:18 We have apartments here.
10:30:20 And here are condominiums, MacDill Landings, and then we
10:30:24 get up into the CVS and Walgreen's and bar and grill.
10:30:33 And it's a mixed use corridor for that South Tampa, Ballast
10:30:37 Point neighborhood.
10:30:39 And then on the other side of MacDill, we have got more
10:30:45 of single-family detached.
10:30:49 The future land use map kind of mimics that pattern.
10:30:53 We have got the subject site and all the pink color that
10:30:57 runs up and down MacDill is that community mixed use 35,
10:31:01 and then directly behind it to the west in the tan color is
10:31:05 the residential 10.
10:31:07 The applicant is requesting approval to this petition to
10:31:11 rebuild the .73-acre subject site to this planned
10:31:17 development zoning district to allow construction of 16
10:31:21 single-family attached dwelling units.
10:31:25 There are exhibiting trees on-site, and like we know now,
10:31:29 one of the key provisions of the city's comprehensive plan
10:31:32 is to maximize the retention of trees.
10:31:36 Another significant portion of the comprehensive plan is to
10:31:39 encourage the development or retention of the diversity of
10:31:43 housing types to meet the needs of Tampa's present and
10:31:46 future population, and the applicant plans to construct 16
10:31:52 single-family attached dwelling units on this site.
10:31:55 Overall, the proposed development is comparable and
10:31:57 compatible with the development pattern along South MacDill
10:32:00 Avenue, and Planning Commission staff finds the proposed
10:32:03 rezoning consistent with the provisions of the imagine 2040
10:32:08 Tampa comprehensive plan.
10:32:09 Thank you.
10:32:09 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Land Development Coordination.
10:32:23 This is a planned development for 16 townhomes.
10:32:26 Here is an aerial of the subject property.
10:32:28 Again, it's on MacDill Avenue, bound by on the north
10:32:32 by -- and west price Avenue.
10:32:39 It's currently, I believe, four dwelling units, as viewed by
10:32:52 the pictures.
10:32:54 The subject property is currently zoned CG as well as the
10:32:57 majority of the properties along MacDill Avenue, and
10:33:01 then when you get to the west behind the subject property,
10:33:06 you have residential 16 zoning district.
10:33:14 This is north of the subject property.
10:33:16 The northwest corner.
10:33:17 Paul and MacDill.
10:33:27 North of the site on Paul.
10:33:29 This is adjacent on Paul.
10:33:33 Again, going to the south.
10:33:37 On Price.
10:33:40 Single-family house.
10:33:42 This is the north side of the subject property.
10:33:45 You can see there are dwelling units.
10:33:47 A series of older buildings.
10:33:50 Subject property on MacDill.
10:33:53 Another shot of the subject property from MacDill.
10:33:58 The rear of the subject property.
10:34:01 The buildings.
10:34:02 It's hard to see with the aerial.
10:34:04 Let me straighten it.
10:34:07 But under these trees is the parking, which is shown thusly.
10:34:19 The rear side approaching from price.
10:34:22 There is a series of large trees that border the western
10:34:26 property line that shared with RS-50 zoning district.
10:34:32 Properties on price.
10:34:33 This is the northeast corner of the site on MacDill.
10:34:37 On the east side of MacDill.
10:34:39 Industrial use.
10:34:40 And again further down MacDill, a series of other
10:34:44 townhomes and apartment developments.
10:34:56 The applicant is proposing a total of 16 units and four
10:35:02 buildings.
10:35:02 On either side. This is MacDill.
10:35:05 This is Price.
10:35:06 This is Paul.
10:35:07 With a central drive aisle with access directly onto price
10:35:10 and Paul.
10:35:11 In a direct access onto MacDill with two sets of
10:35:16 buildings on either side.
10:35:17 For a total of 15 attached dwelling unit.
10:35:25 And the setbacks are front 15 feet north and south.
10:35:32 The corner is 7 feet and the side -- and given the existing
10:35:38 tree line, they are required to do protective radii for the
10:35:43 tree line on the shared property lines, that 7-foot setback
10:35:49 along the side, which is the west property line, would be
10:35:54 required to be enlarged between first and second reading.
10:36:16 The side setback would be as illustrated specifically on the
10:36:19 site plan again, taking into consideration the individual
10:36:21 canopies.
10:36:22 So it's somewhat varied.
10:36:25 They are required a total of 36 parking spaces.
10:36:32 36 are being provided with garages, surface parking, and
10:36:37 2001 car garage, and four guest parking spaces are provided.
10:36:42 Here.
10:36:43 Two on either side.
10:36:44 Adjacent to Paul.
10:36:47 As noted, modifications between first and second reading
10:36:52 from Land Development Coordination to clarify that it won't
10:36:56 be a straight 7 foot setback along this property.
10:36:59 It would be varied as shown.
10:37:01 Because with the tree preservation, and the root plan, as
10:37:09 submitted by the applicant.
10:37:11 Proposes a total of 44 feet.
10:37:13 It's 35 feet to the top of the building.
10:37:18 Massing of the building.
10:37:19 And then there's some auxiliary uses.
10:37:22 And the rooftop.
10:37:24 And called the rooftop deck area.
10:37:26 And specific conditions that would be on the site plan to
10:37:29 limit that being the roof deck.
10:37:37 The canopy should be limited to 60-foot secured per building
10:37:41 code.
10:37:41 The storage area, 30 square feet, and there should be no
10:37:46 converted air conditioning or living space located on the
10:37:49 roof deck.
10:37:52 Again to make sure that the roof deck does not become
10:37:55 enclosed: Occupied air conditioned space.
10:38:00 It's really limited to these three stories.
10:38:03 Natural resources had changes that they are recommending
10:38:07 between first and second reading with are the consistent
10:38:10 finding.
10:38:13 Again making sure that there's adequate notes to make sure
10:38:16 the protection of the tree line along the west property
10:38:18 line, as well as clarifying to numbers in the tree table.
10:38:24 Other than that,
10:38:25 The only waiver that's being requested is that section
10:38:30 27-3-G-107 says that for attached single-family dwelling
10:38:36 units, front doors must face the public right-of-way, or
10:38:41 internal plaza, or courtyard.
10:38:46 These units off of MacDill -- however, these units, the
10:38:52 front doors face the rear.
10:38:54 So, therefore, a waiver to allow alternative design which
10:38:59 permits entrances of units 2, 3, 4, had 5, 6 and 7 to face
10:39:06 side yard and not a right-of-way.
10:39:09 So that's the only waiver being requested.
10:39:16 Staff found it consistent if the changes are approved.
10:39:22 Do you have any specific questions for me are?
10:39:24 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions by council?
10:39:26 Petitioner?
10:39:34 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Address suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza.
10:39:41 And I have the honor of representing ABC capital, Gary Cohen
10:39:46 and Andrew Cohen this evening on this project.
10:39:48 They are part of South Tampa residential VII this evening.
10:39:57 This is -- ABC capital already built 72 units in this
10:40:02 immediate neighborhood, across the street and further up the
10:40:05 street on Paxton and price.
10:40:08 What is compelling about this fourth project of theirs is
10:40:11 this is for ownership.
10:40:13 This is not an apartment project.
10:40:16 The terms of a rising tide lifts all boat search very
10:40:21 appropriate because in this portion of MacDill has
10:40:24 improved the neighborhood to the pointed that now sustained
10:40:26 ownership, and we are going to have a project that will have
10:40:29 ownership of 16 units.
10:40:31 The comments that Mrs. Samaniego provided to you are
10:40:36 acceptable to us.
10:40:37 The waiver will include the facing of the building.
10:40:41 I worked out a condition with Mary Daniel Bryson on the tree
10:40:45 pro affection.
10:40:46 We will also eliminate the 7-foot setback on the rear to
10:40:50 show it as dimensions.
10:40:52 So that setback will meander in order to protect all the
10:40:57 trees on the western side.
10:40:58 None of them will be removed.
10:40:59 Three grand trees on the opposite property on a neighboring
10:41:04 property will be protected and accounted for in the
10:41:07 construction of the project.
10:41:10 I received one call requesting support of the project from
10:41:14 Mr. Angel Mearis who lives.
10:41:20 Mr. Al Steenson has been here earlier.
10:41:24 He has been struggling with a bad hip.
10:41:26 He asked me to convey to you his strong support for the
10:41:28 project.
10:41:30 Let me just go over my notes.
10:41:32 There is a letter of support from a neighbor named Mr. Jamie
10:41:36 Frank who owns one of the apartment buildings down the way,
10:41:40 wants to see this project approved.
10:41:43 I'll provide that to Mr. Shelby for filing in the record.
10:41:48 The elevation is very compelling.
10:41:51 Architecture, I think it's very innovative Florida style
10:41:54 architecture.
10:41:55 I ask that you approve the project this evening.
10:41:58 In the interest of time I will reserve the remainder of my
10:42:01 comments for rebuttal if necessary.
10:42:03 I will provide the letter for the record.
10:42:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions from council at this time for
10:42:07 Mr. Grandoff?
10:42:08 Mr. Grandoff, I have one quick question.
10:42:11 Those buildings that are there now, are those commercial
10:42:13 office buildings?
10:42:15 Or --
10:42:16 >> One bedroom apartments.
10:42:21 Scattered hither and YON.
10:42:24 >> It's a strange design.
10:42:25 I don't think I have ever seen one bedroom apartments
10:42:28 separated lake that.
10:42:29 And that's kind of interesting, strange to me to see that.
10:42:34 I thought they might be offices based on the architecture
10:42:36 that were shown.
10:42:38 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: I had the same thought when I first looked
10:42:41 at it, it's an old office building.
10:42:43 But it's pretty old.
10:42:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you so much.
10:42:47 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: That's all I have.
10:42:48 In a questions from council at this time.
10:42:49 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
10:42:51 this item, item number 12, REZ 16-49?
10:42:58 I have a motion to close from Mr. Miranda.
10:43:00 I have a second from Mr. Maniscalco.
10:43:02 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
10:43:05 Any opposed?
10:43:06 Okay, Mr. Miranda, will you kindly take item number 12?
10:43:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: File number REZ 16-49.
10:43:14 Ordinance presented for first reading consideration.
10:43:16 Ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 5011,
10:43:22 5013, 5015, 5019, 5021 South MacDill Avenue zoning
10:43:31 classifications CG commercial general to PD planned
10:43:34 development residential single-family attached providing an
10:43:36 effective date, along with the waivers, Mrs. Samaniego?
10:43:43 Staff?
10:43:44 I'm asking.
10:43:46 When I'm talking, don't interrupt me.
10:43:48 >> Yes, there is one waiver, as well as revisions.
10:43:56 >> With the waivers stated by staff.
10:44:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion by Mr. Miranda.
10:44:02 Second by Mr. Maniscalco.
10:44:04 All in favor of that motion?
10:44:05 Any opposed?
10:44:07 Thank you.
10:44:07 >>THE CLERK: The motion carried with Cohen and Capin being
10:44:11 absent at vote.
10:44:12 Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
10:44:14 9:30 a.m.
10:44:15 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Thank you.
10:44:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ: All right.
10:44:18 Lucky 13.
10:44:20 Unfortunately those folks in the audience had to wait a long
10:44:23 time for number 13.
10:44:25 Yes, ma'am.
10:44:25 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
10:44:28 I am going to introduce number 13 which is rezoning 16-12.
10:44:32 It comes to you after having participated due to land use
10:44:36 and environment use resolution act, and City Council may
10:44:39 recall the original rezoning was before you last March.
10:44:42 It was RS-60 zoning to PD zoning.
10:44:46 The Planning Commission recommended it be found consistent.
10:44:51 City staff requested that had the be found inconsistent.
10:44:54 City Council denied the rezoning.
10:44:55 At that time, the petitioner filed a request for relief
10:45:00 pursuant to Florida statute, it is a go-part process.
10:45:03 The first part mandate that the city participate in a
10:45:06 mediation with the effort to try to find finance there are
10:45:09 any alternatives or conditions that can be placed on the
10:45:13 original request that would be allow it to be approved, to
10:45:17 take to that mediation, and make a recommendation back to
10:45:20 City Council.
10:45:21 We had your city planning staff at that mediation.
10:45:25 The surrounding property owners immediately adjacent
10:45:27 property owners and anyone hop participated in the original
10:45:30 hearing that we could find their address was notified, and
10:45:34 asked to participate at that hearing.
10:45:35 There were two meetings.
10:45:37 As a result of that, there were a number of changes that
10:45:39 were made to the proposal, and explained in more detail, but
10:45:49 as a result of that, felt they could come back to you with a
10:45:52 recommendation of consistency on this.
10:45:55 It is to allow for two 350-foot lots but there are
10:46:03 additional conditions placed on that.
10:46:05 Other than that, this will proceed as a typical public
10:46:07 hearing.
10:46:08 And I will turn it over to city staff.
10:46:10 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So it is considered de novo hearing, a brand
10:46:12 new hearing?
10:46:14 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes.
10:46:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
10:46:15 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Land Development Coordination.
10:46:24 Here is the subject property again.
10:46:30 It was originally denied for first reading at the March
10:46:35 10th, 2016 regular City Council evening meeting.
10:46:39 It is the property at 4104 Obispo street, just one block to
10:46:46 the west of the intersection of Clark street and the larger
10:46:55 subdivision.
10:47:01 I will highlight the changes that have occurred through the
10:47:08 process that Mrs. Kert just explained.
10:47:11 The proposed building setbacks on the exterior were 7 feet,
10:47:16 they have expanded them to 9 feet.
10:47:18 On either side adjoining property owners.
10:47:23 A note is added for the protective radius on lots 3, block
10:47:29 30.
10:47:31 They will protect a 42-inch grand oak within 20 feet unless
10:47:35 further permitted otherwise from natural resources.
10:47:39 The developer will install a 6-foot high PVC fence along
10:47:46 Tampa rear two sides as well as the interior property line,
10:47:54 white PVC fence.
10:47:56 A note was added that -- sorry, it says it over here.
10:48:00 A note was added that no pool shall be constructed on lot 3
10:48:08 to ensure the protection of the 42-inch grand oak, as you
10:48:11 can see, the protective radius takes up the majority of the
10:48:14 backyard so there's not really room to put in a pool.
10:48:20 They have committed, and again there's a note on the site
10:48:23 plan that the 2001 houses that would be constructed will be
10:48:28 architecturally different sole they won't be matching houses
10:48:32 from the developer, that they will each have their own
10:48:36 architectural character.
10:48:37 And lastly the maximum hate was reduced from 35 feet maximum
10:48:42 to 32 feet maximum.
10:48:44 With these slight alterations of the planned development
10:48:48 site plan, land development found it consistent.
10:48:52 Again because of the legal process, there are no changes
10:48:57 between first and second reading and there are no waivers.
10:49:04 You can approve the site plan as presented before you.
10:49:06 Do you have any questions for me?
10:49:16 >>DAVID HAY: Planning Commission staff.
10:49:18 This will be very short ands succinct.
10:49:21 Planning staff paramedic in the proceedings, and originally
10:49:25 we found it consistent.
10:49:26 We are still finding it consistent with the provided changes
10:49:30 through the process.
10:49:31 So, therefore, the official recommendation is that than the
10:49:35 application be found consistent with the Tampa comprehensive
10:49:38 plan.
10:49:38 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So you are consistent in your consistency.
10:49:40 >>DAVID HAY: We are consistent.
10:49:41 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay, great.
10:49:43 Thank you.
10:49:46 Petitioner.
10:49:49 >> Good evening once again, Mr. Chairman, members of
10:49:52 council.
10:49:53 Mark Bentley, 201 North Franklin.
10:49:55 I represent DEVONSHIRE homes, the applicant.
10:50:04 I didn't handle the original case I.don't want to rehash the
10:50:06 entire case.
10:50:07 I think you are pretty familiar with it and I know you have
10:50:11 the backup.
10:50:12 But the original issue or concern with council was
10:50:15 compatibility.
10:50:17 This is a situation where the client owns two platted lots
10:50:20 that are 51 feet wide, and surrounded on the west side by
10:50:26 55-foot lot, on the east side by 50-foot platted lot.
10:50:32 What they were trying to do is not actually split the lot
10:50:34 but just reinstate the fact to build on those two lots.
10:50:39 Unfortunately from my client's perspective under your zoning
10:50:41 code take property under one deed, two lots Marge so they
10:50:45 become one lot.
10:50:47 Because the issue here with RS-60, needing 60 feet of
10:50:51 frontage, notwithstanding that most of the plat on this side
10:50:53 of the street or all the plats were in the ranges of 51 to
10:50:56 55 feet.
10:50:57 So that's the dilemma.
10:51:00 So we went into this, and it's my understanding we are here
10:51:04 on the settlement agreement through chapter 70-151, the
10:51:09 Florida environmental resolution act, and the settlement
10:51:13 would be to hopefully an approval of the PD rezoning.
10:51:17 So that's kind of the context we are looking at.
10:51:21 And like Mrs. Kert indicated, we hired magistrate Rick
10:51:27 Davis.
10:51:27 I know a lot of you are familiar with him.
10:51:29 Rick has been employed by the city in connection for a
10:51:33 number of years.
10:51:35 An effort to mediation that included neighborhood
10:51:37 participation and also we allowed neighbors, my client did,
10:51:41 to participate that by statute they weren't obligated to do.
10:51:47 So they wanted everybody's input in the process, even to
10:51:50 though some of these people didn't qualify.
10:51:52 So we heard everything.
10:51:53 And then here again the issue of compatibility.
10:51:59 What we fashioned was some modification to the project and
10:52:02 assurance that the elevations that they wouldn't be two of
10:52:06 the same houses and we increased setbacks, reduced the
10:52:09 height.
10:52:09 There's a note on the plan, one of the issues raised by some
10:52:13 of the neighbors is drainage on their property.
10:52:15 So they agreed to drainage system.
10:52:20 I'm just a dumb lawyer but I guess it kind of filters
10:52:23 through the awnings and direct discharge into the street,
10:52:26 gets treated first.
10:52:27 So the client made a lot of concessions.
10:52:30 You had all of your professional planning staff participate,
10:52:34 Gloria Moreda, Mr. Hay, and they felt based on all the
10:52:40 modifications we made, found it consistent, and if you
10:52:44 recall the last zoning hearing, if you look at the staff
10:52:46 report, there was actually a finding that the rezoning was
10:52:53 consistent with the block face and not the overall
10:52:57 percentage of lots, how they pick the red-blue map area so
10:53:02 it was a close call, I think like 34%, from my research, the
10:53:06 cut-off is around 38% to find consistent.
10:53:09 In any event we made a lot of changes.
10:53:11 The intent of the resolution act is to avoid the cost,
10:53:17 uncertainty and risk associated with litigating these land
10:53:20 use disputes and I think the clients made extremely good
10:53:24 faith effort to get this resolved, and we would appreciate
10:53:28 your approval, obviously.
10:53:30 So we went through the process.
10:53:33 We handled it appropriately.
10:53:35 We made these concessions.
10:53:36 We heard everything that the neighbors had to say.
10:53:39 And, you know, you can't satisfy everybody, and I'm sure you
10:53:44 are going to hear a little bit from a different perspective
10:53:47 on this, but bear in mind a couple of these opponents are
10:53:50 living on lots the same size, that each have the benefit of
10:53:54 being there before my client was literally the last guy on
10:53:57 the block and one of the opponents was actually going around
10:54:01 getting a petition, and she lives about a mile and a half
10:54:04 away, in Britton Plaza, so it's hard to say that she really
10:54:09 has a dog in the fight.
10:54:10 So it's compatible in professional planning staff advises
10:54:15 you of you, Planning Commission advises you of that.
10:54:18 We would appreciate your consideration in approving the
10:54:20 settlement agreement which the end result apparently is PD
10:54:23 rezoning.
10:54:24 So if you have any questions, let me know.
10:54:27 I have a lot of information, more than you want to hear at
10:54:30 11:00 at night.
10:54:31 >> we are not quite at 11:00 but we appreciate it.
10:54:35 Any other comments, sir?
10:54:38 >> No, thank you very much.
10:54:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mrs. Samaniego, before the public
10:54:42 speaks, can you show me the photographs of the block,
10:54:51 adjacent to the subject property?
10:54:55 Just to get a feel of what the homes look like?
10:54:59 >> Mr. Suarez.
10:55:08 You said anything else.
10:55:09 I am going to you take up on it.
10:55:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: While she is digging through the files?
10:55:17 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Very good.
10:55:18 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Here is the client's lot.
10:55:25 We are looking east on Obispo, oh Dale Mabry, and this is
10:55:32 the house on a 55-foot lot.
10:55:37 This is the property looking dead on to the south.
10:55:40 The two lots.
10:55:43 Then this house here is on a I think 50 or 51-foot lot.
10:55:49 So you have a 55.
10:55:51 My client is 51.
10:55:52 51.
10:55:53 And then 50 or 51.
10:55:56 And this is the house to the west.
10:56:02 And that's not relevant.
10:56:04 These are some of the elevations that Devonshire intended to
10:56:09 build.
10:56:17 This is to the west on a 50-foot lot.
10:56:20 You can see the house here is almost identical to the house
10:56:25 that Devonshire intends to build, 35 feet.
10:56:34 We are 32.
10:56:35 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mr. Bentley, that's on the same side of
10:56:37 the street?
10:56:39 Your vacant lot is just on the other side?
10:56:42 >> Our vacant lot is here.
10:56:48 And to show the compatibility.
10:56:49 I don't know if you picked up on that.
10:56:52 The side yard setback under the code is 7 feet.
10:56:57 We agreed to 9-foot setback on either side of Devonshire.
10:57:04 Property.
10:57:06 And we maintained 17 on the internal side of the lot, as
10:57:12 seen.
10:57:14 So facing the setback, agreeing to certain architectural
10:57:18 designs.
10:57:20 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Can I see across the street?
10:57:26 Mary, do you have a photo?
10:57:29 >>MARK BENTLEY: I don't.
10:57:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, Mr. Bentley.
10:57:55 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: One moment, please.
10:57:58 I'm trying to see which one is actually across the street.
10:58:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Just run through them.
10:58:11 It will probably be faster to run through them than to find
10:58:14 the one.
10:58:25 >> This one is across the street.
10:58:37 4104.
10:58:43 I can't tell which one is directly across the street.
10:59:01 >> There's one yellow house across the street?
10:59:08 And going by the Google map.
10:59:12 >> If I recall that correctly it's next to a white ranch
10:59:15 style.
10:59:16 So that probably is it.
10:59:17 >> I know.
10:59:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Whoever is speaking wherever outside, you
10:59:38 know --
10:59:43 >> Adjoining houses.
10:59:48 So single-family one-story houses.
10:59:52 This is the one that is adjacent to the property, right?
10:59:58 No, two doors back.
11:00:00 Here is the subject property.
11:00:08 Here is single story.
11:00:09 >> That's across the street.
11:00:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay.
11:00:16 I get the idea.
11:00:18 Thank you.
11:00:18 >> Kind of a mixed bag.
11:00:23 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.
11:00:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions by council to
11:00:29 Mr. Bentley?
11:00:31 Are you done with your presentation, sir?
11:00:33 Okay.
11:00:34 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
11:00:36 item number 13, REZ 16-12?
11:00:40 Please come forward.
11:00:40 Don't raise your hand.
11:00:43 Come on up.
11:00:44 One at a time.
11:00:47 I know the feeling.
11:00:49 Come on up and say your name and address.
11:00:52 >> Mary Salhanick, 4106 adjacent to the property we are
11:00:57 talking about.
11:00:58 I do want to straighten out a few things.
11:01:00 Number one, Mr. Soustek who lives down the street supplied
11:01:05 the 63 signatures of the neighbors who are against it and
11:01:08 they were given for the record it was not his daughter who
11:01:11 lives a mile and a half away.
11:01:13 The drainage into the street that they are proposing as a
11:01:19 better answer to the drainage, we don't have gutters on our
11:01:23 street so it's just more water into our street.
11:01:27 So that's really not going to help or change matters except
11:01:31 it makes more water.
11:01:32 Our water goes down the street and drains out onto Manhattan
11:01:36 Avenue which the past two rainstorms already is flooding
11:01:39 from all the new houses.
11:01:41 I have 18 reasons why I am against doing this.
11:01:44 And one is, number one, we already went through the right
11:01:49 process and they were denied.
11:01:51 Number two is the density of the neighborhood, the drainage
11:01:54 issue, sewage, street parking which is already a problem.
11:01:59 Increased flooding and increased drainage into yards and
11:02:04 neighborhoods, overcrowding of our highly sought after
11:02:07 school, increase in our traffic in our quite neighborhood.
11:02:12 Noise.
11:02:12 Increase of demand on the police department.
11:02:15 Increase of demand on the fire department.
11:02:18 My financial interest, maintaining the character and culture
11:02:21 of the neighborhood.
11:02:23 And I want to point out the five houses directly across the
11:02:29 street which you saw only one of all have greater than
11:02:37 60-foot front.
11:02:39 Okay.
11:02:41 Most of them have 70 or more.
11:02:43 So he's only representing a little part that helps him out.
11:02:49 I wanted you to consider that there is a lack of demand in
11:02:53 housing in our neighborhood.
11:02:54 There are currently from church Avenue to Lois Avenue, which
11:02:59 is about a half a mail, seven houses for sale.
11:03:04 Two newly -- are being built.
11:03:09 33629 has written forget the exact number but a huge number
11:03:15 of homes for sale.
11:03:16 So there is no demand for more housing in our neighborhood
11:03:19 by any stretch.
11:03:20 Imagination.
11:03:22 If I could consider -- how it affect me and my family and my
11:03:28 neighbors and I am totally against it.
11:03:29 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
11:03:30 Next, please.
11:03:36 >> I'm Kathy, 3614 east Caroline circle.
11:03:41 I have come before you guys several times trying to stop the
11:03:46 splitting of the lots in the Virginia park Maryland man nor.
11:03:51 We have a neighborhood association, and they have been
11:03:54 trying and have failed as well.
11:03:57 Several houses have been approved with the split lots, and
11:04:01 that's why I think the Planning Commission went and approved
11:04:07 it after the first time.
11:04:10 They said that it was -- found the majority of the lots in
11:04:15 the immediate area are performing to the RS-60 zoning
11:04:21 district minimum lot within requirements.
11:04:24 The staff found it inconsistent with the existing
11:04:27 development pattern.
11:04:30 Now that all the lots are getting approved and split, that's
11:04:33 where they are getting their numbers from now.
11:04:37 We have been before you before, and chapter 26-1.2 to
11:04:45 preserve the character.
11:04:47 Single-family home residents of the area and discourage
11:04:49 demolition of single-family residences, and under 26-271.5,
11:04:56 retain the current density and character of the existing
11:04:59 single-family area.
11:05:02 And chapter 4 of the City of Tampa comprehensive plan policy
11:05:06 23.2.4, a plan should reflect the neighborhood's history,
11:05:11 character and current conditions and needs.
11:05:15 We are already seeing flooding in South Tampa.
11:05:18 They haven't been able to fix it we are just adding to the
11:05:20 problem.
11:05:21 Adding more homes.
11:05:22 Pulling on our electricity.
11:05:24 Pulling on the sewer system.
11:05:26 It's cramming a lot of people in a very small area.
11:05:33 Devonshire has a lot empty.
11:05:35 They are not selling.
11:05:36 They just want to split this lot for profit.
11:05:39 They can easily have sold this lot a long time ago.
11:05:43 It's been sitting empty.
11:05:44 They promised in a meeting they were going to clean it up,
11:05:48 they were going to mow it, get trash out of there.
11:05:51 Nothing happened until right before this meeting.
11:05:55 To support all their heavy I am vehicles on, their equipment
11:05:58 and everything.
11:05:58 They promise one thing and then do another.
11:06:01 I think Devonshire is a nice company that builds nice homes
11:06:05 but we only want one home on this lot.
11:06:08 Please save the RS-50 in our neighborhood.
11:06:12 Thank you.
11:06:12 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, ma'am.
11:06:14 Next, please.
11:06:14 >> My name is James Soustek.
11:06:28 I live at 4117 West Obispo.
11:06:32 I have been living there for 50 years.
11:06:36 All I'm seeing is nothing but selling the property to have
11:06:43 break it up from one 25 to 50-foot, keeping that house
11:06:49 there, building a house on a 50-foot lot, and then move,
11:06:54 take their money and move and leave that with us hop stay
11:06:59 there.
11:07:00 This has happened twice, to my house across the street on
11:07:05 both sides.
11:07:06 Those properties were 125 feet.
11:07:10 And they sold 50-foot and kept 75.
11:07:17 I'm on a 75-foot lot.
11:07:18 My house was built in 1942.
11:07:21 And all the other houses that are on big properties are
11:07:27 gone.
11:07:27 75-foot, 100, and 125.
11:07:32 Why do we have to break up 100-foot lot that high pressure a
11:07:36 house for 65 years to go to two houses today?
11:07:43 We don't need 2001 more houses.
11:07:47 Like my daughter said, there's properties all over South
11:07:50 Tampa with for-sale signs on them waiting for builders to
11:07:56 give them their $250,000 and then go.
11:08:02 And we are stuck because we want to live in South Tampa.
11:08:08 I thank you.
11:08:08 And I hope your vote is in favor of us, like it was the
11:08:13 first time.
11:08:14 Thank you.
11:08:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, sir.
11:08:17 Next, please.
11:08:17 >> My name is Gerald Salhanick.
11:08:36 I have been sworn in.
11:08:37 I live next door to this lot.
11:08:40 I have made two lists, why this splitting of the lots, and
11:08:45 that was the profit margins of the home builder.
11:08:51 That was it, only.
11:08:53 The others are against it are the infrastructure, which
11:09:01 covers everything my wife had mentioned, the fire
11:09:05 department, police department, water department, sewage,
11:09:10 power grid, the ripple effect, go to the schools, the parks
11:09:17 and recreation.
11:09:18 We are talking about oversaturation.
11:09:25 See what happens.
11:09:26 We don't need it here.
11:09:28 The DRC said that this 34 percent conforming.
11:09:38 That's not very much.
11:09:38 Thirty four percent.
11:09:41 How does that -- you know, it's not right.
11:09:50 I would like to thank you all for staying up here after
11:09:58 12:00 to see what's happening here.
11:10:01 And this was turned down once.
11:10:03 I hope you will see fit to turn it down again.
11:10:07 34% is not conforming.
11:10:11 One home, one lot is what I am looking forward to.
11:10:16 Thank you very much.
11:10:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, sir.
11:10:19 >> Also, if I still have time, I got this in the mail about
11:10:22 the flooding in our area.
11:10:26 They want to raise double the taxes so we can be protected
11:10:31 from the flooding.
11:10:33 And I thought, wow, how ironic.
11:10:35 This came in the mail.
11:10:37 And it's how they want to raise the taxes so we can keep
11:10:43 from getting flooding.
11:10:45 Thank you very much.
11:10:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you very much. Thank you, sir.
11:10:48 Anyone else in the public that would like to speak on item
11:10:50 number 13, REZ 16-12? Anyone else in the public that would
11:10:54 like to speak at this time?
11:10:55 >> Move to close.
11:10:58 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Hang on.
11:11:00 He's got his rebuttal, and I also have a couple questions.
11:11:04 Unanimous problem.
11:11:08 Should I ask the questions first?
11:11:10 Someone from staff.
11:11:11 I don't know if Mrs. Samaniego or Mrs. Kert.
11:11:15 On the first time that this was before us, it was denied.
11:11:21 And what was the reason that was given? Do you have that
11:11:24 information before you?
11:11:25 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Based on policy 18-4-10, page 3 of the
11:11:51 staff report, the proposed lots split, although it is
11:11:54 consistent with the development pattern on -- 4100 block of
11:12:00 Obispo, staff finds the proposed reestablishment of the
11:12:04 original platted lot inconsistent with the existing
11:12:08 development pattern in the area. Further reference is also
11:12:11 made concerning conforming, nonconforming lots as listed,
11:12:16 56% of conforming lots and 34% of nonconforming lots in the
11:12:22 study area.
11:12:24 Further under section 27-136, purpose, it would not promote
11:12:28 the efficient use of land and structure, potential adverse
11:12:35 effects to upset natural elements, in impacted
11:12:40 neighborhoods, which is the emphasis here, and cultural
11:12:43 resources per 27-136-1.
11:12:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay.
11:12:49 In terms.
11:12:49 Mediated settlement, or the mediation, would you call it
11:12:54 mediated settlement, Mrs. Kert?
11:12:56 I am trying to think, it's not settlement yet, right?
11:13:00 Until we settle it?
11:13:02 >>REBECCA KERT: It's appropriate to call at proposed
11:13:05 mediated settlement.
11:13:08 The items that Mrs. Samaniego just mentioned -- you can't
11:13:12 get away -- did the proposed mediated settlement deal with
11:13:18 those issues that were brought up as the reasons for denial?
11:13:23 >>REBECCA KERT: Throughout the mediation settlement, we did
11:13:26 address the basis for denial.
11:13:30 As I told you, the statute requires that we bring someone to
11:13:34 the mediation who can bring a recommendation back to City
11:13:36 Council whether or not there are any conditions that would
11:13:39 address the basis for denial, and we did, and if you want
11:13:43 more detail about how those conditions address --
11:13:47 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I guess my point is that if the conditions
11:13:50 still exist for the first denial.
11:13:52 And the mediated settlement comes back but it doesn't really
11:13:55 deal with what council has already said was the reason for
11:13:59 denial, how do you go forward with a mediated settlement
11:14:03 when you are not really mediating, you are just making a
11:14:06 recommendation from staff, and have a voice in voting on
11:14:10 this, so I'm curious as to how that works.
11:14:13 >>REBECCA KERT: The purpose of the mediation is to see
11:14:16 whether or not there is any alternative or condition that
11:14:20 could lead to an approval, one address the basis of denial.
11:14:26 In your recommended order from the mediator, he did say
11:14:32 that -- he specifically said this addressed the basis for
11:14:37 denial, and looked upon it favorably, that that came from
11:14:42 your city staff looking at those issues and saying, you
11:14:44 know, these are the things, some of the things were proposed
11:14:48 by Mr. Bentley and his clients, some things were proposed by
11:14:51 city staff, at the end of the day, and Mrs. Samaniego is
11:14:56 probably the appropriate person to say this, had but we
11:14:59 wouldn't be back with a recommendation if that hadn't --
11:15:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Okay, let me ask you a legal-ethical
11:15:09 question.
11:15:09 Unless Mrs. Samaniego wanted to answer.
11:15:12 I noticed that Mr. Davis was a mediator in this case.
11:15:15 >>REBECCA KERT: Correct.
11:15:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: He comes before us maybe not as often as he
11:15:20 has in the past, but is there any kind of conflict with
11:15:23 someone that appears before us on a regular basis as to
11:15:27 being a mediator in a case like that?
11:15:30 >>REBECCA KERT: No, not unless they are directly involved
11:15:32 with something that were an active conflict with.
11:15:37 Mr. Davis has been a mediator in the past.
11:15:39 He's the mediator on this case.
11:15:41 Mr. Bentley has in the past been a mediator.
11:15:43 He appears before you.
11:15:46 He's been a mediator.
11:15:48 It's very expensive to get someone outside the area who is
11:15:52 not familiar with the council and than the particular
11:15:57 issues: But it is not uncommon to have someone appear
11:16:01 before you on mediated issues.
11:16:03 >>MIKE SUAREZ: And this is one other thing that I saw and I
11:16:06 was thinking about, which is, you know, if we decide to deny
11:16:11 again, I'm going to give you a hypothetical.
11:16:15 And let's say we deny again.
11:16:17 What is the next part of the process?
11:16:19 Because we have denied a proposed mediated settlement.
11:16:23 >>REBECCA KERT: The next part of the process is actually
11:16:26 dictated under the statute 70-51.
11:16:29 We will go back before the mediator.
11:16:31 We will hold a hearing.
11:16:32 The purpose of the hearing is to determine whether or not
11:16:34 denial denied the property owner a reasonable use of his
11:16:40 property.
11:16:41 That's generally the term.
11:16:42 And we will both have an opportunity to present expert
11:16:45 witnesses.
11:16:46 After that the special magistrate will make a recommended
11:16:49 order on that issue.
11:16:51 That will come back to you.
11:16:52 If the council has the opportunity to reject that order, and
11:16:58 at that point, the chapter 51 proceeding is over, there are
11:17:04 administrative things to do, but it is administratively
11:17:06 over, and at that point the applicant has the ability to go
11:17:09 to court finance they so wish.
11:17:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mrs. Samaniego, I have one more question.
11:17:15 And this is the same question I asked Mrs. Kert, which is if
11:17:19 what you read is our reasons for denial, the mediated
11:17:24 settlement.
11:17:25 And I can only read what's in front of me.
11:17:28 And maybe I am not reading this correctly.
11:17:30 But did it touch at all on it?
11:17:32 How does this settlement, proposed settlement, actually go
11:17:38 back and answer some of the questions that we had or some of
11:17:42 the standards that we had for denial to begin with?
11:17:46 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: It sounded like the basis for your denial
11:17:54 was he quoted the general compatibility with the surrounding
11:17:58 neighborhood.
11:18:00 Given the changes specifically, the increasing of the side
11:18:06 yard setbacks, it appears the houses were closer together,
11:18:09 it appeared that there was a wider separation from the
11:18:14 adjoining property, adding the note to clarify that the tree
11:18:21 in the backyard would indeed be protected, there would be a
11:18:25 6-foot high PVC fence around the entire property except for
11:18:29 the front yard --
11:18:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Can I interrupt you for a second?
11:18:32 So what you are saying is that all the conditions that they
11:18:34 are putting forward is supposed to make us believe that that
11:18:38 meets the aspect that we were discussing that night back in
11:18:43 March, essentially?
11:18:44 I mean, there's no other way for me to say it except that.
11:18:47 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Right.
11:18:49 Well, what I am saying is my professional opinion these
11:18:53 changes make the proposed project compatible with the
11:18:56 surrounding area.
11:18:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Got it.
11:18:59 I appreciate it.
11:19:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Along those same lines, everything that's
11:19:04 compatible begun what you said other than in the near
11:19:07 future, way far in the future, the two houses that are being
11:19:12 built on the vacant land, they are setback, and the center
11:19:17 would be different than the adjoining neighbors.
11:19:19 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: No, sir, it's 7 feet which is the
11:19:24 standard for the RS 507 and the RS-60.
11:19:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You have got 14 between the 2001 houses
11:19:34 that are being built?
11:19:36 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: Right.
11:19:36 Which is the standard.
11:19:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 7 on each house.
11:19:40 I heard you all say 7 and 9 and I thought what's going on
11:19:43 here?
11:19:44 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: The 9 are the outside.
11:19:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If you have 9 and 7 you have 16 feet.
11:19:49 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: As opposed to normal 14.
11:19:52 So the increased outer setbacks from 7 to 9 that adds an
11:19:57 extra 2 feet --
11:19:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I wasn't getting that because I just
11:20:01 heard 9.
11:20:02 I just heard standard.
11:20:04 There was no standard given.
11:20:06 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: It's normally 7.
11:20:08 Increased it by two feet to 9 on the sides so the two houses
11:20:12 would be further away from the adjoining properties.
11:20:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any other questions, Mr. Miranda?
11:20:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No, sir.
11:20:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Mrs. Montelione?
11:20:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: What was on the lot before it was
11:20:24 vacant? Was there a house there?
11:20:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Hang on.
11:20:30 Come to the microphone or don't come at all.
11:20:33 >>MARY SAMANIEGO: There was one single family house on the
11:20:36 subject property as you can see from the arrow.
11:20:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So adding another house is not draining
11:20:51 the resources of the city in the area, because you are
11:20:54 adding one house.
11:20:55 It's not like it was never anything there, and you are
11:20:58 adding two houses.
11:21:00 And in essence, if there was one house, the density you are
11:21:06 adding is just one more house.
11:21:08 >> Correct.
11:21:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: You all follow me.
11:21:10 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Anything else, Mrs. Montelione?
11:21:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No, sir.
11:21:14 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Are there any other questions from council
11:21:16 before we go to rebuttal?
11:21:21 Thank you, Mrs. Samaniego.
11:21:23 Mr. Bentley, as she moves away from the podium you are free
11:21:26 to do your rebuttal.
11:21:28 >>MARK BENTLEY: I just want to clarify a couple of points.
11:21:33 In any event, DEVONSHIRE, I think a lot of you know, is a
11:21:38 pretty reputable builder and with than the anticipation
11:21:42 building on each house here, about an $800 that you house,
11:21:45 okay?
11:21:45 So in terms of draining the city's coffers or resources it's
11:21:49 going to have a pretty significant economic benefit.
11:21:51 Now, the draining, 40% of the lot is pervious surface.
11:21:57 It's grass.
11:21:58 Plus with an AD system it's going to be filtered and
11:22:02 discharged into the right-of-way on Obispo.
11:22:07 If you flip this around and say we would rather have a big
11:22:11 mansion here, the same issue in terms of square footage,
11:22:14 impervious surface and things like that.
11:22:16 One other point, too, and we made this a stipulation on the
11:22:19 site plan, we would be able to park four cars in each house
11:22:23 to ensure to the extent we can no one is parking in the
11:22:26 right-of-way.
11:22:27 So the driveway would accommodate two and there would be
11:22:30 two-car garages.
11:22:31 Now with all due respect to Salhanick, Mary and her house,
11:22:40 they live to the west, they are on a 50-foot lot.
11:22:44 And here again, Mrs. Soustek, she lives near Britton Plaza,
11:22:51 a mail and a half away.
11:22:53 Her father spoke.
11:22:54 Okay.
11:22:55 So I don't think what they have to say is really that
11:22:58 relevant.
11:22:59 And then when they talk about the 34%, that's kind of
11:23:04 ancient history at this point, because the conclusion of
11:23:07 that staff report, not withstanding 34% is similar to the
11:23:10 subject property in terms of the size of the lot, which is
11:23:16 inconsistent.
11:23:16 Okay.
11:23:17 We have worked with the city through this process, Lake Mary
11:23:21 said, described the efforts we make to make these properties
11:23:23 consistent, compatible with the surrounding environment.
11:23:26 Then finally with all due respect, Mr. Chairman, members of
11:23:29 council, you have your professional planning staff here, and
11:23:34 the only evidence in the record at this point in time to
11:23:37 qualify substantial and competent, is the finding of both
11:23:42 staffs that this is compatible and consistent with the
11:23:44 surrounding neighborhood.
11:23:46 There's nothing to contradict that.
11:23:47 With all due respect to some of the comments from the
11:23:50 neighbors.
11:23:50 So we did what we could.
11:23:52 We think it's compatible.
11:23:55 Devonshire is looking forward to building.
11:23:57 And I want to clarify something to you.
11:24:00 I hear that the Devonshire are negligent not taking care of
11:24:07 their property.
11:24:08 This is from two months ago.
11:24:10 I drive by occasionally to see what's going on.
11:24:12 Granted it's not pristine but they do mow it occasionally
11:24:15 and take care of it.
11:24:17 Excuse me.
11:24:18 And actually they were kind enough to allow the neighbors,
11:24:21 Salhanick to park their boat there before we filed this
11:24:27 petition.
11:24:27 That's all I have to say.
11:24:28 I really appreciate your consideration.
11:24:30 And thank you very much.
11:24:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Any questions by council for Mr. Bentley?
11:24:36 Hang on a second.
11:24:37 Mr. Shelby.
11:24:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just for purposes of the record,
11:24:40 Mr. Bentley did submit to me a packet of papers that he
11:24:43 would like to have placed in the record.
11:24:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you.
11:24:53 What is it?
11:24:55 >>MARK BENTLEY: It's professional planner report, staff
11:24:57 recommendation, and also the special master's
11:25:00 recommendation.
11:25:00 I might have missed something else.
11:25:02 But that's the gist of it.
11:25:04 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion and receive and file from Mr.
11:25:07 Miranda, second by Mr. Reddick.
11:25:09 All in favor?
11:25:09 I opposed?
11:25:10 Day.
11:25:11 There are no questions from council after rebuttal.
11:25:13 Do I have a motion to close?
11:25:15 I have a motion to close from Mrs. Montelione.
11:25:17 I have a second from Mr. Miranda.
11:25:18 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
11:25:21 Any opposed?
11:25:22 What is the pleasure of council?
11:25:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move an ordinance being presented for
11:25:28 first reading K an ordinance rezoning property in the
11:25:31 general vicinity of 4104 west Obispo street in the city of
11:25:35 Tampa, Florida more particularly described in section 1 from
11:25:37 zoning district classification RS-60 residential
11:25:40 single-family to PD planned development, residential,
11:25:43 single-family, detached, providing an effective date.
11:25:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I have a motion from Mrs. Montelione.
11:25:50 I have a second from Mr. Reddick.
11:25:52 All in favor of that motion please indicate by saying aye.
11:25:55 Opposed?
11:25:56 Nay.
11:25:56 >>THE CLERK: The motion carried with Suarez voting no, and
11:26:04 Cohen and Capin being absent at vote.
11:26:06 Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
11:26:11 9:30 a.m.
11:26:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Crew, would you please notate that Mr.
11:26:17 Cohen abstained?
11:26:18 >>THE CLERK: Yes, thank you.
11:26:20 Correction.
11:26:20 Cohen was not absent at vote.
11:26:22 Cohen abstained from the vote.
11:26:24 Thank you.
11:26:24 >>MIKE SUAREZ: October 16th.
11:26:28 Mr. Crew?
11:26:30 >> October 6th at 9:30 a.m.
11:26:32 >> Thank you very much.
11:26:33 Have a good evening.
11:26:34 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Information reports from our council
11:26:36 members?
11:26:36 Mr. Miranda?
11:26:38 >> Nothing.
11:26:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: Nothing.
11:26:41 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: Nothing.
11:26:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: None, sir.
11:26:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Before we go to motion to receive and file,
11:26:46 this weekend is the remembrance of September 11th, the
11:26:50 15th year since the attack.
11:26:54 Hopefully, I know that I will be tomorrow at the
11:26:58 firefighter's museum for the remembrance at 9 a.m.
11:27:02 Hopefully our colleagues will be there, too.
11:27:04 It's another time to remind us of what happened on that day.
11:27:08 Any motion to receive and file?
11:27:10 I have a motion by Mr. Miranda.
11:27:12 Second by Mr. Maniscalco.
11:27:13 All in favor of that motion?
11:27:15 Okay.
11:27:16 Thank you very much.
11:27:17 We are now adjourned.
11:27:19
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.