Tampa City Council
Thursday, September 22, 2016
5:01 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.
[Sounding gavel]
05:04:30 >>HARRY COHEN:
Good evening, everyone.
Welcome to this evening's session of City Council for
September 22nd.
Roll call, please.
05:04:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Here.
05:04:43 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Present.
05:04:45 >>HARRY COHEN:
Here.
05:04:46 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
Here.
05:04:50 >>HARRY COHEN:
Our first item at 5:01 p.m. is a public
hearing quasi-judicial so anyone who is planning to speak on
this item or on any other item that's going to be heard at
the public hearing tonight, now would be the time to stand
and be sworn in.
(Oath administered by Clerk)
05:05:18 >>CATHERINE COYLE:
Planning and Development.
This is a continued case from the July 21st evening
hearing.
This is a public service facility located on the -- 2081
north Himes, continued to work with the water department,
moving the camera, and just for reference it is located
towards the back of the property here.
We did work with the public works administrator as well as
the water department director as well as the applicant and
they all conferred, they will be surrounding the actual site
location fencing with shrubbery, and recorded with the
natural resources coordinator on the exact species to use.
They have been used in many city projects around town.
Essentially, it's very, very drought tolerant, very thick
and actually a very good screening in these situations.
And they have also agreed that the gate at the front, they
will be swapping that out for a solid piece.
The entrance is right here off to the side.
They are going to swap that out with a solid PVC gate to add
additional screening from the street.
All the analysis and the applicant concur with those
additional requirements.
And we have no objections.
05:07:02 >>HARRY COHEN:
Is there anything that the applicant would
like to say?
05:07:14 >> I'm happy to answer any questions.
Google Fiber, 2202 North Westshore, Tampa, Florida.
I'm here to answer any questions and we respectfully request
approval of the special use permit.
Thank you.
05:07:30 >>HARRY COHEN:
Are there any questions or comments from
council members at this time?
I don't see any.
At the moment.
Is there anyone in the public to speak to this item number
1?
05:07:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Move to close.
05:07:44 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion to close from Councilman
Miranda.
Seconded by Councilman Maniscalco.
All in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
Councilman Maniscalco, will you please take item number 1.
05:07:57 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
I have an ordinance presented for first
reading consideration, an ordinance approving a special use
permit S-2 approving a public service facility in an RS-50
residential single-family zoning district in the general
vicinity of 2081 north Himes Avenue in the city of Tampa,
Florida and as more particularly described in section 1
hereof providing an effective date.
05:08:17 >> Second.
05:08:20 >>HARRY COHEN:
A motion from Councilman Miranda.
Second by Councilman -- excuse me, Maniscalco, seconded by
Councilwoman Capin.
All in favor?
Opposed?
05:08:32 >>THE CLERK:
Motion carried with Suarez being absent and
with Reddick and Montelione absent at vote.
Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
9:30 a.m.
05:08:45 >>HARRY COHEN:
We are going to move on now to our
non-quasi-judicial public hearings, items 2 through 8.
And item number 2.
05:09:32 >> Good evening council members.
Melissa Dickens, Planning Commission staff.
I am here this evening to present information on the capital
improvement section schedule traffic update, the annual
update in the comprehensive plan, and tonight is the first
reading of the ordinance.
Chapter 163, Florida statutes, the list of projects
addressing and adopted in the comprehensive plan be updated
on an annual basis.
The update would replace the existing capital improvement
schedule in the comprehensive plan, the schedule in your
packet.
The update is a little unusual for something affecting the
comprehensive plan in that it is accomplished by ordinance.
This is permitted under chapter 163.
At their September 12th regular meeting the Planning
Commission found the capital improvement section schedule
consistent with the Tampa comprehensive plan.
I want to briefly touch on the process for developing the
schedule.
First, city staff identified projects in the capital
improvement programs that affected the level of service in
the comprehensive plan.
Projects were identified which eliminated a deficiency,
maintained level of service, or were planned to serve future
growth.
Consistent with comprehensive plan policy direction, over
95% of funding in the capital improvement section schedule
is for eliminating current deficiencies.
Additionally, in the new comprehensive plan, the Imagine
2040 plan, the plans of other agencies, the MPO and the
school board, are now adopted by reference into the schedule
so you may be used to seeing the project carved out
specifically in the schedule, but because of the new policy
in the comprehensive plan, they are now adopted by
reference.
This is a quick overview of the projects in the schedule.
You can see there are water and transportation projects, and
the total five year funding amount is approximately 51.4
million.
In terms of -- the this evening is the first reading of the
ordinance and the second reading of the ordinance will be
October 6th.
And I am available for any questions.
05:12:13 >>HARRY COHEN:
Any questions or comments from council
members?
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
item number 2?
There's a motion to close by Councilman Miranda, seconded by
Councilman Maniscalco.
All in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
Councilwoman Capin, could you please take item number 2.
05:12:36 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
[Off microphone.] an ordinance being
presented for first reading consideration -- I'm sorry.
Thank you.
I'll start over.
An ordinance being presented for first reading
consideration, an ordinance amending the Tampa Comprehensive
Plan, capital improvements section, by updating the schedule
of projects for fiscal year 2017 through fiscal year 2021
and incorporating by reference into the capital improvements
section the Hillsborough County Metropolitan Planning
Organization, TIP, Transportation Improvement Program,
Hillsborough Area Regional Transit, Hart, Transit
Development Plan, TDP, capital projects, and the
Hillsborough County Public Schools facilities five-year work
program, providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
providing for severability, providing an effective date.
05:13:32 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion from Councilwoman Capin,
seconded by Councilman Miranda.
All those in favor?
Opposed?
05:13:42 >>THE CLERK:
The motion carried with Suarez being absent.
Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
9:30 a.m.
05:13:49 >>HARRY COHEN:
Item number 3.
05:13:54 >>DAVID HAY:
Planning Commission staff.
This next item should be very familiar to you all, Tampa
comprehensive plan amendment 16-02.
It was the text amendment, the project text amendment to the
objectives and policies related to the development
properties on Rattlesnake Point.
You will remember on June 23rd Tampa City Council did
vote to transmit to our state and regional reviewing
agencies.
We have received all our comments back, and none of the
agencies had any concerns with the proposed request.
I'm available for any questions.
05:14:39 >>HARRY COHEN:
I don't see any questions right now.
Petitioner?
05:14:53 >>GINA GRIMES:
Law firm of Hill, Ward, Henderson, 101 East
Kennedy Boulevard.
I represent the applicant in this case, viper ventures.
I don't have anything further to add.
I didn't plan on doing another presentation this evening,
given that none of the reviewing agencies had any comments.
I'm available for questions.
Did send all of you a letter earlier this week explaining
that one of the adjacent property owners, alliance
construction, or O'ryan marine construction, right here, had
requested that we make a slight modification to the proposal
to acknowledge that they had the ability to build back their
existing facility in the event it was destroyed.
So I'm happy to hand that language out to you again, give it
to the clerk for the record.
But with this language they are in support of the proposed
comp plan amendment.
05:15:48 >>HARRY COHEN:
Are there any additional questions or
comments from council members at this time?
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
item number 3?
05:16:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Move to close.
05:16:02 >> Second.
05:16:02 >>HARRY COHEN:
Hold it.
Item number 3?
05:16:13 >>DAVID MECHANIK:
305 South Boulevard, Tampa, Florida.
I'll be very brief.
I represent the food, one of the property owners on
Rattlesnake Point who would be affected by this plan
endment language, and we are here to say that we support
the proposed amendments, including the amendment that Mrs.
Grimes just brought to your attention that is proposed at
the request of O'ryan.
And we would just like to ask council support for this plan
endment request.
Thank you.
05:16:49 >> Elise Batsel, south Ashley drive, we represent O'ryan
manufacturing, marine manufacturing, and we requested the
additional language.
The applicant was very nice to work with us, and we are in
full support of the text amendment presented and would
appreciate fountain you would support it.
Thank you.
05:17:12 >>HARRY COHEN:
All right.
05:17:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Move to close.
05:17:18 >> We have a motion from Councilman Miranda, seconded by
Councilman Maniscalco.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
Councilman Reddick, can you please take item number 3?
05:17:29 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Move an ordinance being considered for
first reading, an ordinance amending the Tampa Comprehensive
Plan pertaining to objective and policies for the
redevelopment of the Rattlesnake Point waterfront area
providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
providing for severability, providing an effective date.
05:17:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Second.
05:17:52 >>HARRY COHEN:
I believe, Mr. Shelby --
05:17:55 >> Additional language that Ms. Grimes provided to you.
05:18:00 >>FRANK REDDICK:
So moved.
05:18:02 >> Second.
05:18:05 >>HARRY COHEN:
(Off microphone.) We have a motion by
Councilman Reddick.
Seconded by Councilman Miranda.
All in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
05:18:13 >>THE CLERK:
The motion carried with Suarez being absent.
Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
9:30 a.m.
05:18:20 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
Item number 4.
05:18:30 >> Melissa Dickens, Planning Commission staff. This is a
public hearing on a text amendment to the comprehensive
plan.
This serves takes ten year work plan amendment and modifies
the potable water.
This is a transmittal hearing for the text amendment.
This is a publicly initiated amendment.
And the ten year water supply facility work plan is required
to be updated following the regional water site plan
adoption by the Southwest Florida Water Management District.
The backup documentation included in your plan amendment
packet a detailed analysis and report that examines
projections.
This report was prepared by Planning Commission staff in a
multi-agency coordination effort with information provided
by the city's water department, Tampa Bay water and the
Southwest Florida Water Management District.
The amendment addresses both the potable water -- section.
A little bit about the purpose and intent of the amendment.
The purpose is to fulfill the statutory requirements to
update the ten year water facilities work plan again within
18 months.
It also adds the work plan table of progress to the potable
water section.
With the Tampa Bay water and southwest Florida water
district they identified a few minor clarifications,
language related to potable water in the capital
improvements section.
The proposed amendments have been reviewed by the City of
Tampa water department staff and have been coordinated with
staff as well.
The Planning Commission found the text amendment consistent
with numerous goals, objectives and policies of the Tampa
comprehensive plan.
Some of the main goals, objectives and policies of
intergovernmental and total water policies related to
consistency of the plan and the Southwest Florida Water
Management District regional water supply plan.
There's consistency with environmental objectives related to
utilizing alternative water supplies, reuse and
conservation, and a potable water policy related to insuring
the systems can satisfy the existing and projected demands.
The Planning Commission recommends that the council find
PACPA 16-04 consistent with the goals, objectives and poses
of the Imagine 2040 Tampa comprehensive plan and transmit
the amendment to state and regional agencies for review.
And I am available for any questions.
05:21:43 >>HARRY COHEN:
Are there any questions from council members
at this time?
05:21:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Mr. Chairman, from way read, the goals
and objectives, we will have about 83 million gallons a day
in 2035 and our population will grow by about 150,000 in the
service area.
05:22:05 >> What's your question?
05:22:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Not a question, a comment so the public
understands what you are talking about.
By the year 2035, the estimated total water demand in
millions of gallons is 83.9 gallons, and our supplies by
SWFWMD is 82 million gallons a day average.
And by the population demand we'll have an increase of about
150,000.
That's it.
I didn't want to scare you.
I'm the one that's scared.
They are looking at me, not you.
05:22:50 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
Anyone to speak on item number 4?
05:22:53 >> Move to close.
05:22:54 >> Second.
05:22:55 >>HARRY COHEN:
Motion by Councilman Montelione.
Seconded by Councilman Maniscalco.
All in favor?
05:23:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Move to transmit.
05:23:06 >> We have a motion by Councilman Miranda.
Seconded by Councilwoman Capin to transmit item number 4.
All in favor?
Opposed?
Thank you very much.
Item number 5.
05:23:31 >>DAVID HAY:
Planning Commission staff.
This next text amendment 16-08 is a transmittal hearing,
also.
The proposed text amendment is properly initiated by the
City of Tampa staff in cooperation with the Planning
Commission staff.
The proposed language provided in your packet proposes a
number of changes to the adopted future land use matrix for
the City of Tampa.
The main change would be the introduction of a tiered floor
area ratio for the community mixed use 35, community
commercial 35, and the urban mixed use 60 future land use
category.
Currently all development is treated similarly where one
used to pass a floor area ratio, a 1.0 floor area ratio and
2.0 floor ratio for the urban 60 future land use category.
You must meet performance measures.
These performance measures are basically a monetary payment
to the city to fund urban improvement and are based on a
formula related to additional square footage.
Proposed change would increase the overall floor area ratio
for vertical mixed use development that would not have to
meet these performance measures.
This in theory will further incentivize mixed use
development along the city's main corridors.
Proposed vertical mixed use development would have to meet
certain requirements to attain the higher floor area ratio
such as being located on an arterial roadway or meeting
minimum acreage standards.
Other changes, proposed clarification to the physical
building, height, description for a number of the
categories.
The typical instructions are for informational purposes and
are not tied to any particular regulation.
Another proposed change clarifies the federal Aviation
Authority's role in determining height on adjacent parcels
within the municipal airport future land use category.
Further changes, the removal of a requirement for a public
hearing for buildings over 120 feet in the central business
district, meeting all requirements of the downtown
development regulation.
The proposed changes also seek to limit the recently created
neighborhood mixed use future land use category, about a
year, year and a half old.
It would limit them, the availability of those categories to
the city's four identified growth areas which include the
city's employment centers, such as Westshore and downtown,
urban villages like Seminole Heights and Tampa Heights,
mixed use corridors and centers like Dale Mabry Highway and
any future transit station areas identified as future
planning efforts.
Your Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed plan
endment and found the request consistent with a number of
policies related to mixed use vertical integrated
development patterns, for the protection of the viability of
Tampa International Airport.
The promotion of development patterns that promote the
eastern transit and overall neighborhood protection policies
related to development along the city's major corridors.
The specific policies are listed within the provided staff
report.
Therefore, your Planning Commission recommends the Tampa
City Council find Tampa plan amendment 16-08 consistent with
the goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan
and for regional and state reviews.
I'm available if you have any questions.
05:27:24 >>HARRY COHEN:
Any questions from council members on item
number 5?
I don't see any.
Is there anyone in the public who would like to speak on
this item, item number 5?
05:27:32 >> Move to close.
05:27:35 >>HARRY COHEN:
Motion from Councilman Montelione, seconded
by Councilman Maniscalco.
All in favor?
And again the motion.
Councilman Miranda, seconded by Councilwoman Capin.
All in favor of the transmittal motion?
Opposed?
We are going to move on now to item 6.
05:27:59 >> Jennifer Malone with Planning Commission staff. This is
an amendment to the Tampa comprehensive plan, 16-03-A.
The central Tampa planning district within the West Tampa
urban village.
This is a privately initiated small scale amendment,
approximately 8.12 acres, proposing to go from residential
35 to mixed use 60.
This is the subject site outlined in yellow.
I-275.
This is the Hillsborough River.
This is downtown Tampa.
Right here we have the University of Tampa.
And the preparatory school.
And the Julian B. Lane park and the surrounding areas.
This is west along park street. This is on Cypress Street.
And then Edison Avenue right here.
And last, this is Cass street.
And you start at the bottom where we are on the map.
This is the currently adopted future land use map.
This is outlined in black.
This green is recreational open space.
The darker pink color is RMU 100.
And this blue is the public land use category.
The marine is the future land use category.
The lighter brown is residential 20.
And then I have mixed use 35 along Rome right here.
And then this is Cass to Grand.
This is the proposed future land use map.
The site again indicating that urban mixed use 60 in
different colors.
If approved, this amendment would increase the potential
number of dwelling units from about 284 to 487 and increase
the potential nonresidential footage from approximately 200
that you to over 1 million.
In the proposed future land use category, residential
density would be guided by either the floor area ratio or
dwelling units.
And the typical uses and the urban mixed use category are
medium, high density, with professional offices and
commercial development.
The City of Tampa does support this if approved in
conjunction with 16-03-B which is next on the agenda.
This request does follow many of the objectives of the
InVision Tampa plan which I am sure you are familiar with.
The diversification of multifamily residential areas, also
the comprehensive plan identifies urban villages for higher
density housing, and extended uses and encourages higher
density that will support alternatives, the specific
policies provided in the staff report.
Planning Commission does recommend the proposed is
consistent with the comprehensive plan.
I'm available for any questions.
05:32:04 >>HARRY COHEN:
Councilman Reddick.
05:32:08 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Is this an extension of the West River
park development for future use?
05:32:14 >> JENNIFER MALONE:
That -- David?
05:32:24 >>DAVID HAY:
That's a separate planning effort.
This was not part of that West Riverfront planning that the
city staff had undertaken.
This is a private amendment.
05:32:39 >>FRANK REDDICK:
I understand that, but based on what you
are indicating what the use might be, it obviously is an
extension.
05:32:48 >>DAVID HAY:
I mean, it could be --
05:32:51 >> JENNIFER MALONE:
I would say it's cross limited.
05:32:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I believe I got the right location here.
Years ago, there was an individual that sometimes did what
he said, sometimes did what he didn't say.
He was from New York.
I believe he was one of the owners of this area sometime
back, not that he owns it now.
Yes, it's been through changes of -- and I am concerned
about the people who live there now, what are we going to do
for them?
05:33:23 >> The applicant is present and I will have him further
discuss his plans.
05:33:33 >> Adam Harton, one of the owners of the property we are
talking about today.
05:33:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
And I wasn't meaning you when I said.
That it was someone way before you.
05:33:56 >> I understand that.
I thank the staff for the job.
As discussed, the request before you is for future land use
endment at the western gateway to downtown Tampa.
The property is indicated with in green.
And it includes all the frontage of North Boulevard from the
University of Tampa to the channel 3 construction service
building.
The property fronts Boulevard, which is a truck route, and
across-through street, and it is served by Cass Street on
the south, which is a neighborhood arterial for cypress
which is a regional arterial.
here is a plan showing the lot currently, the improvements
that you have funded in there, Riverfront Park, and Oakhurst
is here, for the relationship.
The highest urban classification of the street, and
transportation plan.
The purple that I realize doesn't present well, cypress, and
the next highest classification.
This is a site plan.
I won't be redundant.
I think that we have been able to acquire this one lot which
is a portion of the companion, and I think that's important
because it allows the street grid to be continued, and I
think as we look to the future we can come back for you to
access some of the possibilities of this UM 60.
I think it's important the street be reconnected.
The site is on a transit corridor.
And I blew this up.
I apologize.
It was out of scale.
The squares are the subject site.
And the bus routes are represented by number 7, number 10
and the number 14.
I think more importantly as we look at the -- and what's
interesting about the future comprehensive plan, this
property occupies a really important gateway tote western
side of downtown as we look to come up with a transit
solution.
It strikes me as somebody who is personally and financially
vested in this area.
And cypress or Haines and Spruce are the two ways that the
Westshore business district would ultimately be connected to
downtown by some type of rapid transit that we have at this
time.
And either way, I think this property occupies a spot with
regard to that if it went down cypress.
I think that is the point I wanted to make to augment the
staff report.
I can answer questions.
05:38:36 >>HARRY COHEN:
I believe Councilman Miranda and Councilman
Reddick.
05:38:43 >> I yield to Councilman Reddick.
05:38:45 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Thank you.
You basically just stated that for years now about this
urban transit, and by you identifying the areas where it
might be.
Let me say, you co-own the Oakhurst apartment, correct?
05:39:03 >> Yes, sir.
05:39:04 >> What do you plan on doing with that?
05:39:06 >> Well, at this point we are before you for a land use
endment.
We were able to go and present to neighbors at the West
Tampa community development agency advisory board.
Generally, what we have in mind show Oakhurst department,
200 wood frame and concrete block apartments constructed in
the early 70s.
They are really nearing the end of their functional life.
They currently have a conflict section 8 agreement, housing
assistance program, and deed restriction on the property.
Our near term plan is to identify the comprehensive plan
usage to come up with a specific regional plan for the site,
to use requires the plan developments in the community
engagement that is involved with that.
Additionally, the HUD process for relocating the housing
assistance program is very similar to what went on with the
public housing, both in Encore and in Main Street.
So we would anticipate -- I apologize.
Three or four years, during the next three or four years, we
would like to engage with the neighbors, seek permission for
a relocation plan, come up with a way to incorporate a
portion of the affordable units back on the site and
redevelop the balance somewhere in urban geography and then
develop this site to a more urban density appropriate to the
spot as a western gateway to downtown.
05:41:00 >>FRANK REDDICK:
So the bottom line is, in two, three to
four years, those people who have been living there for
five, ten years, they will be gone? That's the bottom line
based on what you are saying now.
05:41:12 >> We would like to recreate a portion of those units, and
the process of relocation of people have to have a place to
live while something new is built.
05:41:25 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Right.
05:41:28 >> That is correct.
05:41:29 >>FRANK REDDICK:
And just down the street from there a few
blocks, D.O.T. came up with the same thing for TBX
relocating those people.
It seems like it's proper terminology that you are going to
relocate, and we are going to relocate and relocate.
You know, I grew up in that area.
I was there when they built Oakhurst.
And to hear that -- and I know just across the bridge, you
also are developing in the Tampa Heights, there on Palm
Avenue, and you are trying to do development there.
05:42:13 >> Yes, sir.
05:42:14 >>FRANK REDDICK:
So it seems to me that you have got to
stretch from Cass Street all the way north, across the
bridge, to palm, and you are getting all of that territory
which is going to allow a lot of people to be relocated, to
use your terminology.
And that bothers me because we just continue to have this --
developers keep thinking that we can keep coming to the
inner city community, and keep relocating people, and
everybody should be happy.
And this bothers me to hear, when I first heard that you
purchased the property, you and some others.
And I understand the HUD requirement.
And I understand the section 8.
But it's those people on section 8, they have to meet
certain requirements to be on section 8.
So if you are going to relocate them, where are these people
going to meet additional section 8 requirements? You are
running out of places in this city; for space available for
these people to go.
They just relocated.
They were almost through.
Relocating all these people in public housing on North
Boulevard.
And a lot of those people are on section 8.
Where are these people going?
And now these units, when I look at the number of units that
you are talking about, and what you plan on doing, and the
mixed use development, it just bothers me that why is it
always poor people got to suffer for rich people?
And this is what it come down to.
Poor people got to continue suffering because you got to
relocate them somewhere else, and take something that they
can barely afford, and using development for profit, going
to develop the property, at the benefit of these poor
people.
And this is the problem I'm having, because you just laid it
out.
One thing you said that I haven't heard from a developer
say, everybody else referred to something else, you said
riverfront land.
That's what we used to say when I was growing up.
And they called it Julian B. Lane and all this other.
05:45:10 >> That's down the street.
05:45:12 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Yes.
So my concern is that it's difficult for me to be supportive
of a comprehensive plan that's going to continue to relocate
poor people.
And I'm just tired of every time there's development,
redevelopment, there are always poor people that has to
suffer.
And it's time we stop this foolishness.
So that bothers me.
And I felt the same way when we talked about TBX.
TBX, got rid of the Presbyterian people.
Tampa Housing Authority getting ready to end the housing
project.
They are not Ghana now.
And now Oakhurst, a unit that I saw developed growing up as
a kid, now the next three or four years.
And even though your project won't come along in the next
three to four years, relocation start almost a year or two
in advance.
And so if you approve, when would the relocation process
start?
05:46:29 >> Again, we are before you today with future comprehensive
land use, the process of contract and deed restrictions on
the property is part of what we approve by HUD Jacksonville,
and then once a plan is in place, then that's -- I believe
that this property is our three to four year window, as I
said still, and again, you know, we think the housing
assistance program contract is an asset of the community.
I'm not completely comprehending, and I guess for the
purpose of the hearing today, but we are empathetic to the
situation.
And I developed riverside park in conjunction with a large
national developer, a thousand affordable units in the
tricounty area.
The Heights, building affordable housing.
And this contract is an asset of the community.
We are a donor state.
We are a donor panel.
We send more money -- and the other thing is, she's a would
social worker, and at Oakhurst.
So again, you know, I understand what you are saying.
But they have new housing that's been constructed and Encore
is available to folks at the same price that the obsolete
housing at Oakhurst --
05:48:29 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Let me just say, are you aware of the
waiting list at Encore?
There's a huge waiting list.
I don't want to sound like that commercial on TV.
But there's a huge waiting list.
And so everybody can't go to Encore.
And there's a huge waiting list over there.
And there's a lot of people can't even get in there.
So that's not a good example.
But that's all I am going to say at this time, Mr. Chair.
05:49:02 >>HARRY COHEN:
Okay.
Before we move on to hear from the public, is there anyone
else on council who has questions for the applicant?
I don't see any at this time.
So we are going now to public comment on this, which is item
number 6.
Is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak on item
number 6?
Yes.
Come on up.
05:49:25 >> Good afternoon.
My name is Delphine Jones, West Riverfront crime watch
group.
And thank you, Councilman Reddick, for that insight.
We are definitely opposed to this request, this amendment.
One of my biggest problems is, what is he going to do if
it's passed?
Okay.
My understanding is that he can go up to even eight stories
high.
We have a low density established neighborhood, of people
who have been there forever, 57 years myself.
But what are we going to do with people who love to stay in
this area, where are they going to go?
Taxes are going to go up.
And the people in the area just feel like they are being
pushed out.
Every day, you don't have identity in your own neighborhood.
Can you imagine what that's like to go to your neighborhood
for the last 13 years?
It's the interstate.
It's this.
It's that.
When you get through one thing with council you fight again.
I was here two weeks ago if you recall.
It's a never-ending story.
So we have a petition here, and we are definitely opposed.
Can we put this in the record, please?
05:50:54 >> Yes, just submit it.
05:50:58 >> And I just want to say, I'm not the poorest and I'm not
the richest, but I will fight for the poorest to the day I
die.
05:51:07 >> Good afternoon, council.
My name is Ted Perry.
I reside at 1160 West Gray Street, Tampa, Florida 33607.
I'm here as a follow-up to the e-mail that I sent you a week
ago in reference to this issue, in which I vehemently oppose
the request to change the land use designation for this
area.
I also stand with the residents of Oakhurst square.
And I'm also the treasurer of the West Riverfront crime
watch association.
And before I continue, I would like to ask the members of
the West Riverfront crime watch association that are here to
please stand.
I have lived in this area for approximately 65 years.
My mother brought me home from the hospital to the home
right across the street from where I live.
And to be quite honest, Oakhurst is a sore thumb for us
right now because it shut down several streets in our
community.
We are no longer able to access North Boulevard from gray,
Nassau, and even LaSalle.
And I think to allow this request for this land use
designation would do nothing but decimate our community.
It seems, though, whenever this development -- developers
want to develop, they always want to encroach upon the urban
core.
And we are talking about Oakhurst.
But let's be for real.
This goes beyond that.
It includes Gilcrest.
It includes Delaware.
It includes Edison.
It goes even beyond Delaware.
If we are talking about the property where Beulah Baptist
is.
So we are talking about coming deep into the neighborhood.
(Bell sounds)
I know my time is about up.
But I got Mr. Paul and Mr. Graham will yield their time if I
may continue.
05:54:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
Council, that normally requires a speaker
waiver form.
I do have two people -- if you could stand up and identify
yourself, please.
05:54:18 >> Paul Tompkins.
05:54:25 >> Wynn groves.
05:54:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
And does this council wish to grant two
additional minutes then?
Thank you.
By unanimous consent.
Thank you.
05:54:37 >> I want to talk about riverfront for a moment.
When the first riverfront was built, it was a beautiful
park.
People would come as far as Fort Myers, Orlando, Auburndale,
Lakeland, St. Pete, Tarpon Springs.
Every Sunday, the park would be packed.
If you had nerve enough to venture in and park, it would --
you better be prepared to stay two to three hours because
you couldn't get out.
You had police that had to do the traffic control.
Now, I had no idea when I participated in those meetings to
talk about what the new Riverfront Park would be like.
I didn't know I was getting involved in something that would
decimate my neighborhood.
Now, we don't have any problem with the developer
redeveloping that area under the current land use condition.
But to allow that process to go up eight stories is
unconscionable.
I enjoy walking out my front door and looking at skyline of
downtown Tampa.
From the street which I live on.
And I am going to close now and I just ask that you please
consider leaving the current land use designation as it
currently is.
Thank you.
(Bell sounds)
05:56:40 >> Good evening, City Council.
My name is Ruth McNair, and I am the coordinator of the
West Riverfront neighborhood crime watch association.
And I have lived in West Tampa ever since 1947.
And the house I live in, I lived in since 1958.
I'm right down not too far from where all of this is trying
to take place.
And when I move into my house, it had been very quiet.
And I love where I live.
But changes are coming.
It seems like everybody coming in trying to make us want to
leave.
Well, I love my neighborhood.
So I'm for development, but I don't think we want this to be
two stories, eight story residence that they want.
So if you keep it as it is, I would appreciate it very much.
Keep it as it is.
Thank you very much.
We have some people here.
Would you like to stand, Oakhurst people?
Ladies?
They are here, too.
So we are here to help them, because I don't know where they
are going to go, because like Councilman Reddick, he really
said -- he real said exactly what I would love to have said,
because I don't know where these people are going really, so
much are moving.
So please, let it stay as it is.
Thank you.
05:58:44 >> Good evening, council.
[Off microphone.]
05:59:06 >> Can we have your name for the record, please?
I'm sorry.
05:59:09 >> Your name, please.
05:59:11 >> I'm sorry.
[Off microphone.]
She talked about 57 some years.
I have been 80-some years.
I see the television display of Hyde Park quite often and I
kind of look at it as this place, and it looks different.
We don't want to live in Hyde Park but we want our place to
look and be just as that place is.
But anyway, I don't want anything to change either.
I have been there 89 years.
And I'm still trying to make it a place that will be
wonderful.
And speaking about that park.
We were there.
And we had names for that park, too.
And the park is in the area where black people have
businesses and what have you.
And my choice was Dr.
A L. Lewis park.
But when I looked one day they named the park Julian Lane.
But, anyway, you know who I'm talking about.
But, anyway, I want you to know that I appreciate the work
that you do.
And I want to be here to see whatever you are going to do
with that land but I hope you don't do anything that would
9/11 diminish the pleasure that we have living in the tiny
spot where we live.
Okay?
Thank you so very much.
And please, I want you to do the best you can.
And I commend you because I think you said a lot of things
that was said.
I don't need to repeat all of it.
Okay.
So he's tapping me on the shoulder.
(Laughter)
Saying mama, it's time to go.
By the way, I have just written a book and it's about me.
(Laughter)
[ Applause ]
I want each of you, you know, to get one sometime.
(Bell sounds)
Thank you so much.
06:02:14 >>HARRY COHEN:
She's going to be a hard acted to follow but
is there anyone else that would like to speak on this item?
All right.
Mrs. Kert.
Oh, I'm sorry, there is.
Excuse me.
06:02:32 >> Good afternoon.
My name is Lou share, 1315 west state street.
Been there about 30 years.
I'm secretary for the West Riverfront neighborhood crime
watch.
And a few years ago, the developer came on state street and
they were able to block off the apartments, and now last
year, we just had condos, built about 250 feet from us, and
down the street on Rome, there's going to be 300 more
apartments.
Where my church burned in new Salem, there's going to be
condominiums built there.
And those condos, they are about three stories high.
And they blocked in our little house.
I cannot imagine what eight to ten stories will look like in
Oakhurst.
So I just want to ask you all to please keep it as three,
four stories high, and we would appreciate keeping our
neighborhood in unity.
Thank you.
06:03:41 >>HARRY COHEN:
Are there more?
Come on up.
All right, if that's the end of the speakers for item number
6.
If it is, I believe Mrs. Kert wanted to say something to
City Council.
06:04:03 >>REBECCA KERT:
Thank you, City Council.
Before petitioner has rebuttal, I just wanted to talk to you
about the legal parameters for rezoning.
It is a comp plan amendment.
So it's a slightly different animal than what you typically
see.
But your comprehensive plan actually that you adopted states
how you should review these requests, and it does say you
need to take these requests very seriously because you have
already taken a lot of time and effort in these planning
decisions.
And any change you need to identify what has changed to make
the change necessary.
But further than that, it actually spells out specifically
what you are to review when you are assessing a proposed
endment, and it does state that you are supposed to assess
the merits of the plan, and consider policy implications
that the amendment would have on the future land use map in
the general area of the affected property and the
development pattern and growth policies currently being
pursued there.
And then it says, specifically, you shall review the
following criteria. Mandatory criteria that you must apply.
There's a recent case out of Pinellas County where their
decision was overturned and damages were assessed because
they did not apply these criteria. So whatever your
decision is one way or the other, these are the criteria
that you have to apply.
And it is that the requested land use category meets the
intent of the city's component in which it is being
requested, and approving any requests for land use category
that provides the intensity or broader range of uses --
06:05:39 >>HARRY COHEN:
Councilman Capin just mentioned we would
like to have this printed out.
06:05:44 >> I would be happy to do that.
I just didn't have time to run upstairs and do that. I
thought they were in the staff report and they weren't.
I don't know how you want to handle that.
I would prefer to do that as well.
I mean, I can do it during rebuttal.
06:06:02 >>HARRY COHEN:
If it's the pleasure of council we can go to
rebuttal and if you come down by the time it's over.
If not --
06:06:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Mrs. Kert, you are speaking about
certain criteria on 13-03 A, but 13-03-B is a different
animal.
06:06:21 >> No, it will also be a request --
06:06:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Let me ask before we go there.
And not that the petitioner would do it any other way than
the way he said it, but you can have a piece of property and
sell to the someone else and then someone else, it's
different than the petition we have today.
So what I am saying is, what we are asking here is a
changing -- and I heard all about the density and the use,
and I understand that legally, I can't go by that criteria.
It meets the criteria of the law.
I cannot use that in any form which way I would like to,
whether I like it or not.
I also understand all that, but, however, when you are
speaking about relocation, and what we are asking to do here
is to have a portion of property, whether this one or
somewhere else, and change the parameters of the life no way
without regard to life.
In other words, when I look at the audience and I look at
the age and I look at different things, going to move
somewhere else.
But when you are over 365, 75, you can't move somewhere
else.
Very difficult.
Your income is much lower.
Your abilities to move is less than it was when you were 25,
other than myself.
I'm stronger now than I was 55 years ago.
But what I am trying to say is that what regard do we have
so that the people that live in houses like they do now,
that they are guaranteed a movement, a relocation, somewhere
else?
06:07:59 >>REBECCA KERT:
I am familiar William the process that you
are talking about in general but I am not specifically
familiar.
And I would not be the appropriate person to talk about the
relocation that's required when you have this type of
housing that's there currently.
I know that there are standards but I would be misleading
you if I spoke about them in detail.
06:08:18 >> Wait till you bring us back the information.
06:08:24 >>REBECCA KERT:
I think I have a couple of people going to
print it out right now so we will have plenty of copies
hopefully.
But the one thing I want to talk to really speak specific
about is there may be a lot of good reasons for, good policy
reasons to deny this, but you need to follow the criteria
that is in your plan, because that is what happened in
Pinellas County.
They felt they had a very good reason to preserve industrial
area but they had failed to adopt that in their plan.
And I don't want City Council to in that position.
So when we get the criteria, just please, whatever your
decision is, one way or the other, just please review it
understood those criteria.
Thank you.
06:09:03 >>HARRY COHEN:
We'll go to petitioner's rebuttal and then
we'll go back to council.
06:09:09 >> It sound like there's a lot -- I think that the whole
eight-story thing is a rendering.
We understand it.
I am going to come back before you with a relocation plan
approved by the department of urban housing and development
and a planned redevelopment rezoning, later in this process
is going to require that what we construct, the
transportation standards, stormwater, parking, transition to
the adjacent neighborhood, all those things are going to be
addressed at that time.
So that's not what we are here to talk about today.
And with regards to the criterion for the decision today, I
would point out that the property is in the West Tampa urban
village, and the West Tampa redevelopment area, and for this
area is business centers, transit stations, urban villages.
The urban village goals include that they should contain a
mix of uses, same with multifamily residential,
neighborhood-serving commercial, schools, central gathering
places, mass transit, safe walkable pathways.
You made a good starts on that with the park.
And I had this we are trying to create a place with a nice
transition to downtown and one that can support the cost of
constructing neighborhood serving retail, to get to that
viable point where you can have a corner store and a dry
cleaner, and that this area can become a neighborhood again.
Heights is a desert in the middle of Tampa. This is an
underserved area, medically underserved population.
The first two tenants at the apartments constructed at the
Heights include full service medical clinic, and a fresh
food component.
Additionally, this site is on a transit corridor.
We covered that.
It's served by three passes.
It's bound to be more important future transit corridor, but
today designated transit corridor. This site is directly
across from UR 100 so we are assessing the boundary, and I
think there's a consideration.
That said, at the peril of getting back in the weeds, our
commitment to re-creating a portion of the affordable units,
that still requires relocation.
So we can't reconstruct these functionally obsolete units.
You and I both watched it constructed in 1972 and 73 without
moving the folks out.
The relocation process, as I understand it, is more the
developer pays for the person, and works with the local
housing authorities, and if section will can be turned into
vouchers.
In discussions, I believe there may be an opportunity for
some of these folks, you know, with the new housing that's
going to be in West Tampa.
Again we are empathetic to it and we understand when we
bought this property that it was part of the duty that we
had.
So thank you for your time.
And we look forward to coming back and plan for relocation
thank you.
06:13:29 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.
I was just trying to review this at the same time I'm
formulating my thoughts.
But when we went through the Imagine 2040 process, and we
went through the InVision process, we went through the Parks
Department went out and bought charrettes for Julian B. Lane
Riverfront Park, all of these plans, InVision took forever.
There was a study done, although this is just outside the
boundary of the CRA for West Tampa.
It was all bill in the area.
There was a lot of discussion with the public, with the
neighborhood, with the individuals who live in the
neighborhood, and that took for years.
06:14:24 >> This property is in the CRA.
06:14:27 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
It is in the CRA?
06:14:29 >> Yes.
06:14:29 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I'm not sure where the line was.
So it is in the CRA.
So part of the CRA is to redevelop and bring back -- that
was the whole point -- to bring back to life this area.
And one of the things you have to prove in order to get the
CRA established, as we all know because we just went through
the process a few months back, was slum and blight.
I don't like those two words but that's what's in the law.
Slum and blight.
And everyone participated.
They wanted the CRA.
It was the next best thing since sliced bread and was going
to, you know, bring great posterity to the area which is
right outside of downtown, and one of the policies that is
cited by Mr. Hay in the finding of consistent at the end, it
says it is consistent with the goals, objectives and
policies of the Imagine 2040 Tampa comprehensive plan.
It doesn't say that it's consistent with the plans for the
West Tampa CRA, but that's not part of his review to do
that.
And changes are.
When we take one big lot in South Tampa neighborhood or any
of the other neighborhoods where they are used to certain
development patterns, and now the economy is flourishing,
and the people are building density and dividing lots,
people don't like it.
They come in here, and you have many people who don't like
change.
So this being the first step in the redevelopment of the
West Tampa CRA, we haven't seen any others, other than
city-owned property.
It's going to be the toughest one because it is the first.
And everything that is presented by this comprehensive plan
endment, and talking about relocation, talking about the
rezoning, talking about meeting all those other standards,
we are getting way ahead of ourselves, because development
takes a long time.
We could pass this tonight, and it cop sit exactly the way
it is for a very long time.
So what has happened in other projects is they have been
passed, they have been approved, and they thought because of
the economy or financing reasons or whatever, and nothing
has happened, even though we approved the comprehensive plan
endment.
So I'm going to say that I would find it really, really hard
to find reasons to deny this because of all of the planning
that has gone on.
Imagine 2040, InVision, West Tampa CRA, planning for Julian
B. Lane Riverfront Park, they all line up.
And these plans are being worked on for five and a half
years at a minimum.
And what this request is asking for is consistent with all
of those planning efforts that we have been undergoing for
five and a half years plus, because I am sure some of them
started before we took office.
06:17:58 >>HARRY COHEN:
Councilman Reddick.
06:18:02 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Let me ask you a question and respond,
because I went to all of those meetings in West Tampa, and
not once did I see you there.
And, two, none of those people at the meeting, the majority
of them didn't agree with this InVision plan, for your
information.
Third --
06:18:31 >> It passed.
06:18:32 >>FRANK REDDICK:
By the neighborhood, okay.
Third, let me say this, it's easy for someone who is not
going to be relocated to speak up over somebody that got
relocated.
The last thing I want to say, and it's for the legal
department.
Since this is considered now the best use of that community,
this plan is considered the best use of this community
because of the density level, could we request that the
Planning Commission will make the decision to come back with
an ultimate plan, and keep the density at the same level
that it is currently at?
06:19:24 >>REBECCA KERT:
If I understand your question, I think what
you are saying is how would you arrive at a way to keep this
comprehensive plan as it is without this amendment.
06:19:38 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Correct.
06:19:40 >>REBECCA KERT:
Are the way you would doll that is you
would deny that and after you base it, based upon the
criteria, you reach it based on the criteria that's in your
comprehensive plan and how but review proposed amendments to
it.
06:19:54 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Okay.
And by this not being comparable or suitable to the
neighborhood, is that one option?
Or to you, Mr. Chairman, anyone you want.
06:20:20 >> A question to me, sir?
Well, basically the criteria for comprehensive plan
endment is a fairly debatable standard.
You need to make the determination as to whether this plan
or this request is consistent with the plan as you have
heard from the Planning Commission, but also based on your
criteria as to whether or not it is in the best interest of
the city to allow the land use, the future land use, to
change and to increase density, but that is the basis upon
which you must base your decision, is under the review
criteria, and you must make a finding based on something
that is not arbitrary and capricious, something that you can
actually relate to as to the basis for why you believe it is
in the best interest to not grant the request.
06:21:29 >>FRANK REDDICK:
I'm trying to read this information that
was handed out to us.
And to reach that determination.
And that's why I was asking the question.
06:21:43 >>HARRY COHEN:
Councilman Miranda.
06:21:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
As I read the legal status of the plan,
and you talk about the plan, the individual talks about, oh,
you must be within the site of 1320 feet or quarter of a
mile, that's 1320 of a transit stop or designated emphasis,
or the subject R-6, R-10 subject to site location within 660
or an 8th of a mile and half the distance of a transit
stop.
Those things are so antiquated.
Now why?
Transit stops are considered buses.
And I haven't ridden a bus since 1964.
I don't know how many people in the audience have ridden a
bus.
But if I was to put up -- and I am not going to ask the
public because I don't want to embarrass, but I am
embarrassing myself.
It's been 52 years since I have ridden a bus.
My kids have never ridden a bus.
My grandkids have never ridden a bus.
And we wanted to talk about transportation, you have to
change it from buses to something else.
Like a light rail, something where people like to move fast.
And they adopt want to wait on a bench.
If all we have is transit stops with maybe six seats in it,
that's not considered a transit stop.
We are living in a modern age with old time fashioned ideas
written into this plan.
Transit stops don't mean anything because no one here rides
a bus.
Buses are a thing of the past.
To a lot of degree.
You have to reenergize.
There's a use for them but you have to reenergize transited
in order to have the buses to work.
And it's not going to happen unless we reenergize something.
And that's all I got to say, Mr. Chairman.
06:23:45 >>HARRY COHEN:
Round two.
Councilwoman Montelione.
06:23:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
There is because we voted on things, Mr.
Reddick that was in my district and I don't think you were
at any of the innovation lines meetings that I was in.
I was called out, Mr. Miranda, and I am going to respond.
06:24:03 >> You might be called again.
06:24:07 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I believe the vote for the Julian B.
Lane Riverfront Park plan passed unanimous -- not passed
unanimously.
I voted no.
The InVision comprehensive plan changes were voted on
unanimously.
We all passed those.
The 2040 plan, we have been agreeing.
Not the Planning Commission, but the Planning Commission
passed unanimously and we appointed the individuals to the
Planning Commission to speak on our behalf.
So every vote we have taken here except for me -- I'm the
only one who voted no -- every vote we have taken here has
been in support of establishing a CRA that was unanimous,
has been a unanimous vote.
To approve exactly the plan, the wheels that have been put
in motion to redevelop this area.
That's why the CRA was created.
And if we are not going to redevelop the area, why did we
create a CRA?
I would like a CRA in North Tampa.
We don't have one in North Tampa.
I pushed for it for three or four or five years, and we
don't have one.
I have got slum and blight in North Tampa.
But we approved the CRA in this part of town, means we are
hoping that someone would come in and redevelop.
We have got somebody who has come in to take that first
step, and the first time to move the CRA forward with the
redevelopment in the right oar under our criteria we are
going to say no.
It doesn't make sense.
All the other votes should have been different if we were
going to say no the first time.
06:25:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I am not responding to anything anyone says.
I am not questioning anyone's vote.
Never has in 20-some years but I guess you are entitled to
whatever you want to play.
I am a not a tea totaller but under the statement just made
if I take one drink I'm an alcoholic.
If you don't vote one way you're wrong.
And everybody here on this board got elected.
Everyone is entitled to their own vote and their own
feelings.
And at any time you try to suppress someone by doing that, I
feel sorry for you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
06:26:30 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
Anyone else?
All right.
I don't see anyone else.
I do hear a motion to close?
06:26:40 >> So moved.
06:26:41 >> Second.
06:26:41 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion to close from Councilwoman
Montelione.
Seconded by Councilwoman Capin.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
All right.
What is the pleasure of council?
Councilwoman Montelione.
06:26:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I move item number 6, I move an
ordinance being presented for first reading consideration,
an ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive plan, future
land use map for the property generally located at -- what?
06:27:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I am not talking.
I'm asking for the other council member to be present.
06:27:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
All right.
I'll wait.
Do we have hold music?
06:27:30 >>HARRY COHEN:
We closed the hearing.
You can go ahead and read the ordinance.
06:27:37 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Okay, once again I move an ordinance
being presented for first reading consideration, an
ordinance amending the Tampa comprehensive plan, future land
use map for the property generally located at 1120 North
Boulevard, 1002 West Cypress street and 902, 906, 912, 914
north Edison Avenue from residential 35, R-35, to urban
mixed use 60, UMU 60 providing for repeal of all ordinances
in conflict providing for severability, providing an
effective date.
Transmitting the staff report regarding said plan map
endment.
06:28:11 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
I am going to second it.
And I understand what it is.
06:28:21 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion from Councilwoman
Montelione with a second from Councilwoman Capin.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
06:28:31 >>FRANK REDDICK:
On the motion?
Oh, yeah, I vote no.
06:28:37 >>THE CLERK:
The motion carried with Suarez being absent
and Miranda and Reddick voting no.
Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
9:30 a.m.
06:28:48 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
Item number 7.
06:28:53 >> Jennifer Malone, Planning Commission staff, again.
16-03-B as well.
Land use amendment.
06:29:17 >>HARRY COHEN:
May I ask you to please do your best to keep
it down?
Because we are conducting a public hearing here.
Thank you.
06:29:27 >> This is also located in the central Tampa planning
district within the West Tampa urban village.
This amendment was publicly initiated, a small scale at 5.23
acres for residential 35, residential 20, general mixed use
24, urban mixed use 60, community mixed use 35 and
neighborhood mixed use 35.
This amendment was initiated by the City of Tampa staff as a
response to development potential proposed under 16-03-A.
City staff and City Commission staff worked together to
ensure the proposed land uses are compatible and complement
the development patterns proposed under 16-03-A.
This is the subjects site outlined in red.
And then the yellow.
This is the subject site of 16-03-A.
And the red under 16-03-B.
Once again, downtown Tampa, Hillsborough River, University
of Tampa, preparatory school, and then the park.
To the north.
Here are some site pictures.
Cass Street.
North Boulevard is out of range but to the east.
Then downtown Tampa in the background.
The current future land use of this is general mixed use 24
and the site is proposed -- the urban mixed use 60.
This is looking southwest at West Lemon Street and Edison
Avenue.
It is proposed urban mixed use 60 as well.
Finally, this is the church on Cypress Street looking
southeasterly.
Current land uses, residential 35, and they are proposing
neighborhood mixed use 35 for this site.
Here is the future land use map.
As you see, you have the residential 20 in the lighter brown
and R-35 in the darker brown.
A very light color.
Here is the general mixed use 24.
And then this is the proposed indicating the community mixed
use 60 -- excuse me.
For the record, I would like to correct the community mixed
use 35, proposed urban 60 right here, and then mixed use 35
in these colors.
I have a proposed future land use map outlining 16-03-A in
bloc black and B in the pink color.
These have been amended as the proposed mixed use 60.
This future land use amendment if approved would increase
the potential number of dwelling units from 148 to 144,
would increase the nonresidential square footage from
205,000 to over 560,000.
It would also increase the uses medium density -- medium
toking high-density multifamily residential, professional
office and commercial development.
It would also provide between the different land uses
between the urban mixed use and neighborhood mixed use 35.
The City of Tampa found this consistent contingent upon the
approval of 16-03-A.
Once again, it does follow many of the main objectives of
the vision Tampa plan, and staff found this consistent, with
a number of comprehensive plan policies, the comprehensive
plan protects the single-family neighborhood by providing
transition and staff finds the neighborhood mixed use
category is an appropriate category for the location.
This is also consistent with the policies of a vibrant area
and the comp plan also seeks to diversify multifamily
residential areas.
Finally, the Planning Commission recommends the Tampa City
Council find Tampa plan amendment 16-03-B consistent with
the goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive
plan.
And I'm available for any questions, and the City of Tampa
which is the applicant is available for any questions as
well.
06:33:54 >>HARRY COHEN:
Any questions?
Is the city available for comments, questions?
06:34:11 >> Good evening, council members.
LaChone Dock, City of Tampa.
The item before you is 16-03-B.
I would like to direct your attention to the map for the
parcels that are identified in color on this map identified
in red, blue and orange are the parcels under this request.
For the general vicinity of this south of 275, North
Boulevard is located east.
This is North Boulevard.
This is Carmen street, the south border. This is Cass
Street. This is Cypress Street.
So the areas identified in red, the request is for urban
mixed use 60, UMU 60 category.
The areas in blue are requests for community mixed use 35.
The area identified in orange, the request is for UMU 35
neighborhood mixed use.
And what I would like to do is just to show you again the
area under the request for 16-03-A, the companion amendment.
The property identified in green are the properties that are
under that request, to orient you on this map, this is
Cypress Street, and this is west Cass Street.
So just to show you the difference, we came in and the red,
"A" to the south, to the south, and then to the west.
This is a view of the map of the parcel that we are
requesting under this application.
This will show you both.
The green is A.
The red is 60 which is on the request B.
Agenda B.
And the orange is under B.
So on this map, this is cypress street. This is North
Boulevard.
And Cass Street is running east-west, and then this is south
boundary, west Carmen street.
And that concludes my comments.
06:36:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
If I heard right the City of Tampa is
the petitioner in this case?
06:36:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
06:36:36 >> Correct.
06:36:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Do we own that land?
06:36:39 >> No, we don't.
06:36:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Why are we doing it?
Why are we making this effort to rezone the property?
06:36:47 >> We came in.
What happened, we had the additional anymorely.
So the city planning staff looked at the request to see and
proposed a companion amendment with the additional parcel so
what we did was May, in early May sent out letters to the
property owners within the boundaries to notify them of the
request.
And so we haven't received any objection from any other
property owners.
06:37:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I'm not asking you where objections.
I have never in my years of public service have I seen
something like this.
That's why I am asking the question.
There was a petitioner came just ahead of you, and in any
way did the city have a an agreement or some kind of if you
do this, I am going to do that?
Is that what I am hearing?
06:37:45 >> No.
06:37:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
So the --
06:37:50 >> It will remain under the same ownership.
Maybe the Planning Commission could explain a little more.
06:37:56 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Yes, please.
06:38:01 >>DAVID HAY:
Planning Commission staff.
The applicant came in for the private amendment.
We as staff -- and this has been done before, Ricotto's just
last year, for example, due to a private applicant coming
in, staff looks at and says is it appropriate to continue to
just look at a subject piece, but there may be opportunity
to further the comprehensive plan, you know, based on the
private request.
So that was this case where we looked at the private
request.
We said, you know, there are opportunities to provide a
better transition westward.
You have got that regional mixed use hybrid where the Tampa
prep school is, you have got the private amendment, and then
in discussion was the city, and then with the property
owners, through the city, it was found this second amendment
would provide for that better transition.
To the single-family detached and the lower density
residential to the west.
06:39:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Again I have never seen one of this
size.
So if someone was to build a big monstrous building across
from a residential you can say that the residential
neighborhood going four or five blocks could also be changed
under that comprehensive plan if you see that might have a
benefit to somebody?
06:39:32 >>DAVID HAY:
Well, one of the main objectives of the comp
plan is to provide appropriate transition between uses.
06:39:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
So then if the comp plan has a line down
the center of the lot, let's say the orange lot there, only
half of that should be -- I am just using that example --
only half of that block should be developed under that
certain category?
06:39:54 >>DAVID HAY:
Well, remember, the comp plan, every piece of
land within the city has a future land use designation.
If there was any change that was being proposed, it would
have to come through a rezoning. And that's when we see
greater detail in transitions --
06:40:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I understand the rezoning part, but away
from the orange piece of property I'm looking at, there was
a center line right there drawn, and you say this is where
it ends, and the center line of that comprehensive change
under comprehensive plan change you can only build half of
that.
The other half you can't.
06:40:34 >>DAVID HAY:
You are referring to this?
06:40:39 >> Yes, sir.
Just any one.
Pick any color you want.
The question is the same.
If you have a square block and you say this is the center
after new comp plan change, the center of that block, then
that eastern part or western part or whatever which way it
faces you can develop the other part.
That's a very simple question.
You should have an answer being in your position.
06:41:01 >>DAVID HAY:
I mean, they could develop the lots based on
what is approved through zoning.
06:41:06 >> The lot or half a lot under the comp plan.
06:41:08 >>DAVID HAY:
Well, that lot is the full block.
That block could be fully developed.
06:41:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
But if the comp plan does not go there,
only goes a half a lot, which half do you develop?
Only the one that falls under the comp plan?
06:41:26 >>DAVID HAY:
Well, in this instance it's within an urban
village and there's policy language within the comp plan
that allows greater flexibility.
So if you have one parcel that has two future land use
categories, we would look at the entire parcel, the density
with the other category, and then urban village, that
density can be flexed on the entire site.
06:41:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Urban village, Indian village, Cuban
village, they are all the same.
Thank you very much.
06:41:57 >>HARRY COHEN:
Anyone else?
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
item number 7?
Don't all get up at once.
I don't see anyone.
Is there anything additional from council before we move on?
06:42:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Second.
06:42:26 >> We have a motion to close by Councilman Maniscalco,
seconded by Councilman Miranda.
All in favor? Opposed?
I'm not really sure where we left off in terms of ordinances
but I will go to Mr. Maniscalco.
06:42:39 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I have an ordinance being presented for first reading
consideration, an ordinance amending the Tampa Comprehensive
Plan, future land use map for the property generally located
at 909, 911, 913, 1006, and 1008 West Cypress street, 1002,
1007, 1010, West Lemon Street, 910, 1001, and 1010 west Cass
street and 707, 711, 903, 095 and 907 north Delaware Avenue
from residential 35 to urban use 60 UMU 60 providing for
repeal of all ordinances in conflict providing an effective
date.
06:43:21 >> We have a motion by Councilman Maniscalco, seconded by
Councilwoman Montelione.
All in favor?
Opposed?
06:43:33 >>THE CLERK:
The motion carried with Reddick voting no,
Suarez being absent and Capin being absent at vote.
Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
9:30 a.m.
06:43:44 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
Item number 8.
06:43:47 >>DAVID HAY:
Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn.
The next plan amendment is map amendment 16-05.
The subject site is located along Florida Avenue in the
university planning district.
06:44:09 >> Excuse me, go ahead.
06:44:18 >>DAVID HAY:
The request is a privately initiated map
endment, approximately .24 acres of a larger .66-acre
site.
The request, the subject site is designated residential 20.
That portion of the subject site.
And the applicant is seeking the portion of the back of the
subject site to be changed to that community commercial 35.
Here we have an aerial.
We are looking north of Florida Avenue.
We have got Waters Avenue to the south.
You can see basically Florida Avenue has a number of
commercial uses, auto related uses, and restaurant uses.
Then to the west and also to the east, basically off the
corridor, you have got a mixture of duplexes and
single-family detached, and even some smaller multifamily
uses.
Here we have an existing land use map based on the property
appraiser's designation.
You can see the subject site is commercial, the pink and red
here are commercial uses.
The yellow is single-family detached, while the orange is
duplex uses.
Here we have the adopted future land use map as it is right
now.
You can see the back portion of the site has that
residential 20 future land use designation.
There was a plan amendment recently on the parcel directly
to the north also that you had approved.
This applicant is almost requesting the same.
The difference would be on the one to the north, in the
rear, remains a developable lot based on city standards in
that residential 20.
This would not provide a developable lot in the back portion
of that R-20.
That's really the only difference between the two.
Here we are looking west of the subject site from Florida
Avenue.
An auto sales and leasing business.
Here we are looking south from Florida Avenue at Wood
Street.
North of the subject site.
The subject site is just behind these cars right here.
Then we are looking north from Florida Avenue at Wood
Street.
North of the subject site.
You see the corridor, commercial in character.
Then we go into the residential looking west from Tampa
street, across from the rear of the subject site.
These people are in the back of the subject site.
This is east from Tampa Street at the rear of the subject
site. This is that plan amendment right here that you
previously approved.
And this is the requested area here.
Moving on looking south and east from Tampa Street behind
the subject site.
And then we are looking north and east from Tampa Street
just south of the subject site.
And again looking north from the intersection Tampa Street
and wood street.
You can see there a residential development pattern on that
section.
Here we have the proposed future land use map, if you choose
to approve it this evening.
You can see the entire site with the remaining piece
remaining at residential 20.
The majority of the site would go to that community
commercial 35.
Again, this is for that portion, just a portion that they
are changing currently.
It can be considered for up to four units based on that
residential 20.
And under that residential 20, it does allow for
consideration for neighborhood and general serving
commercial uses.
What would change under the proposed community partial 35
would be additional density, up to 8 units, and then the
allowance for intensive commercial uses, CI uses.
Also you can see the floor area ratio of those types of
buildings also increase.
The Planning Commission has found that the proposed request
is inconsistent with a number of policies.
Those policies include policies related to that sensitive
transition of usage, overall compatibility with surrounding
development patterns, policies related to the city's
commercial corridors, and the promotion of stable
residential areas.
Those specific policies are provided to you within the staff
report of the there was concerns that since the rear of the
remaining residential 20 would not be a buildable lot, and
it could not provide an appropriate transition to that
residential directly to the west.
So the official recommendation of the Planning Commission to
you this evening is to find proposed map amendments
inconsistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the
Imagine 2040 Tampa comprehensive plan.
And that concludes my presentation.
I'm available if you have any questions.
06:49:43 >>HARRY COHEN:
Questions of Planning Commission at this
time?
Applicant.
Todd Pressman, 334 East Lake Road, Palm Harbor, Florida.
I do have a Power Point for you if we can go to that,
please.
While we are doing that, I want to introduce you to the
family here tonight. This is Mr. Bruce Quatch and her
mother. This is their property that we have before you this
evening.
So this is family-owned land business, it's worked in
conjunction with property to the north which you approved
about a month and a half ago, approved the zoning just a
couple of weeks ago.
It is used primarily as a preowned vehicle display lot
located in the central northern part of Tampa, and it's
located just north of waters.
This is the site as per the property appraiser that's under
review today.
So we come toll you with a lot of good support.
We did talk to the neighbors.
You can see that we tried to get many of the neighbors in
the immediate area around supporting us.
There are a number of mobile homes.
You can see that in terms of the surrounding abutting
properties, we did talk to neighbors, and we have submitted
a petition for the record in support.
The site which is closer to you in the front is operated
jointly with the property to the north which again this body
approved same exact same use category about a month and a
half ago and you approved the zoning and follow-up.
We would have loved to have brought them in together if we
could have.
And that's pretty much what's been going on with the site
today.
You can see it's pretty.
For vehicle display
This is the site edge.
The Planning Commission indicates this is a very
intensive -- council members know this is a intensive route.
It's no different than what you see up and down Florida
Avenue.
So the current category is residential 20.
We are requesting CC 35 but this is only for a very small
portion of the property.
It's only for about .24 acres.
And you can see in the graphic here, it's just a small part,
actually shows it larger than it is, but again the acreage
is this .24 acres.
Showing you graphic lyrics you approved to the north, and
where today's is, and again it's just 2.24 acres whereby the
changes are sought and it would match exactly what's to the
north and what is approved in recent past.
In support, points in support, there are many for approval
in the past.
We are seeking the same abutting to the north.
One of the staff's basic premises which you.
Heard today is it's rigid and there's that demarcation line
all the way down Florida Avenue as to where intensity line
is.
There's a lot of jiggling and a lot of movement in line, and
as you can see the CI line, commercial intensive does change
and it does move and that's something that we are trying to,
in a sense, match up or work with and work with that
intensity as you look all around Florida Avenue.
The other thing you haven't heard from staff is these first
two parcels, the second one, those are different than
everything to the south.
To the south there's separate ownership so you are not going
to see a precedent, if you want to look at it that way, and
actually runs down to Waters Avenue a couple of blocks.
But the difference to the north where we were a month or so
where we are today is it's one owner going all the way
across the block where to the south it's two separate
owners.
And CC 35, the depth you find across the street goes all the
way across the block.
There have been no problems, been no issues that we have
heard, so certainly on the other side of the street works
fine and that's parted of the historical element of both.
I showed you neighborhood support which we are very proud to
have, and the petitions and signatures are in the file.
We do have a number of policies to look at.
These are some that the staff presented to you and some that
they didn't including policy 22.2.2 that the support
development of state economies in Tampa from poorer
neighborhood, to accomplish it, identify neighborhoods
throughout Tampa, that need additional assistance and there
are a number of employees that work at the site to the
north, and they enjoy walking to their job, and they are
gainfully employed and love the work.
Policy 18.6.1, encourage development of commercial uses in
character or scale with the general look and scale.
Policy 14.1.4 use limited land resources more efficiently
and pursue a development pattern that is more economically
sound, by encouraging in-fill development on vacant and
underutilized sites.
Staff tells you that intensive uses would not fit bull in
reality, it would allow some intensive uses, so to say that
we are going to introduce intensive uses, we feel, is not
correct because some intensive uses could be used on this
site today.
And as your staff told you, you have a criteria in the Tampa
plan that we believe we need.
Criteria one is it meets the intent of the general character
and description of the city's form which is basically
historical development of the neighborhood, and we clear lip
do that, I would take the great liberty to say that you
recognize that on the property north, and we are asking the
same thing to the north and across the street, that line is
very clear throughout the block.
So looking at the zoning line as well, the CI line, we are
following that general intent, the historical nature of the
specific area.
Criteria 2, your city staff says that we meet, which is land
use category, intensity located at least on one side.
I think I beat that horse to death so that's very clear at
this point.
And B, within a quarter mile of designated transited.
And Councilman Miranda of course referred to.
That bull we do meet that criterias a well.
Really in summary, the zoning intense line does shift, only
allows intensive uses, permit per the intensive uses along
the front. This matches it.
We are asking less depth than what you see across the
street.
And outstanding support from abutting and nearby neighbors.
We are happy to answer any questions.
And Mr. Chairman, if I may, I asked Mr. Quatch if he would
make some comments but he was very nervous and asked me if I
would make them.
He put a few words together.
So I will read this on behalf of Mr. Quatch and his family,
his wife and mother.
I wanted to say a few words to you.
One thing I want you toll know that this is not some big
corporation or International company. This is just a very
small piece of property that my family has come to own.
It's something that we again on, something that supports the
family, is a very small business.
This is again Mr. Quatch speaking.
I am here tonight to ask your help and consideration but
mostly help, exclamation point. This is something we still
don't 100% understand, but we have to get approved.
In a one in the neighborhood that we know of is against.
This it's kept very quiet.
Thank you.
Happy to answer any questions you might have.
06:57:21 >>HARRY COHEN:
Questions from council members at this time?
We don't see any of the moment.
Perhaps we'll come back to you.
Is there anyone from the public that would like to speak on
this item number 8?
06:57:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Move to close.
06:57:36 >> Second.
06:57:38 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion to close from Councilman
Miranda, seconded by Councilwoman Capin.
All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
Councilman Capin, would you please take item number 8?
06:57:47 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will be glad to.
An ordinance being presented for first reading
consideration, an ordinance amending the Tampa Comprehensive
Plan, future land use map for the property generally located
at 8426 North Florida Avenue from residential 20, R-20, to
community commercial 35, CC-35, providing for repeal of all
ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,
providing an effective date.
06:58:15 >> Second.
06:58:17 >>HARRY COHEN:
Motion from Councilwoman Capin, seconded by
Councilman Miranda.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
06:58:25 >>THE CLERK:
The motion carried with Suarez being absent
and Montelione absent at vote.
Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
9:30 a.m.
06:58:36 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
We are now at our 5:30 public hearings.
Item 9 through 11 are quasi -- quasi-judicial proceedings
requiring witnesses to be sworn in prayer to testimony.
So at this time, anyone who thinks they are going to speak
on any of the remaining items of the evening, 9, 10 and 11
we are opening now but 12, 13 and 14, now is a good time to
get sworn in.
(Oath administered by Clerk)
06:59:14 >>HARRY COHEN:
Since it is past 6:00, I would like to
entertain a motion to open the public hearings on items 9
through 14.
06:59:21 >> So moved.
06:59:23 >> Second.
06:59:25 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion from Councilwoman Capin,
seconded by Councilman Maniscalco to open the public
hearings.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
All right.
Those hearings are open and we are going to move on now to
item number 9.
06:59:39 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Land Development Coordination.
Item number 9 on your agenda this evening is a request to
rezone, and the request before you is REZ 16-52 located at
808 and 813 North Howard Avenue and 801 and 811 North
Armenia Avenue and 2310 west state street.
The request before you this evening is from CI commercial
intensive to PD planned development, residential
multifamily.
07:00:11 >>DAVID HAY:
Planning Commission staff.
I have been sworn.
We start the rezoning portion of this evening in the central
Tampa planning district.
More specifically the West Tampa urban village.
It's within the subject site the of the public recreational
facility is the Villa brothers park located at the southwest
corner much Armenia street and Lemon Avenue.
The park is located less than just 100 feet.
Someone has to walk 800 feet to get to the park because it's
across-walk situation.
So, also, North Howard and North Armenia avenues are
designated transit emphasis corridors.
And the closest Hart bus stop is located approximately 600
feet to the north on cypress so there isn't any transit on
that segment of Armenia or Howard.
Cypress Street, that's served by Hart's route 10 connecting
the subject site to downtown Tampa and the Westshore
business district.
The subject site is also located in a level E evacuation
zone
Onto the aerial.
We have the subject site right in the center.
The site looks familiar.
The armory.
The Jewish Community Center just to the south.
On the other side of the remaining, I guess, armory portion.
Down here.
And then here is the park on the west side of North Armenia
Avenue.
Here is North Howard.
And cypress is up to the north.
You can see that this section is slightly different than
what occurs on either side of Armenia Avenue.
This is more nonresidential development pattern, while to
the east of North Howard and west of North Armenia, you get
into more of that residential development pattern,
single-family detached with some scattered duplexes.
Onto the future land use map.
The subject site and all this red is the community
commercial 35.
The pink to the south is mixed use 35.
To the west we have in the brown color the residential 20.
And then this lighter tannish color, I guess, is the
residential 10.
Overall, the applicant is proposing to develop 198
residential units within a 220,928 square foot multifamily
building with structured parking.
The proposed development furthers the number of objectives
and policies regarding development within the City of Tampa.
The proposed in-fill development will redevelop a number of
existing commercial properties that have been underutilized
for years based on that underlying community commercial 35
future land use category.
That has up to 2.0 floor area ratio and the existing
development is no where near that intensity.
Proposed development will be urban in character and will
utilize the density bonus provision within the development
code.
The comprehensive plan promotes additional density within
the central city neighborhood.
Parking will be provided within a structure internal garage.
There will be integrated into is the T overall structure and
the building will be pedestrian oriented with a main lobby
being provided on north Howard Avenue.
Overall Planning Commission staff did find the overall
development comparable and compatible to the community
commercial 35, and that nonresidential development pattern
occurring in that area.
And based on that Planning Commission staff recommends to
you that plan development be found consistent with the
Imagine 2040 Tampa comprehensive plan.
Thank you.
07:04:10 >> Thank you, David.
As David mentioned, the request before you tonight is for
198 residential multifamily units in a multi-story structure
building with a central structured garage.
There are several waivers being requested.
The first is to allow for payment into the tree trust fund
prior to required trees being planted on-site, 43-inch
trees; second to reduce the required number of loading
berths from two to one; the third is to allow the loading to
occur in more than one continuous maneuver and to allow
maneuvering in the right of way;
Fourth is to reduce the use-to-use buffer along the southern
property line abutting the existing cell phone tower lot and
I'll show that to you.
Some 15 feet with a 6-foot wall, 10 feet with a 6-foot PVC
fence with a perimeter surrounding the cell tower lot.
Last is to reduce the required multifamily green space
requirement from 350 square feet per unit to 136 square feet
per unit for a total waiver of 42,794 square feet.
I will go ahead and show you the site.
The property is 2.83 acres.
And it does encompass a full city block with the exception
of the small cut-out for the cell tower parcel.
David showed you the aerial.
Armenia to the west, Lemon to the south, state to the south.
You do have the armory, and JCC development that is
occurring, brothers park over to the west.
This is the first block before you west of Howard for
redevelopment as multifamily redevelopment that you see
recently.
Over the past couple of years we have done several
applications on the east side of Howard, Lemon, Carmen,
gray, Habana square.
All this would be the east lot --
07:06:32 >>HARRY COHEN:
This is not inside the CRA boundaries, is
it?
It's just outside of it, I think.
07:06:38 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I do not believe so.
07:06:39 >>HARRY COHEN:
Yes.
07:06:43 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
I'm sorry.
Armenia is the western boundary.
This is the zoning atlas shown here.
Property currently CI.
There is RM-16 to the south, and the PD for the Fort Homer
Hesterly armory.
The PD over here was with the place of religious assembly
building, and that was done a few years ago.
This PD over here is five single-family lots.
Three of them have been built.
Two are vacant.
And a host of redevelopment and commercial reutilization of
existing structures along this segment of Howard.
I am going to present to you now the pictures.
I am going to start here.
At the southwest corner, or the northwest corner of Howard
and Lemon.
I am going to come around the block showing you the subject.
And then I'll come around the block showing you the adjacent
properties.
That's the northwest corner of Howard and Lemon.
Now moving west along Lemon, toward Armenia.
Approaching Armenia.
Coming up Armenia now.
This is also from Armenia.
This is at the corner of Armenia and state.
There is the facade that faces state.
Now heading down state towards Howard.
You can see the South Howard there.
That's the small cut-out that's part of the site plan that's
cut out on the site plan before you as well.
This is continuing down state toward Howard.
Approaching Howard.
From Howard.
And now back at that beginning corner on Lemon looking back
south toward the armory.
Again headed down Lemon toward Armenia.
This is the south side.
At Armenia and Lemon, there is Villa brothers on the west
side of Armenia.
This is for the habad that has not been built yet.
This is the northwest corner of State and Armenia.
And now on the north side of State directly across from the
subject headed back toward Howard.
The north side of State headed back toward Howard.
And then the Howard side, those are the two vacant setback
side lots.
These are two houses.
And then south of the site on Howard.
The application before you is 198 residential units on a
2.83-acre site.
As I just showed you, it is surrounded by the family owned
David cigar factory that is currently vacant and special
uses, catering by the family, the JCC to the south and
Beulah brothers to the west as well as single-family.
The project will contain four story multifamily residential
with structurally integrated five level garage located mid
block.
The garage would have access on West Lemon.
The service area is also co-located a vehicular entry along
Lemon.
And I did -- I have a smaller site plan for you to take a
look at.
The building setbacks are proposed as follows.
12-foot north on state, 12-foot south on legal on, 12-foot
west on Armenia, and 20-foot east on Howard Avenue.
Through the KRC process we discussed the building back on
Howard to be respectful of the Davis cigar factory
immediately adjacent to the site to the north.
The proposed maximum height is 352 feet to the top of roof
and 58 feet to the top of the architectural features and the
parking garage.
Based on the proposed number of units, total number of 345
parking spaces are required including guest spaces it.
I'm sorry, including 295 residential spaces and 50 guest
spaces.
A total of 348 spaces are being provided.
The property is in the West Tampa overlay district, and
between two historic landmark structures.
The applicant has committed to comply with all design
standards.
This property has a future land use designation of CC 35
which you all talked about this evening, community
commercial 35, and it allows for consideration of a floor
area ratio up to 2.0.
Once you pass the 1.5, you need a development agreement and
bonus provision.
This project has a proposed F.A.R. of 1.81.
They are asking for a 222,928 square feet.
The three proposed bonus criteria includes the structured
parking, transit stop, enhanced streetscape and entryway.
The associated development is also on your agenda this
evening.
In my staff report on pages 3, 4 and 5, you will find the
findings of Development Review Committee.
From land development, we have some minor modifications we
need made to the site plan.
Including paver entry -- included in the development
agreement -- and there is also a cross section of these that
we have.
This is one of the enhancements.
The contrast to that was these arrows shown in red are all
green space.
As you know, staff has come before you on a couple of
occasions after we did NOHO whereof we did not provide
adequate setback for planting and adequate green space for
planting, and we tried to get a little bit more in this at
the 12-foot setback in order to provide adequate space for
planting in these areas when we have a more urban form of
building.
So we are asking those two modifications be made to the site
plan in between first and second reading, and also that a
cross section of the new wall which is being proposed at
Howard and state and Howard and Lemon also be included on
the site plan.
Urban design had some comments.
They need a notation added that the developer will initiate
the required maintenance use and assumption of risk and hold
harmless agreement.
They need the revised exhibit 4, specialty pavement that I
just showed you, and also colored architectural elevations
for the remaining three sides of the building.
In relation to transportation and natural resources, both of
those departments have a finding of inconsistency.
Transportation -- and Jonathan is here this evening -- has
an inconsistency finding related to the requested reduction
in loading spaces, and also the maneuvering in the
right-of-way.
If it is council's pleasure to approve those two waivers,
they do need a notation added that alternative driveway
configuration on West Lemon was approved via transportation
design exception and the case number.
Lastly natural resources has a finding of inconsistency in
relation to the multifamily green space waiver.
In relation to that, they do not support the waiver, the
plans propose an extensive waiver to the landscaper, 427,974
square feet at the current rate of $8.01 per square foot,
the total in lieu pavement would be $342,780.
In the event that council would grant the green space
waiver, they had two changes that needed to be made in
between first and second reading.
There's one set of trees that is not shown on the plan, and
then secondly, they need notations related to a tree
transplant plan that the developer is proposing for some of
the trees on-site.
Overall staff did find the request inconsistent in reals to
natural resources and transportation, and we are available
for any questions.
07:16:11 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
Any questions from council before we move on to the
petitioner?
07:16:18 >>Michael Horner:
14502 North Dale Mabry highway Tampa
363618 and I have been sworn.
Mr. Miranda, you were the motion maker to allow us to come
up first on the agenda after notice issue last month, and we
appreciate that courtesy.
Council, we have been --
07:16:49 >> First on the agenda?
07:16:51 >> We were wondering, at 7:
00 to be first and it's still a
privilege.
We appreciate the courtesy.
Tonight we have representative Mr. Jesse WALPES, and Mr.
Lucas Carlos, Mr. Michael gates, with white house group, to
answer any utility engineering questions.
As Abbye said, we have been in this process for a good six,
seven months, and we have worked very, very hard.
To say that staff held our feet to the fair would be an
understatement.
So at that DRC meeting, we had to go back essentially to the
drawing board and redesign this project.
It has not been easy.
But we stepped up to the plate, and we worked with all the
review agencies, and I stand before you tonight with
favorable recommendations.
We are pleased, we worked hard for the finding of
consistency with Planning Commission.
We have, I think, a dressed most if not all of those issues.
Our revisions have been made for the second reading.
Hopefully it will be a second reading.
We have worked hard with staff in the interim period.
Let me go back to what we did between the initial site plan
files and what are now proposing before you tonight.
We reduced 218 to 198.
We increased the open space which essentially was zero and
the first part of the plan, and the first design, to now .62
acres or 27,000 square feet.
We increased the setback as Abbye mentioned of 20 feet on
Howard and 12 feet on the other side elevations.
Reduced the F.A.R. from 2.07 which was the maximum to 1.81.
We also reduced -- excuse me, increased the tree
preservation from zero -- this is an urban density in-fill
project from essentially zero to 56%.
Includes rotating of palms, great extended effort on our
part to work with the city arborist, and now at a 60%
preservation with located palms.
We are pleased we can achieve that.
The elevations, comments from Mr. Fernandez and Mr. Callahan
quite honestly were a little bit harsh.
We took that comment to heart, and we sat back down with our
architects.
We then worked through elevation changes, and revisions to
incorporate some brick veneer into the building structure as
well as banding as well as the arches, and carried that
through dramatically to the entire development, and we stand
before you with their supports in terms of the architectural
elevations.
We also incorporated as Abbye mentioned paver block,
highlights, planning a round the entire site for the
entryway into and out of the building entrance.
No-parking waivers are being sought.
We exceed parking space requirements.
We have all the visitor space accounted for.
And the site plan before you even allows for visitor parking
in the front, which are public parking spaces.
They should be because they are on public streets, Lemon and
State streets.
All access movements are related, restricted to just Lemon
street to the south so those maneuvers are fairly easy to
control, if you want to the go in you take the left, and the
left on Howard. If you want to go southbound Armenia you
take a right out of that garage.
You take a left turn on Armenia.
We comply with all West Tampa overlay design requirements.
We also -- placed all of the stormwater vault under the
building at great expense.
That frees up areas for space internal as well as making
this an outstanding urban in-fill development project.
We have reached out to the CRA advisory committees.
We have reached out to the North Hyde Park, had numerous
meetings with the neighborhood associations, and those have
been very positive, council.
We are pleased that we have been able to meet with them,
review our plans, we have gone through those reductions,
intensity reductions.
We thought that we had unanimous approvals, perhaps being
forthcoming.
I got a letter today from the North Hyde Park alliance that
indicated they had a concern.
This was not a condominium project.
That this is an apartment multifamily development.
Quite honestly, I don't know how to address that because we
are not going to force mortgages on any of the residents.
This has always been planned for a multifamily apartment
rental community.
The Richman Group of Florida that I have had the pleasure of
representing for 15 to 20 years has never done condominiums.
They have always done multifamily developments.
And these are established with rate structures that we think
are reasonable, that people can afford.
It's interesting the dichotomy that the rates are a little
too high for the area.
And then we had comments from the North Hyde Park alliance
that they thought that perhaps we did not establish the
right clientele.
I was shocked to see.
That I don't know how to respond to that except to say this
will be a highly vetted application process.
We hope all those residents that qualify can be certainly
residents of this community.
We encourage that.
This is not subsidized housing.
Those tax credit deals are done by the legislature.
This is solely a market rate development.
I might add this was similar development to the J Square
development project that I stood before you on, I would say,
six months ago, south of Columbus, east of Grady, and came
back in for a follow-up PD and did a 94 unit town home
project to the south.
So that has worked out well.
Richman Group just finished the Aurora development in
downtown City of Tampa and did not require any rezonings so
you are probably familiar with that on a regulatory front.
It's a beautiful project.
This is an ideal transitional parcel.
As Abbye mentioned we are at the epicenter of all these
changes.
We have the Jewish Community Center to the south, Fort
Homerly. It will remain in place, a historical structure.
We have the Samuel Davis cigar factory directly to the
north.
Beautiful structure.
But unfortunately it's in private hands right now.
But I have heard that might be scheduled for some active
participation, redevelopment in the next few years.
We hope that's the case.
We have Cypress Street to the north, the interstate to the
north, Kennedy Boulevard to the south.
These are the only one-way to have that kind of volume that
allow this entire block to actually be developed in a
completely redeveloped opportunity for multifamily
residential units.
We have complete support of the Jewish Community Center, a
letter in the record from them indicating they find it to be
a complementary use.
We have also have support from domain homes who I believe
are also here, the largest volume builder of single-family
homes in the West Tampa area.
We are proud to have their strong support also.
We have a waiver of open space.
Abbye is correct.
We wish we could have more but we have 27,000 square feet,
came up from zero.
And that yields to us a requirement for 342,000-dollar
payment into the tree trust fund.
We offered to take all of those trees and put them right
next door in the Villa Brothers park.
150 feet away.
Makes ideal sense.
That cannot be approved.
So we make the trust fund payment allows.
But that green space that recreational opportunity is 150
feet away on the west side of Armenia.
I expect our residents to take full opportunity of that
enity.
The ad valorem revenue, council members, I think with the
existing improvement as Abbye mentioned is an assemblage of
five properties, we have warehouses, boat storage, insurance
building.
I think the last research we did a month ago is about
$35,000 ad valorem revenue per year.
After construction and development the ad valorem revenue
increases to 730, to $740,000 ad valorem revenue per year.
If I can go to the overhead briefly.
Council, this is west of the east elevation of Howard.
You can see the incorporation of brick veneer, and based on
the elevation of the cigar factory.
We carried that design theme throughout the elevations.
This is the south elevation on Lemon. This is the north
elevation on state street.
Howard to the east.
And elevation on Armenia Avenue.
You can see the green is the open space now provided.
The courtyard is internal.
Full amenities.
Courtyard internal to the western portion.
This is the sole access.
Ingress and egress into the development.
On the north side actually incorporated eight town home
units.
The stairsteps that go out onto state street to give some
character.
This is the paver brick detail that we have committed to.
All the entryway on the frontages.
We have sidewalk, pedestrian entryway come out to the
right-of-way.
And where will those be?
Again looking north.
All the entryway to the units will be true.
The knee wall detail that Abbye referred to, some people
thought we were doing a 7 to 8 F.W. Woolworth knee wall.
That's not a knee wall, that's an institutional wall.
The tallest part is the column.
Those columns are only five feet 6 inches.
The Jewish Community Center to the south.
8,067,000 square feet.
Community, production, daycare center.
Certainly a catalyst for investment in this neighborhood.
As soon as we saw they were on the books and moving forward,
we sat down with them, looked at their plans, with the same
engineers, compared notes and they are excited to have us on
board for this corridor redevelopment as well.
Council, we have worked hard with staff on the revised
plans.
We have reached out to the greatest extent possible.
Even as late as yesterday and this morning, responses and
traffic study reviews.
Our traffic consultant in speaking with their traffic
consultant in the neighborhood for the last week and a half.
We have shared all of our studies, all of our plans.
We think it's an excellent project for this area.
We appreciate your support.
I am going to ask Jeff if he can come in for just a minute
and speak briefly on the project.
And I will be happy to stand for any questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
07:28:04 >> Good evening.
My name is Jeff -- with the Richman Group, 477 Rosemary
Avenue West Palm Beach, Florida.
I have been sworn in.
We originally identified this site for a proposed
development.
It's an up and coming potentially awesome area.
The site proximity to I-275 and Kennedy Boulevard makes this
an ideal location for people who work in many different
parts of the area from a community standpoint.
We hope it will bring younger professional demographic in
this area and we believe the development serves as a
catalyst for future development such as after the JCC came
in.
It spurred up to make the investment and jump into this area
as well.
As Mike and Abbye mentioned we completely revamped the
elevations of the building to work with the city and tried
to adjust all the neighborhood groups.
We feel that the changes we made to the elevation to keep
the historic West Tampa overlay feel while also at the same
time providing a brand new high quality residential product
to the area.
The Richman Group has a longstanding relationship with the
City of Tampa.
We have two beautiful projects currently one in downtown,
one in Westshore, as Michael Horner pointed out.
It's because of this long-term relationship with the city
that we see the value in making a $41 million investment in
what we feel is a very high potential exciting new area
coming new area.
We feel that we are proposing a great project in an area
that really could use a great project.
Thank you.
07:29:45 >> We are going to ask you to receive and file this letter.
07:29:50 >>HARRY COHEN:
Any questions from the applicant, from
council members, before we go to the public?
I don't see any at this time.
Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on
item number 9?
07:30:01 >> (off microphone).
07:30:11 >>HARRY COHEN:
No, we don't.
McCarthy, Tampa, I have been sworn.
I'm a home builder, expect 23 years in the home bidding
industry, mostly working for big public builders in the
suburban market, and an few years ago went to work for a
local home builder, single-family urban -- single-family
homes.
And one of the areas we were the largest single-family
builder in the city limits.
An area we looked at was north of Kennedy and bringing
families into that area.
We have been successful.
And I just can't imagine a better project to be able the
rest of Howard between Howard and Armenia, that block is
dormant, and to bring in a project like this with the
quality development that the Richman company can do, it's
going to be transitional.
I assure you, you are going to bring in families, bring in
single people, and what happens is they get used to the area
and fall in love with it.
And they are going to fall in love with West Tampa.
I'm telling you, they are going to fall in love with West
Tampa and the proximity.
So it's a no-brainer.
I have never seen -- I have been in Tampa since 1980.
I have never seen a project that will transform an area like
I believe this 186 units will do.
Thank you.
07:31:45 >> Good evening, my name is Blake Frazier, 3002 West
Cleveland Street.
I have been sworn in.
Just like Jim McCarthy said, I believe very strongly in
this project.
I know that they have come a long bay way with the city,
with the design elements.
To go a little bit further on what Jim was saying, and what
Abbye pointed out, was that this is the first development
that's happened west of Howard of this sort.
I see the Richman Group's projects downtown, over in
Westshore, and although they are great urban in-fill
developments, you know, the temporary housing that provides
is not encouraging the potential home ownership and love for
the neighborhoods that Jim McCarthy spoke about no
residential setting like this one would provide.
This is in the heart of Tampa, in the heart of West Tampa.
Some of, I guess, the biggest pride in ownership of
single-family houses.
I see this development as just unbelievable potential for
what it could be for the West Tampa area and the City of
Tampa.
It will bring in young professionals, people who are living
and working in the city to be here long-term.
You know, they are going to put their roots in like Jim
said, and continue to add benefit and value to the city.
I think in closing, the Richman Group has done a great job,
and finding ways to make those waivers that they are asking
for a little less intense, and I would strongly urge you to
consider approving this development.
Thank you.
07:34:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I just have one question, Mr. Horner.
You spoke begun everything other than the reduction of the
loading space, maneuvering in the right-of-way.
07:34:12 >>Michael Horner:
Thank you, Mr. Miranda.
We are requesting the reduction of the loading space because
quite honestly we don't need it based upon our practices.
Our other developments, the two loading spaces simply are
not necessary.
Therefore, add to the waiver.
The maneuvering area has been slightly compress ready.
We worked with Abbye and Jonathan Scott of transportation,
so we have minimized that encroachment into the area.
But it's Lemon street.
It's going to be only for incremental time period,
infrequently, and will not have any impact on the motoring
public because we have on street parking there in any event.
07:34:55 >> So you have no need for loading docks?
07:34:57 >> No, we do, have one loading space but we don't have the
second one is being paved waived.
07:35:03 >> And the loading space is what size?
07:35:07 >>Michael Horner:
I want to say 25.
07:35:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
In other words what I am getting at I
don't want to see happening here what's happening in some of
the downtown buildings, in the loading spaces.
30-foot, and the semi is 60-foot so I have half the street
blocked.
07:35:22 >>Michael Horner:
I understand.
Our engineered informed me it's 12 feet by 360.
07:35:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Then you should have no problems with
any street movement of traffic.
07:35:35 >>Michael Horner:
And we'll have the same design loading
space as the other two multifamily developments.
07:35:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you.
07:35:43 >>HARRY COHEN:
Anything else?
Is there anyone else from the public that would like to
speak to us about item number 9?
07:35:48 >> Move to close.
07:35:51 >> We have a motion to close from Councilwoman Montelione,
seconded by Councilwoman Capin.
All in favor?
Opposed?
All right.
Councilman Reddick, can you please take this ordinance?
Oh, excuse me, substitute ordinance.
07:36:07 >>FRANK REDDICK:
I move a substitute ordinance being
presented for first reading consideration, an ordinance
rezoning property in the general vicinity of 808, 810, A/B
and 812 North Howard Avenue, 80 and 811 North Armenia
Avenue, 2310 west state street and 2315 West Lemon Street in
the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described
in section 1 from zoning district classifications CI
commercial intensive to PD planned development, residential,
multifamily, providing an effective date.
07:36:40 >> Second.
07:36:42 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion from Councilman Reddick,
seconded by Councilman Miranda.
All those in favor?
Opposed?
07:36:48 >>THE CLERK:
Motion carried with Suarez being absent.
Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
9:30 a.m.
07:36:56 >>HARRY COHEN:
And item number 10 relates to item number 9.
So we will go ahead and hear that now.
Crystal Moore, legal department.
Item 10 relates to rezoning as you just heard, a
redevelopment to allow a bonus density increase. This is
still under the old revision for the density bonus.
They are providing structured parking, a transit stop, and
pedestrian streetscape improvements.
They meet the criteria under the code.
I am available if you have any questions.
07:37:32 >>HARRY COHEN:
Any questions from council members?
Councilwoman Montelione.
07:37:38 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I can't wait for those new provisioning
to kick in.
07:37:42 >> This is one of the last two.
07:37:51 >>HARRY COHEN:
We are not actually taking action on this
tonight.
We are just going to continue it to the second public
hearing.
Is there anyone, however, that would like to speak to the
public on this item before we go ahead and do that?
I don't see anyone.
07:38:06 >> Move to continue to October 6th at 9:
30 a.m.
07:38:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
I think it probably would be appropriate
to close it and then have it set for second public hearing
on October 6th.
Is that correct, Mr. Crew?
That's what it appears to be.
07:38:31 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Second reading on that -- I mean, if I may
for a moment.
Rezoning requires two weeks in between.
And October 6th --
07:38:48 >>HARRY COHEN:
Two weeks from today.
07:38:49 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Thank you.
I was thinking it was September 29th.
(Laughter).
07:38:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I have been telling you about that Tampa
water.
07:39:00 >>HARRY COHEN:
Don't even joke about that.
All right.
Councilwoman Montelione, could you go ahead and make a
motion to close and then we'll go ahead?
07:39:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Move to close.
07:39:10 >> Second.
07:39:11 >>HARRY COHEN:
Motion to close from Councilwoman
Montelione.
Seconded by Councilman Miranda.
All those in favor?
Opposed?
All right.
Now we can go ahead and continue.
07:39:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Move the resolution be presented October
6th, 2016 at 9:30 a.m.
07:39:32 >> We have a motion from Councilman Miranda.
Seconded by Councilwoman Montelione.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
All right.
I have been informed by the clerk that we need to take a
five-minute break.
And we will be back with item number 11 at exactly a quarter
of 8.
(Tampa City Council in brief recess).
[Sounding gavel]
07:50:01 >>HARRY COHEN:
Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to get
started again.
Tampa City Council is now going to be called back into
session.
Roll call.
07:50:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Here.
07:50:14 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Here.
07:50:14 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Present.
07:50:16 >>HARRY COHEN:
Here.
07:50:19 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
Here.
07:50:21 >>HARRY COHEN:
Just a reminder, we have items 11, 12, 13
and 14 that are open.
We are going to move onto item number 11.
07:50:30 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Land Development Coordination.
Item number 11 on your agenda this evening is a continued
public hearing.
This is REZ 16-60 located at 1300 south Dale Mabry highway.
This was before City Council on September 8th.
It is the Starbuck's rezoning.
It came before you with two different options at that time.
One for the preservation of a grand tree, one with the
removal of a grand tree.
The applicant at that time asked for some additional time to
go back to Starbuck's and talk to them about a third option
that would save the 36-inch grand tree and provide the
required 50-foot buffer to the adjacent residential use to
the east.
Just to refamiliarize you with the site.
Dale Mabry, Neptune.
At the time the initial application came before you, you had
a finding of consistency from the Planning Commission based
on the new option that had been presented.
The Planning Commission has found the application
consistent.
I passed out to you the revised site plans as well as the
revised staff report in relation to this application.
There is currently one single waiver that is being requested
before you tonight.
The latest application, and that is a signage waiver.
That would be for signage to be located on the south side of
the building that is not adjacent to a street frontage so it
would not qualify as signage.
That being said, I would like to briefly go over the plan
that is before you tonight.
And that is a little cut-out.
In the pint of time, what was before you the other night has
an option that has come around back here, and therein was
parking here.
What is before you tonight, on option 3, would ask that
those options be removed and that this the option that would
go forward before you.
The queue line has been moved up to the west.
The 50-foot required separation from the adjacent
residential to the drive-through window operation has now
been achieved.
Within that 50 feet, which you are allowed to have, is the
dumpster location and a couple of parking spaces.
These parking spaces would be for employee only.
And these are above the required parking for the project.
The required parking for the project is being satisfied in
this area here.
This scenario was quickly vetted through staff.
It was an expedited review, got in the last Friday.
We have been working with the applicant at the request of
the applicant, contractual obligations to try to have
something before you tonight for your consideration.
There are a couple of modifications that would be required
in between first and second reading would it be the pleasure
of council to entertain this scenario before you tonight,
and that would be for these spaces need to move over to
achieve the 24-foot backout, and the dumpster, staff report
provided to you, there was some discussion about putting
dumpster over here and flipping these spaces over here.
However, based on a conversation the applicant had with
solid waste this evening, or this afternoon, not solid
waste, land development reviewer but solid waste commercial
collection, I believe that Mr. Gradston will speak to that a
little further and not making that adjustment.
That being said, let me go through and just make sure that I
have covered everything that is in the report.
Just one more clarification.
Nothing to the west of that is related to the building site,
that has not changed.
The parking here and here and adjacent to the building and
then this too now would come closer and you would have the
queue back here.
So it looks like there's approximately 12 or 13 cars that
would stack in prayer to getting to here.
Solid waste had concern as to the pinch point and backing up
of the service vehicle in this area.
But I think that we may have some solutions to that, that we
can propose now at first reading, and then confirm with
solid waste in between first and second reading, and in
something comes up, we would have to go back at that point.
Based on our review of the new development scenario 3 which
retains the 36-inch grand tree as well as meets the 50-foot
separation to the single-family residential to the east, we
do find this request consistent and we would ask for the
following modifications in between first and second reading.
The revision of the waiver table, the removal of sheets 1
through 4, which are those other development scenarios, the
switching of the dumpster enclosure, I am going to let Mrs.
Grimes cover that, but I believe that would stay as is on
the plan, and that would be bullets 3 and 4 would not be
considered in your motion.
Add a general note that the call box and menu board shall be
at least 70 feet from the east property line, correct a
setback for the east 75 feet currently listed on the plan as
10 feet, restate that the front yard setback is 45 feet from
the center line of south Dale Mabry, and move the --
relocate the signature block, attach the two building
elevation sheets tote plan and limit the side bar sheet
titled alternative development scenarios.
In relation to natural resources had modifications that they
found option 3 consistent with the grand tree preservation,
they needed the stormwater dimensions, they needed the two
palms on the south portion, 6 fat protection, they needed to
show the credits and debit of the trees, and to label the
employee parking as pervious and indicate pervious material
for the drive-through as optional.
I believe I may have omitted one.
Give me a second.
Transportation needed to show the stacking length
measurements from the menu board to the right-of-way, update
the parking table to correct high density compact and to
move the three employee spaces which I identified for you
further to the east in order to achieve the required 24-foot
backup.
That being said, staff is available for any questions.
07:58:49 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
There are any questions from council before we move on?
I don't see any.
07:59:10 >>GINA GRIMES:
Law firm of Hill, Ward, Henderson, 101 East
Kennedy Boulevard.
And we are happy to be back in front of you tonight with
option 3, which I think was the direction that you had asked
that we head in.
I want to begin by putting the site plan on the Elmo.
07:59:28 >>HARRY COHEN:
Mrs. Grimes, would you move that up a
little?
There you go.
Thank you.
And maybe a little over to the right.
There you go.
07:59:50 >>GINA GRIMES:
I want to begin by pointing out that have
been we now with option 3 meet or exceed all the current
standards with the exception of the waiver for the sign on
the southern elevation of the building.
That includes the special use standards for the
drive-through wind-
We now meet the 50-foot set back, 50 feet from the eastern
property line.
In fact we are actually 60 feet is where the queue Lane
starts.
So we meet code in that respect.
We also comply with the tree and landscape code.
We are now preserving the 36-inch grand tree in the middle
of the site in the rear.
We comply with the parking requirements.
We were required to have 25 parking spaces.
We actually have 28.
But these three on the northeastern corner are for employee
only because of the conflict that is created with the queue
line.
We also are willing to enhance the landscape above and
beyond what the tree and landscape code requires by planting
bamboo around the perimeter of the dumpster in the rear of
the site.
And I contrast that with the existing conditions of the
site.
Remember, currently, there's an 8-foot wall on this eastern
property line.
And right now you have parking that occurs on along that
wall.
In fact that parking is for some of the employees and they
begin work at like 5 a.m. so they are out there early.
You also have this driveway that extends over to Watrous so
you do have trash, solid waste pickup that uses the access
point and comes down to the site at whatever hour they do
the trash pickup.
And because we will be accessing, will be accessing a long
Dale Mabry, the solid waste truck will no longer travel
along that eastern boundary adjacent to the residential.
Also as far as the aesthetics of the building, that's what's
there right now.
As you can see it's in need of a face lift.
The rear of the building is very unorganized.
There are abandoned trailers on the site, trucks parking
wherever -- parking is really not arranged in any particular
fashion, and there is also an abandoned trailer on the site.
We believe the rezoning will be a substantial improvement to
the existing conditions.
Now, the parking.
This was the area that created the conflict that we had to
go back and discuss with Starbuck's, and there was a lot of
arm twisting that went on with this because Starbuck's
wanted 30 spaces on-site, and as we discussed at the last
hearing, they are very particular about their stores,
especially when it comes to queuing and especially when it
comes to parking.
So as I said previously, not only are we trying to work with
the city staff and all the reviewing agencies including the
Planning Commission, but we also had to comply with the
Starbuck's requirements as well.
So Starbuck's wanted 30 spaces.
They consider our site to only have 25 because of the three
spaces being limited to employees.
So as a result the compromise was for the developer J square
to go out and is going to have to go out and obtain some
spaces off-site for some of the other Starbuck's employees.
But we are now no position where we really can't reorient
the site, especially with respect to the trash and the
dumpster in these parking spaces, the dumpster here, these
parking spaces here.
I know that was a comment by solid waste.
But if we have to do that, and we would lose two additional
spaces if we put swap these three space was the dumpster we
will lose two additional spaces and if we lose those two
additional spaces we will lose Starbuck's as a tenant.
We simply can't go any lower in the parking on-site.
Let me address the solid waste.
It is proposed to be located approximately 25 feet from the
rear forgot line but it will be heavily buffered with
15-foot landscape buffer, which is immediately behind it, as
well as the bamboo trees that I mentioned earlier.
I showed you previously a picture of the bamboo that would
be planted.
It would grow probably close to 20 feet tall.
So it would shield or mitigate for any impact to that
residential area.
Also keep in mind Starbuck's trash. On the other hand
restaurants that could otherwise go on this site under the
CG zoning.
They have a lower trash volumes than most restaurants.
A lot of is it cardboard.
In fact, they have a very strong recycling program that they
have at all their stores.
So it isn't the typical restaurant dumpster that you might
find under the typical CG zoning.
As I mentioned, the city would like us to swap the location
of the -- the city solid waste department had a comment when
they reviewed the plan to swap the two.
And their issue was with the solid waste truck pulling in
and backing out, this could be a conflict with the queue,
and that really was the main issue.
The trash is picked up a couple times a week.
We don't know at this stage exactly how often but we would
be willing to mitigate, and we have agreed to -- and I have
actually drafted some language where we would be willing to
add to our site plan in order to avoid any conflict between
the solid waste pickup, and that drive-through queue Lane
the developer will contract with the city for solid waste
pickup at times off peak of the drive-through queue and or
we will have a restaurant employee on-site and present when
a solid waste pickup occurs and they will control the
drive-through queue line tore avoid any conflict with the
solid waste trucks.
And I presented that language to Ms. Feeley tonight, and we
have already set up a meeting with the solid waste
department in hoping if we go forward with first reading
tonight that they will sign off between first and second
reading on that issue.
The last issue that we discussed at the last hearing was
operating hours.
The hours of operation.
And despite our third attempt in discussing this issue with
Starbuck's, they would not agree to limit their hours of
operation.
But I want you to keep in mind that hours of operation is
not a code requirement.
Also, as far as the site is concerned, and how it impacts
the residential area, not only dough we have the queue Lane
60 feet, which exceeds code requirements, the menu board is
130 feet from the residential, and the pickup window is 230
feet from the residential.
So those activities on-site that would typically generate
noise would be quite a distance from the residential on the
eastern boundary.
And then the other thing I would like you to note is that
there are CG uses to be permitted on this site by right that
would generate -- that are a lot more intensive and would
generate a lot more noise.
Just some examples are a hotel or a motel.
You can have a 24 hour restaurant on this site like a Waffle
House or an I-Hop.
Actually the code allows equipment repair, allows a vet
office, allows a kennel, a pharmacy, a gas station, even
minor vehicle repair.
We think that this proposal is much less intense than any of
those, and that we have mitigated above and beyond what the
code requires.
And so with respect to the hours of operation, we think that
we have sufficiently mitigated with all of these other
conditions that we have agreed to.
I would like to close by saying that we have worked
extremely hard in satisfying everyone requests including
Starbuck's, and again it meets or exceeds code criteria with
the exception of the sign on the southern elevation.
City staff has found it consistent, and I'm pleased to say
that the Planning Commission has also, based on this option
3, which was part of their suggestion at the last hearing,
that they also have now found it consistent.
And with that we one request your approval.
08:08:34 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much, Mrs. Grimes.
Are there any questions, comments from council members
before we hear from the public on this item?
Anyone here in the public that would like to address council
on item number 11?
We have a motion to close from Councilman Maniscalco.
Seconded by Councilman Montelione.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
All right.
Councilman Miranda, would you please take item 11.
08:09:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
File REZ 16-60, an ordinance being presented for first
reading consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the
general vicinity of 1300 South Dale Mabry Highway in the
city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in
section 1 from zoning district classifications CG commercial
general to PD planned development, restaurant with drive-in
window, providing an effective date.
Along with the items that Ms. Feeley put into the record
earlier, along with the conversation that Ms. Grimes put in,
between first and second reading regarding the dumpsters and
any others that were discussed.
08:09:47 >> Second.
08:09:48 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion from Councilman Miranda,
seconded by Councilman Maniscalco.
All in favor?
Opposed?
08:09:55 >>THE CLERK:
The motion carried with Suarez being absent.
Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
9:30 a.m.
08:10:02 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
We are going to move on now to our 6:00 public hearings.
It's 10 after 8 so we are not doing too bad.
Item number 12 is our public hearing regarding city's
citizenship participation plan.
It is a non-quasi-judicial proceeding.
08:10:19 >> Vanessa McCleary, community management director for the
City of Tampa.
What we are presenting is the citizen participation plan
which is a plan that outlines how we will involve the
community in why use of the grand funds.
The city is a retirement community that service CDBG, HOME
dollars from the federal government and the plan just
outlines how we will didn't those funds and how we will
involve the public in the use of those funds.
And so at this point what we are doing is opening up the
public comment period on the document which just talks about
where different documents will be available, and the
properties that we will use R.
08:11:11 >>HARRY COHEN:
Are there any questions for Mrs. McCleary
before we go to public comment on the citizenship
participation plan?
I don't see any questions at this time.
Is there anyone from the public that would like to being
address council on item number 12?
Part of the public hearing.
Motion to close by Councilwoman Montelione, seconded by
Councilman Maniscalco.
All in favor?
Opposed?
All right.
Thank you very much.
08:11:40 >>FRANK REDDICK:
[Off microphone.]
08:11:49 >>HARRY COHEN:
Actually all the other ones were 5:30, and
this 6:00 one was set for time certain.
In any event, we are to our 6:00 public hearing, items
number 13 and 14.
These are quasi-judicial.
And since a lot of people have comb in just recently, if you
are planning to have speak on item number 13 or 14 and have
not yet been sworn, please take the opportunity now to get
sworn prior to speaking.
So if you haven't been sworn in, pleas stand to be sworn in
at this time.
(Oath administered by Clerk).
08:12:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
Mr. Chairman, just to inform council that
my understanding is the Mascotte room is open down below on
the first floor and there may be people there who are
watching this who may wish to at some point come up and
testify.
08:12:54 >>HARRY COHEN:
Well, it's certainly obvious from the amount
of correspondence we have received and the number of people
that are here tonight that there's a lot of interest in this
matter.
So everyone that needs an opportunity to speak tonight will
have an opportunity, and they will have a chance to be
heard.
With that said, Mrs. Kert, we'll go ahead and begin.
08:13:12 >>REBECCA KERT:
I wanted to bring another procedural matter
to your attention.
I know that the petitioner has procedural issues of that
they would like to discuss.
And I know at least one of the representatives for an
opponent does, I don't know who else does.
I don't know if you want to take those issues up when they
come up or set the procedure for the evening at the
beginning.
That's at your discretion.
08:13:35 >>HARRY COHEN:
I think we go ahead and set it now so there
won't be any questions about how we are going to proceed.
Why don't we start with the petitioner?
And then we will move on to the other.
08:13:46 >> David Smith, 401 East Jackson Street, from Gray Robinson,
representing Tampa Yacht Club.
What we thought we would do this evening, we have a rezoning
request, a PD, which is a predicate act in order to move
forward with the special use alcohol beverage application.
It probably would make more sense for us to present our case
in chief on each of those issues, and then open it up to the
public participation and those who are pro and con so that
we don't have to have people to stay around for the PD that
have to wait for the SU to speak against.
I think we could facilitate your process, it would allow
everybody to be heard.
They are very much intermingled in terms of the nature of
the activity and I think will find many people speaking to
the issue of the SU application that will also speak to the
nature of the PD application.
So I think it will simplify things in terms of your process.
We all New York you have to vote on the PD first and you
will do that.
You will be instructed by a very capable attorney honor we
think that would be an appropriate way to proceed.
And we think give opportunity for everybody to err heard.
Wee do have a number of people downstairs.
I'm not sure how many because they were outside the door and
in the Mascotte room.
I don't know if you want to the go through that process.
Hopefully they watched on TV and they were sworn in.
08:15:10 >>HARRY COHEN:
I would certainly ask that anyone comes up
to speak that hasn't been sworn, identify that fact to us.
But we will intermittently ask if there are additional
people to be sworn in.
Mr. Shelby.
08:15:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
May I inquire of petitioner how much time they are
requesting to present their case?
08:15:29 >>DAVID SMITH:
At this point we have 15 minutes each for our
PD and for our SU.
But we may need additional time in rebuttal as is
contemplated by the rules of procedure that governing City
Council.
So it's kind of hard for me to answer that in abstract.
We would like to try to be as succinct as possible but want
to make sure that you have an opportunity to hear also about
our arguments.
And this is very complicated, as we will a certain during
our presentation in chief.
There's been a lot of let's call it misunderstanding about
what the facts are.
It's very difficult sometimes to unwind that in a very short
period of time.
So if we are going to have an expansion of time for others,
then we may need expansion of time to rebut.
Otherwise we try to stick with our case in chief which is 30
and then our five on rebuttal which is ten.
08:16:20 >>HARRY COHEN:
You wanted to speak?
08:16:27 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I did, thank you.
Mrs. Kert?
So what we would do then is open both the PD and the public
for the SU, so they are both open.
We hear from the petitioner statements regarding both, and
we will hear from the public and we will hear from everyone
else on both.
But when we close, we close both hearings, and we just tab
separate votes, one on the PD, one on the SU.
08:17:02 >>REBECCA KERT:
Legal department.
Yes.
08:17:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
You don't need to say your name for the
answer.
08:17:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I just want to ask the public to leave
exactly how you came, neighbors, friends, and maybe even
relatives.
If you are going to get mad at anyone, get mad at me.
But I want you to stay in your friendship forever.
It's a very short period of time in life.
All that conversation that we have had, I suggest we leave
it at 15 minutes.
But if a councilor representing petition each time we allow
that time, and whatever the opponent counselor is, on the
difference of opinion, they are given the same time. So
that way they we open it for 30 minutes, they may only need
25.
I don't know.
08:17:50 >>HARRY COHEN:
I think any grant of additional time will be
by council's vote.
But to provide everyone with due process we need to let
everyone make their argument.
And we will do that certainly.
08:18:01 >> Thank you, my name is Gordon should have, I was going to
make some suggestions.
I am remitting a number of opponents tonight and I think it
would be make sense from an efficiency standpoint and
efficiency standpoint to open both matters like you are
suggesting together, also suggest that the applicant go
first, and then let the proponents go after the applicant,
and then let the opponents go, and then the applicant would
then have the opportunity for rebuttal.
That seems a very fair process.
Otherwise it becomes a very disjointed process, and I also
think it will be a longer process.
I would just ask that you consider that for fair process.
08:18:44 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
So it's going to take longer to get to the
procedure than the whole -- (Laughter).
08:18:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I agree with are some of that.
Some I don't.
There's two sides to this room here.
One the people proponents, one for the opponents and you
take them one at a time.
That's all.
08:19:04 >>FRANK REDDICK:
It seems we have a lot of people that want
to speak, and we had a process in a previous meeting that we
make it two minutes per person.
I think there's a whole lot of people downstairs waiting.
We have a whole lot sitting up here.
So I just wanted council, maybe two minutes per person for
public comment.
08:19:31 >>HARRY COHEN:
Is that a motion?
Is there a second to that motion?
08:19:38 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
I'll second it.
08:19:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
I'll second it for discussion providing
the two attorneys, because I don't want later on in life to
say, well, I want another bite at the apple.
Do you agree with that, sir?
08:19:49 >> I didn't fully hear the discussion, but the one thing I
would suggest is that when I speak, I am going to have
others who speak after me, and it would be, I think,
fundamentally unfair not to let us complete our
presentation.
And so I think -- and that's why I was suggesting this
process.
08:20:11 >>HARRY COHEN:
We will do the best we can with that.
The one issue is that oftentimes, we can't control when
people come to the podium.
But we'll do our best to keep the process in order that
people can follow.
08:20:24 >> And I will make sure, Mr. Chair, that you know who is
speaking after me.
I believe it's a matter of fundamental fairness to let us
put our full case forward.
08:20:34 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
08:20:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Mr. Chairman, again, if the petitioner
takes 22 minutes, then the opponent has 22 minutes.
Whether you have one speaker or ten speakers.
You can only give the same amount to each one.
08:20:47 >>HARRY COHEN:
With that said let's vote on Councilman
Reddick's motion.
08:20:51 >> Can I be heard on that first, Mr. Chairman? We would
actually prefer the three minutes.
We have many speakers who dedicate add significant amount of
their time to be here this evening.
And many of them will take more than two minutes.
Some of them will take a minute.
But I think for those who have at least three minutes, I
would like to request give them that three minutes.
08:21:11 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Sir, you have been dealing with this for a
long time.
Do you mean to tell me those can't speak what they have to
say in two minutes?
08:21:18 >> Many of them will do it in 30 second.
But there are some people that have a little more.
08:21:23 >>FRANK REDDICK:
Then there should be no objection to the
two minutes.
08:21:26 >>DAVID SMITH:
Well, except for those who have more than two
minutes to speak.
We would like to have them speak.
But if it's the will of the council it's the will of the
council.
08:21:34 >>HARRY COHEN:
Is there any other comment on the motion?
We dough have a motion on the floor.
Councilwoman Capin.
08:21:39 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
We go with the two minutes, and we if they
want an extra minute we give them the extra minute.
08:21:45 >>HARRY COHEN:
With that said let's go ahead and vote on
the motion so we can get started.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Those opposed?
All right.
Mr. Smith.
Or excuse me, I think we are going to hear from staff first.
Go ahead.
08:21:59 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Land Development Coordination.
I would like 17½ minutes, please.
(Laughter)
Item number 13.
Lucky number 13 on your agenda this evening is REZ 16-54.
Located at 5320, 5321, 5322, Interbay Boulevard, and 5118
south Nichol street.
The request before you tonight is from an RS-60 residential
single-family and RS 150 residential single-family to PD
planned development recreation facility private.
08:22:45 >> Jennifer Malone, Planning Commission staff.
I would like to clarify the Planning Commission only
reviewed the PD.
We did not review the SU petition so I will only be covering
the PD in my brief presentation.
This is located in the South Tampa planning district.
It is in evacuation zone A.
It's located on Interbay Boulevard, south of Gandy
Boulevard, South MacDill.
Here is an aerial.
This is Interbay Boulevard right here.
On Gandy Boulevard, north of the subject site.
The surrounding single-family detached.
And then there's also a public park to the north.
This is the existing land use of the site.
It has three land use categories.
There's a very small sliver of residential 10 in that
orange.
Then the residential 20 in the brown.
And then the recreational in that green.
Then we also have residential 10 in the residential 20 over
here on the side.
The protection of single-family neighborhood in providing
transition is an important component of the comprehensive
plan.
Planning Commission staff highly recommends that the
applicant give careful consideration and recommends the
hours of operation are reasonably determined.
Overall we did find the proposed plan development comparable
and compatible with the uses providing for the appropriate
mitigation of sensitive impact on the surrounding
single-family residential.
I'm available for any questions.
08:24:16 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Land Development Coordination.
The request before you tonight with the zoning from
residential to PD for recreational facility private is to
allow for the expansion of the existing Tampa Yacht Club
facility and for consideration of the associated alcoholic
beverage application.
The 18.77-acre property is located south of Gandy Boulevard
on Interbay.
It is comprised of two parcels.
The western parcel includes the riding stables, riding
track, tennis court, associated tennis center building, and
surface parking, approximately 224 parking spaces.
The eastern part contains the main Yacht Club building,
clubhouse, pool, playground, Marina facility, golf master
score and surface parking approximately 107 parking spaces.
The property is surrounded by single-family residential
along the west and south, Southpointe park to the north and
the Hillsborough bay to the east.
The application seeks approval of the planned improvement to
the existing facility totaling approximately 17,707 square
feet, including clubhouse improvements, and the construction
of the pool.
Pavilion.
If you will allow me for just a moment, and I too have read
some of the articles and heard some of what was on the news.
There's been discussion that there are planned improvements
over in this area.
The planned improvements I just stated to you are in the
pink areas here.
I have calculated exactly the square footages that were on
the plan.
It equals the 17,707.
That's what's shown down in the improvements.
There is to be no new construction on the western parcel.
There is a notation which allows for -- should be existing
buildings be destroyed, for those to be built back in their
current location for their current uses, and no expansion of
those areas or anything less.
Any new construction or new development in this area would
be subject to a rezoning.
No substantial -- there's no construction to take place on
that site.
So the improvement site is outlined, or getting to, would be
on the eastern side as indicated in those areas totaling
that amount of square footage.
There is a proposed relocation of a couple of the
maintenance buildings that are currently on the east side to
the west side.
However, there is no new construction proposed on the west
side.
The property received several special use applications for
the existing facility.
And I have some of those historical ones with me this
evening.
There are included approvals in 1991 for the approval of the
deck, 1992 for clubhouse modification, in 1997 for tennis
courts.
As well as several board of adjustment approvals over the
years in 1983 and 1984.
The property currently has an approval for the sale of
alcoholic beverages through an old state license which is
governed by the 1959 footprint of the building.
In order for the applicant to be approved for a new special
use for alcoholic beverage sales, the zoning must be changed
from the current residential zoning district.
Jennifer just showed you the aerial of the site.
I'll show it to you again here.
Interbay.
Country club Avenue.
Nichol street.
And then Crescent drive to the west.
Ballast Point park.
To the north.
Predominantly, the zoning category on this property is
RS-60, with as Jennifer showed you the exception is the one
sliver in the comp plan that has a lower land use, just one
sliver on the south here is the RS 150.
I will show you some pictures of the property.
Main clubhouse building.
Looking south on Interbay.
On the west side starting up at the north, the riding area.
Coming down south.
South.
Still on the west side.
From the southern-most point looking north of Interbay.
Coming around country club, Nichol.
The west side of the tennis court area.
This is Nichol looking east toward Interbay.
From Nichol looking south.
Toward the western parcel.
From Interbay looking -- yes, looking south.
The corner of Nichol and Interbay.
This is Interbay.
This is the residential just north of Ballast Point park on
the east side there.
The residential just north of the park.
And off the park.
In addition to the limitation on the square footage for the
improvements on the eastern side, the site plan before you
tonight does have a 75-foot vertical construction line that
prohibits vertical construction within 75 feet of all
boundary lines.
And you will see that shown in red on your site plan.
For the western parcel the seatbacks are proposed as
follows: North 7-foot, south 7-foot, west 20 feet, and east
25 feet.
To the eastern parcel the setbacks are proposed as north
zero foot adjacent to the park, south 7-foot, west 15-foot,
and east zero to the water.
The 75-foot setback on both parcels prohibits vertical
construction within 75 feet of the property line.
Therefore, establishing a vertical bidding setback line of
75 feet.
There are existing structures within that area, that
notation, a small quadrant of the barn -- I lost my
highlighter.
It's a small section here.
This section here.
And these maintenance buildings here.
Thank you.
I had it highlighted on another sheet.
But as I stated, there is a standard note on the plan that I
may have used existing facility, if destroyed, they could be
built back in the current locations but those are the only
encroachments into that 75-foot line.
The proposed new construction is occurring outside of that
area.
Pursuant to the existing square footage, the property has a
total of 42,574 square feet requiring a total parking of 213
spaces.
Based on the planned improvement, the required parking for
the site will be 301 spaces by code.
The current site plan illustrates a total of 331 parking
spaces being provided including 7 ADA, 251 standard spaces.
The staff report that was filed before City Council from
staff a week ago, there was -- sorry -- related to the
removal of this tree here.
Because there was no waiver for the removal.
It is a healthy grand tree, 50 inches.
That waiver is being removed.
That tree will not be removed.
That tree will be retained.
Cate Beck with natural resources, our natural resources
manager, was out on the site, did confirm that it is
healthy, and it can be preserved, and the applicant will be
modifying the area of improvement to ensure that this is
retained and adequate protection is given.
I do have a few pictures Cathy took this morning.
Of that tree.
There was, over the years, she said she had gone out, and
they have put feeders and other improvements into the
protective Reid radius of that.
There are some -- I will not use the correct technical
term -- things up in the canopy that can be cleaned out and
given -- the tree can be given some additional help.
So they were out today.
They had a conversation, I believe Mr. Smith will address
that further.
In relation to that waiver, that waiver will be removed from
the site plan and the request.
I did do a new revision sheet this afternoon to address that
modification.
And I will provide that to council at the end of my
presentation.
In relation to land development, I do need my first bullet
was in relation to the tree, since that tree is going to be
saved, that finding would be removed from the report.
I would ask that the waiver table as provided in my staff
report be corrected.
One of the other items in that waiver table -- and I should
go through the waivers.
The first was for the grand tree.
That's going to be removed.
The second was special use criteria for the private
recreation facility, section 27-132-A.
To allow access to a local street for private recreational
facility which has membership outside of the immediate
residential area.
That would be Interbay Boulevard.
And to allow for parking within 25 feet of adjacent
residential.
This would be applicable to parking lot A shown on the plan
and parking lot B.
The third waiver listed there was in relation to some
parking dimensions.
And if I may, my staff report actually has a better picture
of that.
Specifically in the area adjacent to the new porte-cochere,
these spaces here and these would not function if the
improvement was developed this way.
What we are going to do they are not going to ask for the
waiver for these to be deficient spaces.
They are going to add a condition that at the time of these
improvements, that any spaces which do not function to code
would be removed, and that the remaining spaces would meet
code.
I did do a preliminary calculation on the removal of those
spaces, and the site will still be overparked in relation to
what code requires.
So that would be waiver 3, sub A, B and C.
Those would not need to be added between first and second
reading.
The fourth waiver is to allow for the existing shell
parking, shell drive aisles as depicted for park lot A
that's located at the south of the western parcel, to remain
and to allow for a waiver of the required protective radius
for the trees located within that area.
This waiver would be to the existing.
Waiver number 5, section 287-214 to reduce the required
number of loading berths from three to zero.
The sixth is to reduce the required use-to-use buffers as
follows.
The first is to reduce the use-to-use buffer on the western
parcel along the southern property line from 15-foot with a
6-foot concrete masonry wall to 10-foot with a 6-foot chain
link fence, and the second is to reduce the use-to-use
buffer on the east parcel along the southern boundary from
15-foot with a 6-foot concreted wall to 10-foot with a
6-foot concrete masonry wall.
And that is the parking is currently 10 feet back so that
would be the 10-foot.
The 7th to reduce the green space air. In my report
this percentage was less from 20% to -- and we did not have
that finalized because I reviewed the plan and it looked
like they were pretty darn close to the 20%.
They did do the calculations, and they are at 17%.
So it would be from 20 to 17.
However, based on the relocation of those maintenance sheds
and some other things, I believe they were asking this
evening for 20% to 15%.
Waiver number 8 would be to reduce the required vehicle use
area buffer from 8-foot to zero.
This is only -- the existing area right here.
That 606 feet right there would be required in 8-foot buffer
in the existing condition has zero.
So that is waiver number 8 there.
And then lastly, waiver number 9 would be to allow for the
dumpster to remain in the existing location, and subsequent
relocation of the dumpster to a location within parking lot
B.
That would meet current code requirements.
In the report on pages 4, 5 and 6 are the findings from Land
Development Coordination, natural resources, and
transportation.
Land development, I just have some site plan modifications
that needed corrections.
I have reviewed those with the applicant in relation to the
grand tree.
Like I said, that's going to be removed.
And they just needed some other corrections to the parking
table, than the fence types and a couple of conditions I
asked be removed that either were incomplete or didn't make
sense in relation to the land development regulations.
Natural resources had a finding of inconsistency in relation
to the tree, now that the tree is being saved that finding
of inconsistency is being removed.
I spoke with both Cathy Beck and Mary Daniel Bryson today.
They do have a couple modifications in between first and
second reading.
Those are the four bullets on page 5.
And transportation needed -- they needed two more waivers in
relation to these five spaces over here.
However, if those five spaces are removed, they would not
need the backup waiver for those spaces.
And I believe it is the intent to remove those spaces, and
the site would still be overparked because they are required
301 and they have 331.
And lastly, transportation needed the driveway down on this
side to just actually show the apron on the plan for that
area.
Also, the sidewalk in lieu, there is a note on the plan
asking for a payment of in lieu for the squawk, and on
Interbay the plan, because there is a sidewalk on the east
side of inter bay, and given the large number of trees on
the west side of Interbay, they are asking for a finding of
impracticality by the council to pay fee in lieu for the
sidewalks on the west side of inter bay, and then on Nichol.
That being said, I think that is the staff findings from
land development, transportation, and natural resources.
On pages 8, 9 and 10, we did evaluate the PD criteria, and
did find the request to be consistent.
08:42:16 >>HARRY COHEN:
Do council members have any questions for
Mrs. Feeley?
Councilwoman Montelione.
08:42:25 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I do.
I'm sorry, Mrs. Feeley, I was writing everything down or
trying to keep up with you here.
On waiver number 7, the green space was reduced from 20% --
I don't have the blank number.
What is that number?
08:42:42 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
It's going to be 15%.
The calculation right now on-site, it has 17%, which I
thought they were pretty close to the 20 based on existing
conditions.
But when they moved those maintenance sheds and some other
things, they wanted the 5% request.
08:43:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I just didn't write it down when you
said it.
Thank you.
08:43:06 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Okay.
08:43:07 >>HARRY COHEN:
Ms. Moreda.
08:43:12 >>GLORIA MOREDA:
Land development.
The report on AB 2-16-18.
The request is for a large venue beer, wine, liquor,
nonprofit, private club, on premises consumption only.
Within the use being private recreation facility.
As Ms. Feeley said, they are currently licensed as an 11
seat and it just the clubhouse building, the 1959-foot,
approved for alcoholic beverage sales.
The proposal before you is for 13 .44 acres of an AB sales
area.
The parking, I believe it's now going to be 301.
It will be consistent with the PD site plan.
The proposed hours of operation are indoor AB area
consistent with chapter 14.
They are indicating that the outdoor area Monday through
Thursday until 12 a.m., Friday and Saturday until
12:30 a.m., Sunday until 10:30 p.m.
Except for Gasparilla events, New Years, and a maximum of
two temporary special events that will follow the chapter 14
limitations.
So this is going to be the difference between an indoor area
and the outdoor area.
They are asking for a waiver.
The code requires a distance separation from residential
uses of 1,000 feet.
They are adjacent to residential uses as well as the
institutional use, city park, is basically at a zero
setback.
So it's a reduction from 1 that you feet to zero.
The additional waivers indicating that AB sales should not
be located within parking and loading area.
The boundary that they are showing does have some parking
area in that area.
However, there is a condition on the site plan that
indicates that they will have no consumption or sale of
alcoholic beverages within parking or loading area.
Their AB site plan is divided into three parcels.
It's shown right here.
The western parcel, parcel 1, is 5.5 acres.
No AB sales areas will be within 75 feet to the southern
property line, or 150 feet to the western property line.
Parcel 2, which is the main clubhouse area, is on the east
side of Interbay Boulevard, is approximately 2.5 acres.
Generally no AB sales areas will be within 75 feet of the
northwest or southern property line, except for the eastern
60 feet along the southern property line.
Which is generally right in this area here.
And then parcel 3 is the dock area for another 5.4 acres.
The staff found the request inconsistent.
They failed to meet the distance separation requirements for
residential and institutional.
The staff is also concerned just for the size of the
proposed AB sales area.
They are looking at 13.44 acres, and primarily residential
and quite neighborhood.
Staff is urging the applicant to consider shrinking that
area in parcel 1 around the tennis court building, maybe 20
feet around that building is what I would suggest.
As well as around the equestrian office building here around
this area here.
In terms of parcel B, I would suggest that they commit to no
AB sales areas within 75 feet of the south, north or western
property lines.
In terms of parcel A, which is the Marina area, probably
just the north half of that area.
Pulling it away from where residential uses are.
In terms of noise levels, I know they are subject to the
City of Tampa noise regulations.
But looking at how our standards are for adjusting like the
special restaurant, our code limits amplified sound to no
later than 11 p.m., and given the residential character of
the area, I would suggest that that be placed on as a
condition.
I did identify a number of changes to the site plan that
needs to be done which I think they are agreeable to doing.
In terms of the rest of the report, transportation did find
some concerns, but as long as they are addressing the PD it
should be satisfied in that regard.
The residential uses are adjacent on the south side, Ballast
Point park on the north, and that is really the basis for
our concern for this petition.
If you have any questions.
08:48:50 >>HARRY COHEN:
Any questions for Ms. Moreda at this time?
All right, thank you very much.
Applicant.
Your turn.
08:49:01 >> Steve grafting, 1909 south Brookline street, Tampa 33629.
It's a great pleasure that I have the commodore at the Yacht
Club.
Tough two applications before you.
Our advisors are going to be presenting our applications in
much more detail.
But as a quick overview, I would just like to say that we
are preserving our ability to operate as we have for
decades, and then allow some minor enhancements and
renovations of the core facilities.
Our site plan covers everything we have now.
It also asks for approval from some projects, that we
contemplate for the future.
So if it's approved, whatever is on our plan is what we
would be able to do and no more.
We know that because some of our detractors have mentioned
some items and projects that we mate do but in fact none of
those are contemplated by the plans.
And I appreciate Mrs. Feeley mentioning some of the things
that we are not doing.
The plan limits us from doing.
Ballast Point is a treasure to the city. We love it, the
brick streets, the waterfront, the trees.
What he want nothing more than to help preserve the quiet
pastoral beauty of the neighborhood for the club, our
neighbors and the city overall.
For decades and decades the Yacht Club has been a home away
for home for many members, including my parents wedding
reception in 1962, and many other families.
It is, however, also a place that provides a home for
Tampa's signature Gasparilla festival and many of our
members host charity events at the club as well.
So on behalf of our 1400 members, I respectfully ask that
you hear our advisors this evening and a favorably consider
our plan.
With that David Smith.
08:50:55 >>DAVID SMITH:
401 east Jackson street, on behalf of
petitioner.
Grace is assisting us in setting up the easel.
She will also provide you shortly an evidently notebook that
we will track in our presentation so you will have a
notebook that has the summary of the things that I will
cover in brief so that we can try to make sure we expedite
this hearing as much as possible.
The expert res plays will be at the back.
The evidence notebook, I will not read through those or
elaborate on them.
You can see what they are.
See what the experts are and what their curricula vitae
show.
I will indicate we have been working closely with staff.
This project as you may not know has gone probably four or
more iterations.
There's been a lot of back and forth with neighbors in
efforts to accommodate neighbors' concerns.
Some of those accommodations were not acceptable from a
legal standpoint because they dealt with restrictions that
you don't typically address in a PD.
So we appreciate the assistance of staff.
And we agree with the staff report.
We are going to -- we should have one more.
Here it is.
And we are not going to remove a healthy grand tree.
There was some concern regarding whether the grand tree at
issue was not healthy.
But there was a visit today as Abbye described, determined
to be healthy, it will be preserved.
We will redesign that area, the porte-cochere, or we will
also reprioritize our capital, so we will make sure that any
healthy grand tree is preserved on-site.
As you will note if you look in the tree report, the back of
the site plan, there are something like 41 grand trees
on-site, all of which will be preserved.
So the perception as some tried to create that an
aggregation is mistaken, we love the trees, we are going to
preserve the trees.
As a matter of fact as you will see in the background
material, there was a grounds committee for many years that
spent thousands of dollars on arborists and other efforts to
preserve the trees.
There's a grand tree at the front entrance that has
struggled because it's old and is a difficult environment.
But we have spent money to preserve that.
So the idea that somehow we are not alert to the
significance of the tree canopy is simply a mistake.
As Steve has indicated we are really simply trying to
memorialize the activities that we currently conduct
on-site, conditions as you will note in the site plan
specifically limit it to a private recreational use.
Some speculated that we are building the Amalie arena south.
I cannot fathom with such a concept that has been generated.
But that's the sort of thing that when people get upset they
say.
You will note in the comp plan you cannot take an ROS and
create a commercial use without doing a comprehensive plan
endment.
So it's not even possible.
Additionally, the site plan itself says it will be limited
to private recreational use.
The liquor license is an 11-C can only be used for private
use.
We are not for profit entity with a 5:01 C 7 so the concept
that we are somehow doing that is just crazy.
We were told we are going to build multifamily residences,
we are going to build CLS, going to build a commercial
center.
None of that is happening.
That has generate add tremendous amount of some of what you
have received from some of the neighbors.
We had an opportunity to meet with various groups of
neighbors.
One of them on a website and expressed their concerns.
When we sat down and talked with them and they hired a
lawyer and we sat down with his lawyer and we explained what
we were doing, the lawyer is Jim Porter, it whats clear that
what they were being told was not what was happening, and we
reached an accommodation and they shut down the website.
You still have other opponents.
You will hear from them tonight.
But you need to know that some of the earlier information
you received was based upon a campaign that I would say was
not accurate.
These are our friends.
These are our neighbors I.want to try to make sure our
rhetoric does not do anything that injuries the potential
conned friendship and relationship.
I notch in the discussions I have had with the opponents
there's been a tremendous amount of respect for the people
who articulated different views and there's been an effort
to accommodate those.
Can't always arrive at a solution that works for everyone
but we will listen and I think we have accommodated most of
them.
I will not address the SU activities because Grace is part
of the tag team and she will address that issue.
But I will come back later to talk about a little bit.
What I want to do is allow sue Murphy, the expert planner on
our team, to describe to you some issues associated with the
planning analysis.
Sue.
08:55:52 >> Thank you.
Good evening.
For the record my name is Sue Murphy, a C and F consulting
group, 150 Euclid Avenue in Tampa.
I'm here tonight to discuss the land use issues requested to
the PD. The Yacht Club is one of the earliest private
recreation facilities established in the City of Tampa.
The single-family homes existing in the area today were
constructed after the club was initially developed, and over
time the area has evolved into a mixed use urban village
providing variety of housing, recreational and limited
commercial uses.
The city's staff has noted in their reported, quote, the
club has historically been part of the fabric of the Ballast
Point neighborhood and community as a whole.
The primary goal of the planned development is to recognize
the existing development and to identify the modifications
to the clubhouse and to relocate the maintenance facility.
The Planning Commission discussed the land use categories on
the site previously, and I won't go through those again.
All of the fought land use categories contained within the
property on the PD permit private recreation facilities.
The comprehensive plan contains the land use category matrix
that identified the intensity and intensity from the fought
land use category as well as other considerations and key
characteristics of those categories.
Proposed PD is consistent with the land use category matrix
each of the different future land use categories contained
on the site.
The R-20 designation which is where most of the development
is permits an F.A.R. .35.
The total F.A.R. of the preponderance of the evidence
including the future expansion is .12 which is well below
the .35 F.A.R.
I concur with the staff report from the Planning Commission
finding that the PD request is consistent with the overall
plan as well as numerous specific goals, objectives and
policies cited from that report.
The staff report also notes that the maximum development
potential of the site based on the land use planned
categories there are is 341 dwelling units or 375 -- 875
square feet of nonresidential uses under the existing land
use plan.
The PD request does not allow additional dwelling units and
including future expansions of 82,900 square feet.
All of which are private recreation facility uses.
It represents 22% of the allowable development potential
under the comprehensive plan.
I also concur with the city staff report which finds the PD
consistent with the Tampa code of ordinances.
Contrary to arguments made in opposition, this rezoning
request significantly reduces the allowable development
square footage of the site and surrenders residential and
commercial development potential that exists under the
current zoning today.
The majority of the property is currently zoned REZ 60 which
limits a private recreational facility as an S 1 use.
Several other uses as a matter of right.
These uses include single-family homes, small congregate
living and group care, daycare and nursery, temporary film
production, churches and other religious organizations that
include a church, educational facility, administration
building, and sleeping quarters, and the R 20 land use
designation on the site the maximum density of 18 per acre.
The PD request is for a private recreation facility that
does not include any residential or commercial uses. This
provides a guarantee for the neighborhood that use is
permitted under existing zoning district such as
single-family development to not occur and that the facility
will remain a private recreation facility.
The PD also eliminates the need for the S-1 review and
approval, approval of requests waivers from the site will
bring the -- which was developed over several decades and
several differ codes in conformance of now current codes.
Staff also addressed the general standards for PD as well as
the specific standards for private recreation facilities and
found the request consistent with the standard.
With the waivers.
The report states, quote, overall the facility has been part
of the fabric of the neighborhood for over 100 years, since
the original construction in 19005.
This maintains a country club atmosphere and has not
adversely affected property values in the surrounding
neighborhood.
End quote.
All the special uses made over those several decades will be
consistent with private recreation facility.
The buildings of one or two stories that create consistent
with residential uses.
There's 45 feet for an interior portion of the site, but as
Abbye mentioned the PD provides for 75-foot building setback
on all property lines.
The existing property is in excess of code requirements.
The hours of operation of out door activity is being limited
to provide reduced noise levels in the area.
Sidewalks exist along the east side of the Interbay
Boulevard across the entire frontage of the club.
Safety ingress and egress.
Valet parking is provided to reduce any traffic circulation
or parking problems.
Site already has adequate facilities and utilities.
The club has been diligently working with the area residents
and David mentioned, and at a minimum meet all codes and
regulatory requirements for lighting and noise.
Finally it should be noted that the club, the proposed PD
boundary, is approximately one mile of lineal footage, and
of that one mile of lineal footage there is only one
single-family homes that abuts property directly and shares
the 235-foot common property boundary.
Thank you for your time.
That's all my comments.
Thank you.
09:01:39 >>DAVID SMITH:
I wanted to briefly pointed out a couple much
conditions that are in the site plan.
Currently some people get confused by what our comprehensive
plan allows and what a zoning legally permits you to do.
I want to make sure we are clear on that.
I want our neighbors to understand exactly what we are
doing.
We are doing what we have been doing, and we are not going
to change that.
There's a modest expansion to accommodate some additional
need for that space.
But if you look at condition number one in the site plan,
and it's in your tab 7, I believe, there's a printout a
little larger, reading the site plan it's difficult, at
least it is for me.
Number one, the permitted use, this is what we can do, will
remain a private recreational facility, as such residential
development including but not limited to multifamily
development shall be prohibited.
The last sentence was added to accommodate a concern by some
of the neighbors, the first group we spoke of, that wanted
to be sure, even though we are private residential doesn't
allow residential, private recreational doesn't allow
residential, we can say the obvious.
We also add a provision that says commercial development is
not allowed either.
Because it isn't.
Number 3.
The planned improvements are as delineated in the remodeling
summary and will be on the site as shown on the site plan.
The site plan governs the use, it governs the location, it
governs the activities.
We can't somehow do something different and take the how
many thousand square feet it is and turn it into Amalie
arena south.
It's going to be used as contemplated.
The barn will be a barn.
The clubhouse will be a clubhouse.
And the tennis and fitness facility will be a tennis and
fitness facility.
I don't know why that concept has been so hard to get
adjusted to but that's exactly what we are doing.
Again in condition 13, the use of all buildings as labeled
on the site plan.
We are committing to what you see on the site plan.
That's what a site plan is.
(Bell sounds)
Also, generated on the property, legally applicable noise
regulations.
We have got to comply with the ordinance.
There's no question about it.
It's not debatable.
It's not optional.
It's the law.
We have to comply with it and we are going to have to do
what we need to do to make sure we comply with it.
It's that simple.
It's not debatable.
We have to comply and we will.
Building setbacks are shown on the site plan.
I also point out that the 75-foot setback was a requirement
asked by neighbors, and we were more than happy to
accommodate them because we are not building anything in
that 75-foot setback because that's not what the current
uses are.
I was going to pass this on to grace now to handle the SU
application to complete our case in chief if that's okay.
I can answer any questions at any time.
09:04:26 >>HARRY COHEN:
Are there any questions for Mr. Smith before
we go on to Mrs. Yang's presentation?
09:04:33 >> Thank you very much.
09:04:37 >> My name is Grace Yang.
Lake David Smith I'm with the Gray Robinson law firm, 401
east Jackson street suite 2700 Tampa, Florida 33062 and I
have been sworn.
It's my pleasure to give you the alcohol portion of the
presentation on behalf of our applicant Tampa yacht and
country club.
David, I hope, can help me pass out the notebooks for the
alcohol side.
They are right up there.
And we will didn't those.
I will give you some comfort that it is not as full as Mr.
Smith's is.
I will not go into detailed history of the club.
We will be here all night and nobody wants to be here all
night.
But there are some key things that I do want to specify and
emphasize as part of my presentation.
The clubhouse -- the club was established from 1904.
The clubhouse, the original clubhouse opened in 1905.
And I don't believe there's any dispute that members and
guests were drinking at the clubhouse as early as 1905.
We are aware of license record as far back as September
1945.
And the Yacht Club property was annexed into the city, used
to be parted of unincorporated Hillsborough County, but it
was annexed into the city in 1953.
One of your notebooks provides some introduction and some
background remarks that I have for your consideration to
this effect.
I would like to move on to tab 3 actually and jump over to
tab 3 which talks about the club's dual alcohol and tobacco
license.
As David and others have said already, this is an 11-C state
liquor license.
It allows alcohol consumption on the premises only to club
members and invited guests.
This is not a liquor license for a location that is open to
the general public.
It is a license for a private club with members, and it will
remain so.
And that is our alcohol request.
To continue on as a private members club.
As I also said, the earliest date of the state lay sense
record is September 1949.
The members have been drinking inside and outside of the
country club for decades.
If you go to the second page in tab 3, this is an e-mail
that I received from the Florida department of business and
professional regulation, division of alcoholic beverages and
tobacco, which inspects and regulates businesses that sell
alcohol in the State of Florida.
And you will see in this confirming e-mail from the
department dated today that there has been no enforcement
documents that they have ever seen in this file.
That is extraordinary.
I have been doing alcohol Lou sensing and compliance work
for almost 20 years, and for a licensee to have maintained a
license since September of 19 ha which is when the state
records go back, and to have absolutely no enforcement
documents in their files, is extraordinarily commendable.
Florida does not have a mandatory responsible alcohol vendor
training requirement.
It is voluntary here in the State of Florida for businesses
to train their servers and their bartenders in the
responsible service of alcohol.
I commend the Tampa yacht and country club because they do
train their servers and their bartenders.
They participate in the national restaurant association
program which, and there are materials in tab 7 of your
notebook that give you more background information about the
serve safe training program.
It's a well respected alcohol training program available in
Florida and other states.
If you go to tab 4 in your notebook, this is where I
discussed the separations on the waivers.
As Ms. Moreda stated, we do require two waivers, because we
have first within a thousand feet an institutional use,
which is Ballast Point park to the north.
And the second distance waiver that we need is because we do
have residential property within a thousand feet and that is
to the south on parcel 2.
However, I ask council to bear in mind that the 1,000 foot
separation requirement for distances between alcohol uses
and residential and institutional uses came into effect far
later than the establishment of the club.
Remember, the club has been there since 1905.
The clubhouse.
And the use of the private club has been there since.
The 1,000 fat separation requirement came much later.
And so the residential neighborhood and the park has grown
and developed around the club through the years, and the
club was originally there, it was farm land, and grazing
pasture, from what I understand.
And now you have a full vibrant community and full vibrant
neighborhood in the area.
Further protection with buffers around parcels 1 and 2.
Let me talk about that.
On parcel 2, we are respectfully requesting a buffer area
that looks like this.
We have a 75-foot buffer for alcohol sales and consumption
on the north side here, on the west side we have another
75-foot buffer.
And on the south side we also have a 75-foot buffer, except
for this area which is where the playground is currently
located.
We are respectfully disagreeing with staff's request to
extend the 75-foot buffer over there.
We would like to request that the playground remain in the
wet area so that members may be able to sit on the benches
there, socialize, catch up with friends, have a drink, and
also be able to watch their kids who are playing there on
the playground.
On parcel 1, for the buffers, we have listened to staff's
request to shrink the alcohol sales area, and we have also
been engaged in significant discussions with legal counsel
for Lykes brothers, and we are agreeing -- we are willing to
shrink the buffer area -- excuse me, to shrink the alcohol
beverage area on parcel 1 as a certain condition.
I will let Elise Batsel who is the attorney for Lykes
brothers to discuss the proposed conditions some more during
her time and comments.
Count 5 in your -- tab 5 talks about outdoor music and sound
policies.
The Yacht Club wants to continue to be a good neighbor.
You will hear testimony from many people here in support who
will speak, that the Yacht Club has been a good neighbor.
We are willing to limit the outdoor music hours, the Yacht
Club in tab 5, has given you their outdoor music and sound
policy.
We are especially -- agreeing with staff to limit the
outdoor sound to 11 p.m. because we feel it is too
restrictive for some of the events that happen at the club.
On average there are about 35 events annually, where there
is outside music events, for this event.
We would ask and continue to emphasize that the Yacht Club
will comply with all applicable noise ordinances.
We will follow those ordinances, and we ask not to have
council impose a condition to have outdoor amplified sounds
stop at 11 p.m.
Tab 6 addresses the special use permits.
It is our position in tab 6, and positions laid forth, that
we can comply with the special use permit requirements with
waivers as needed.
And I would like to close by talking about the hours of
alcohol sales.
If you look -- I will put this on the Elmo.
Right now, the club is subject to chapter 14, hours of
alcohol sales, and the chapter 14 hours state, Monday
through Saturday, 7 a.m. to 3 a.m., the following day.
And on Sunday, 11 a.m. to 3 a.m. the following day.
Now, the club is almost never open that late.
But those are what code currently says.
We are agreeing under our proposed alcohol site plan to
further restrict the alcohol hours outside, so that if you
see in condition 3 on your alcohol site plan, Monday through
Thursday, we are proposing to stop outdoor alcoholic sales
and service at midnight.
Fridays and Saturdays we are proposing to stop alcohol sales
at 12:30 a.m.
Sundays we are proposing to stop alcohol sales at
10:30 p.m., with the exception for Gasparilla events, New
Year's Eve party and the maximum of two additional temporary
special events.
We feel that those are good mitigation, self-imposed
conditions that we can offer to continue to be a good
neighbor in the community.
Now I would like to yield my remaining time to the next
speaker, rich Malloy, unless the council has any questions
for me.
09:15:07 >>HARRY COHEN:
Any questions for the alcohol section at
this time?
I don't see any.
09:15:13 >> Muellen, Franklin Street, Tampa, Florida.
I am here to talk a little about the community outreach that
the club has undertaken, which is extensive.
And it results from -- the first few steps that the club
took, city code requires 250-foot notice to homeowners that
have a parcel 250 feet.
We went almost ten times that, sent letters to neighbors
within 2,000 feet.
So far beyond.
The territory.
Oh, excuse me.
Special Facebook pages to engage the community to get
accurate information and to hear back from the community.
We built a special website with complete copies of the whole
application so everybody could see what we are doing, so
that everybody could see the transparency.
It was very important to us.
We met directly with neighbors, and so we could hear from
them what they were most concerned about.
And we listened directly to the concerns of neighbors and
incorporated a lot of their ideas.
So I am going to put up here real quick the results of that.
Pretty nice neighborhood support.
We received total approval from Crescent pay condominiums.
We'll hear from them later on.
The Brigintine neighborhood association down the street,
their approval.
Ballast Point neighborhood association, their approval.
Now, I am not here to speak on behalf of Ballast Point.
But what I would do is to thank them.
We were able to engage with them and address their concerns.
They took the step to reach their supporters and tell them
that.
For which we are very thankful.
This is the endorsement from Tampa events.
And to do a little bit of name dropping, essentially some of
those supporters that we heard from along the way, Richard
Gonzmart, rob Taylor.
Now this I wanted -- because I don't believe he could be
here unless he showed up recently.
He lives exactly 18 feet from the property line.
He has eleven years experience, assistant county
administrator, land use and zoning.
Chris walls, past member Hillsborough Planning Commission.
Mayor Greco.
Mayor Freedman.
Lykes family.
Gale and Tyson Lykes.
Admiral, retired, chief of SOCOM.
This one I like in particular because it speaks about the
fundraising that happens at the club.
The million dollars they have been able to raise for
pediatric cancer foundation.
James Ferman.
Charles Lockwood.
John Steinbrenner.
Eric and Bobby Newman.
Rosemary Henderson.
Petero knight.
Rhea Law.
Brad King in case you are wondering about support from
nonmembers, one thing that we are very grateful of is when
we did several mailers out, a lot of members are right there
but there are a lot of nonmembers that live right there.
So I didn't print it out all for you but it is a sample of
50 non-members, and a lot of them of the country club.
(Bell sounds)
So the last thing I wanted to talk about.
Is the fact so far by count, there are more than 950.
09:19:43 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
We have all received those.
And we can attach the correspondence that we have received
on all sides of the matter and all of it will be placed in
the quasi-judicial box.
(Bell sounds).
09:19:58 >> We did receive one addressed to honorable Robert Francis
Buckhorn, mayor, and it is a non-member.
Yes.
And it's really quite something.
09:20:10 >> And everybody has a green folder.
09:20:16 >>HARRY COHEN:
Okay, thank you very much.
I think it is the pleasure of council, it would be
appropriate now to hear from the stated opposition that
spoke earlier.
If you have certain people you would what like to follow
you, that would be fine.
And then we will open it up to general public comment.
And I'm sure if Mr. Schiff wants to take the time signs down
or someone wants to take the signs down, maybe the
applicant, that would be helpful.
09:20:49 >> Gordon Schiff:
If I can take a minute here to get set
up.
09:22:00 >>GORDON SCHIFF:
Gordon.
09:22:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
Mr. Schiff, did you want to address --
09:22:17 >>GORDON SCHIFF:
I think there's a couple of procedural
matters we would like to at least state on the record.
1211 North Westshore Boulevard, Tampa, Florida 33607.
I represent Tom and Kay Rankin, Howard and Patricia Jenkins,
Charles P. Lykes, Jr., John and Susan Buehler, Mallory Lykes
and David Belcher, Jack and PT.
And before I start our presentation I am asking City Council
to as a matter of taking judicial notice of a file the city
has, FDN-15-647 concerning an application requesting a
formal determination as to the alcohol status of Tampa yacht
and country club including but not limited to all petitions,
responses, filings, electronic fails, staff files, e-mails,
draft documents and notes, and I have -- I would just ask
that council take judicial notice of that file as parted of
this proceeding.
09:23:19 >>HARRY COHEN:
Mrs. Kert, is that something you would like
us to take notice of by motion or did we just knowledge it
into the record?
09:23:28 >>REBECCA KERT:
I don't think you can take judicial notice
of it but certainly you can take notice of it and if it
would -- and incorporate it into the record, what I believe
he's trying to do is incorporate that file into the record.
I don't have any objection to that.
I don't flow if petitioner has any objection to that.
As to putting in the record the relevancy of it is certainly
up for discussion, but not necessarily as far as --
09:23:54 >>HARRY COHEN:
This is a very large record.
There's an awful lot of documents that have been taken into
it.
Mr. Smith.
09:24:00 >>DAVID SMITH:
On behalf of the applicant.
Just so I am on the record we do object.
We don't think it's relevant to the application before you.
It was a previous application filed by the applicant, for an
administrative determination, which we would do because we
realize even if we won that determination, we wouldn't get
the sort of relief we need with respect to the property.
So the fact that it was failed, the fact that was withdrawn,
the fact that was never finalized, an opinion was never
rendered, it is just at that point speculative and not
relevant to your task.
Your task is to evaluate the application and make a
determination based upon your code.
So we object and I want to make sure I am on the record
objecting.
09:24:41 >>HARRY COHEN:
What is the pleasure of council?
09:24:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
My personal opinion is this.
I have no determination legally.
Anything that we receive in the city is public record.
That's already somewhere.
So I personally have no objections to the record that's
somewhere in space or somewhere in some file somewhere.
It's never been heard by us.
So it's part of the unofficial record that you can certainly
bring up in a legal matter if you so choose.
09:25:12 >> We have put everything we received in this matter into
the record.
It is an enormous record.
So we'll enter it in with all the other documents.
09:25:28 >>GORDON SCHIFF:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I rise tonight on behalf of my clients to object to this
commercial PD rezoning and alcoholic expansion plans.
I will provide at the end of my presentation a 4-point plan,
and the 4-point plan will address and resolve the four
significant neighborhood issues that exist before you
tonight.
If the club is unwilling to incorporate the 4-point plan,
then we would ask that you deny the petitions.
At the outset, Tampa Yacht Club should not be rewarded for
violating the law and for inappropriate behavior.
The Yacht Club has been openly violating state and local
alcohol laws by selling, serving and consuming alcohol
throughout its property, 18 acres, when they are only
licensed as you heard from your staff and others to do so
within a portion of the inside of the clubhouse.
They have continued to violate the license even after the
state confirmed in the writing to their lawyers.
I will provide an exhibit that supports my statements.
They also violate the city noise ordinance, EPC noise rule
with out door parties and events.
They violate the city code by parking buses and delivery
trucks in the right-of-way and on sidewalks rate next to
no-parking signs.
Mr. Chair, they have tainted the entire process by having
multiple inappropriate communications with city staff.
I will provide this exhibit as well for the record.
For these application it is commodore sent an e-mail blast
to the entire membership of Tampa Yacht Club asking the
members to, and I quote, contact any City Council members
with whom you have a personal relationship, exclamation
point.
Why would you approve and legitimize this unlawful and
inappropriate behavior?
They say they are seeking approval of what they have always
done.
They also say they are grandfathered.
We keep hearing grandfathered.
For what?
If you violate your annual state liquor license for years
and you don't get caught, that is not grandfathered.
That is violation of a license.
They say they are just confirming -- you are hearing the
terms qualifying, that they are updating their paperwork,
that they are seeking to limit alcohol.
They are not seeking to limit alcohol.
None of that is accurate.
None of that requires a rezoning if that were accurate of
the
Privately they say otherwise.
They say they want broad flexibility for the future and
never once come back to City Council to ask for anything
again.
The unreasonable and extreme variances and extreme variances
from the norm, I will note a few.
Alcohol distance requirement, the norm in a residential area
is a thousand feet away.
They want zero.
For parks, it's a thousand feet away.
They want zero.
For the area for sale of alcohol, the norm in a residential
zoning district is it's prohibited.
They are seeking 13 acres.
That is more than five times larger than the area they
claimed in the item you just took judicial notice of when
they claimed they had best advice and grandfathering for
2.6-acre parcel.
Five times more.
They propose 161 patron outdoor bar.
The norm no residential area is outdoor bars are prohibited.
Regarding noise, they ask you to allow them to have outdoor
plified music every day and night of the week, 365 days a
year.
The norm for noise protection is to require that the noise
be kept inside the building.
The Yacht Club is located on a dimly lit local street.
The street cannot possibly handle the congestion that will
occur and there are safety issues.
The Yacht Club advertises events where they invite other
clubs.
Upwards of 5,000 people to events.
If they only had 331 parking spaces, please do the math.
They publicly advertised the weddings and events.
Just Google "can I have my wedding at Tampa Yacht Club?"
You will be directed to a Yacht Club website which publicly
advertises for weddings and events, provides phone numbers
and offers private consultations.
The web page says Tampa Yacht Club, quote, offers and ideal
destination for any event, and, quote, can accommodate a
lavish wedding reception for 400.
Recently on August 13th, the same night that the
commodore sent and e-mail blast to the club members saying
the Tampa Yacht Club is quote nothing but a club, a public
event advertised on the Internet where anyone can buy a
ticket was occurring at Tampa Yacht Club, the same night.
That is operating a commercial event.
The plans would increase the event space, they expand the
clubhouse, add an outdoor bar and expand alcohol areas
substantially and would allow for multiple events to occur
at the same time pursuant to the approval.
This is not about Gasparilla.
They can have Gasparilla today.
To temporary expand for Gasparilla day, it's a simple
process.
You apply, you get a permit, you expand.
It's simple.
This is not about Gasparilla.
However, under this permanent expansion proposal, they could
have Gasparilla there every day.
The board of Tampa Yacht Club board changes regularly so the
verbal commitments tonight or otherwise mean nothing and are
not binding on future boards.
Alcohol runs with the land which means that the Yacht Club
could sell all or part of the land along with the alcohol
approval to another private recreational facility or
facilities.
My clients object because these proposals would
fundamentally change the neighborhood.
Introducing noise, congestion, incompatible uses.
Why would you approve a plan that violates your noise
ordinance?
I do have petitions from the neighborhood.
I will submit them.
The neighborhood association had a vote.
We were there.
They had 17 votes when they achieved or what they achieved
with Tampa Yacht Club.
We have received 125 signatures from the Ballast Point
residents who are against this proposal, and out of all the
petitions received back, only four were in favor.
So there's a total -- and then a total of 151 petitions,
some from other areas.
Tonight I got four more.
So there are 155 petitions against.
We'll submit those into the record.
I should say is Stella could not be herd tonight.
She apologized for that but she asked that I submit a letter
into the record objecting to these which I do at the end of
my presentation.
I offer three experts.
The first will be power acoustics as an expert in sound and
noise.
The sound being Robert Lilkendey, an expert in traffic and
circulation, and Ethel Hammer will be the third of
Englehart, Hammer and Associates as an expert in planning
and zoning.
I will provide you the books at this time with CVs, and
past experience, as well as written reports of each of these
experts.
And as I said in the beginning of my presentation, we have a
4-point plan.
I will pass the 4-point plan out to you but let me just give
you the four points.
One, the proposed alcohol beverage area should be reduced to
2.13 acres.
Two, the hours of operation need to be reduced to a
residential type of hours.
We will present those hours in this table.
Three, the outdoor open air bar needs to be eliminated.
Four, the outdoor noise after a grace period we suggest two
years needs to move back in the building.
Those are -- that's our four-point plan.
I'll provide that to City Council as I finish here.
And I will then -- I also have a condition which I can
submit into the record now or later which is a noise
condition for monitoring because you think monitoring would
be appropriate after we demonstrate that they are violating
the noise ordinance.
And with that, I will introduce my experts one at a time and
I will pass out some and put all these documents into the
record that I spoke about.
09:34:11 >> I'm Dave parson, power 36, 2730 North Tampa Ave.,
Orlando, Florida.
And I was asked to look at the sound levels at the
residential property immediately south of the Tampa yacht
country club, address 5324 Interbay Boulevard.
And we performed two studies.
One last year in August, August 20th through 23rd,
where are we left a sound level monitor at the property line
for a period of four days, just to get an idea of what the
bient sound levels are with and without music events
occurring at the yacht and country club.
We looked at that.
We prepared a report.
We found that sound levels were in excess of the Tampa noise
ordinance by quite a bit.
We also provided an addendum to that sound level study that
basically looked at the sound levels relative to the new
sound ordinance that was just recently passed.
And we also did a study in April of this year, and again it
was about a period of about four days, three days.
And this was largely just to go back and take a look at
music events and just make sure that the one event that we
did look at in August of last year wasn't just a fluke, in
that we had representative data that typically occurred when
music events were going on.
We also prepared an addendum to that sound study that looked
at the current Tampa noise ordinance.
And then we have also got a summary report, and that's what
we are going to kind of talk a little bit in detail, and
that is, I guess, tab F in your books.
In figure 1 of that summary report, it shows where we put
our monitors, and they were high point precision equipment
that is accurate to plus or minus 1 decibel.
It measured both the A weighted and C weighted sound.
The A weighted sound is typical of what you measure for
sounds when we are talking.
C weighted sound is representative of more like the bass
sounds that you hear, the thumping that occurs from music.
The locations are shown in figure 1 of that summary report.
We used two monitors for redundancy just to make sure we had
good data, in case one monitor shut off.
Going to figure 2, figure 2 is a time history.
Remember we took this data over a period of days.
This is a time history that shows about an hour on each side
of the music event that occurred, and Friday, August
21st, 2015.
So this is last year.
It was an event called the Carolla beach party by the bay.
The two plots there show what the sound levels were prior to
the music starting.
You looking at the one that's relative to the current Tampa
noise ordinance, the one that's on the right was the
previous Tampa noise ordinance that was in effect when we
took the data.
But if you look at the chart on the left, of figure 2, what
you see is before music starts, sound levels in that area
are below the C weighted criteria, again the thumping sound,
the low frequency sound criteria, and all of the A weighted
sounds.
As soon as the music begins, it's a live music performance,
the sound levels that we measured from the band went up by
13 or so decibels, above the Tampa noise ordinance
requirements for C weighted sound.
Also slightly exceeded the A weighted sound during that time
also.
You can see in the plot there was a break where the band
took a break for about 20 minutes and the sound levels
dropped considerably.
There was probably some additional sound from recorded music
going on and the crowd that was there.
But as soon as the band started again the levels popped back
up and again shall they are 10, 12, 13 DB above the C
weighted thumping sound criteria that the Tampa ordinance
has.
When you move to figure 3, this is sound levels that we
measured this year, and this one happens to be on April
15th and it was a band on the patio, I believe its would
be the event was called.
And very, very similar results occur.
You see when the music begins, the sound levels come up.
They are above the noise ordinance considerably.
That's the blue line you will see on the curve there, and
again look at the one on the left.
That's an ordinance.
And they stay consistently above the Tampa noise ordinance
for the whole event.
And then when the music ends at midnight, miraculously the
levels drop down by 15 decibels.
5 decibels below what the noise ordinance allows for.
It's just clear evidence that when the music is playing,
they are well above the Tampa noise ordinance.
When the music stops, the levels drop well below.
There was another event on that same weekend.
And it was a DJ for a wedding.
(Bell sounds)
And that's shown in figure 4.
If you flip to figure 4, you see exactly the same pattern
when the music occurs, the sound levels are well above the
ordinance, allowable ordinance levels.
When the music stops at 11:30, it drops well below.
That's I guess all my time.
So if you have questions I will be glad to answer.
09:40:42 >>HARRY COHEN:
(off microphone).
09:40:51 >>GORDON SCHIFF:
At this time Robert will talk.
09:40:58 >> My name is Robert, I'm a principal with Gulf coast
consulting, 13825 Icott Boulevard, in Clearwater.
I'm an certified planner and professional transportation
planner.
My reports are in tab 2 of your notebooks.
I was requested to evaluate the proposed PD zoning
application from the perspective of transportation related
issues.
Particularly traffic impact, parking adequacy and internal
circulation.
In summary, item number 1, no transportation evaluation is
provided with the application.
Section 27-138 of the code requires a traffic study per the
transportation impact analysis and mitigation procedures
manual for any development exceeding 100 net new daily
trips.
We believe this expansion would exceed 100 net new daily
trips.
As a matter of fact on page 2 of my report, the planned
improvements leading to transportation engineer trip
generation calculations, we think it could generate an
additional 1500 daily trips.
Parking calculations are unclear.
There is no confirmation that adequate parking is provided
for the expansion.
Again, please refer to my report page 2, paragraph 4.
It eliminates parking for the horse barn.
We believe there's some reasonable estimate of parking
spaces assigned for the horse barn.
Point 3.
Capacity of parking lot does not match the number of spaces
shown.
The site plan stated 309 parking spaces provided.
I believe your staff had stated 331.
We believe the actual figure is more in the line of 301
spaces.
Again, I ask you to refer to page 2, paragraph 4 of my
report.
There are several locations where the actual parking spaces
are below the number of reported on the plan.
Parking lot A, they report 73 spaces at the shell lot.
Based on standard parking dimensions of the parking space
and drive isles, we believe 54 should be provided and still
be able to work around the trees and the root line of the
trees, to protect them.
In addition parking lot D of the porte-cochere, they
mentioned 74 on the plan.
We believe the actual number is 66.
Once you remove the parking spaces underneath the
porte-cochere and that number may be reduced even further
based on staff's presentation tonight.
The right-of-way not shown on the site plan.
Those conditions should be clarified.
Sidewalk, we understand is not being provided on Nichol
street.
Pavement in lieu of sidewalk is being implemented.
We believe that payment in lieu of sidewalk fee proposed for
Interbay Boulevard based on staff's, that should be
clarified.
Number 6, circulation in the northern parking lot does not
appear to function properly particularly with the
porte-cochere.
I refer to page 3, paragraph 5 in my report.
That the parking space under the porte-cochere need to be
removed.
There are also three parking spaces accessed by the drive
aisle on the northern expanse of the clubhouse. We believe
a diagram in the northern parking area should be provided
particularly where the proposed vacant buildings are
supposed to be removed.
We should be what I believe to be see what's going object
there.
And also porte-cochere we would assume would have some
support columns, and those usually have islands around them,
and that would further inhibit circulation.
Circulation of all ingress and egress points should be shown
and several locations appear to be too narrow for two way
traffic so we think the flow should be shown on the plan.
Finally the capacity for outdoor alcoholic sales and
consumption is not quantified could lead to a parking
deficiency.
We believed a parking analysis should be provided.
On page 3 of my report, they are proposing 13.47 acres of
alcohol sales and consumption.
Within these areas the number of people, parking
requirements should consider maximum occupants at events
occurring simultaneously and considering normal occupancy
rates for such events.
That concludes my presentation.
I am happy to answer any questions.
09:45:29 >>HARRY COHEN:
Council member Montelione.
09:45:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.
So the parking spaces you said, there's a discrepancy
between what is there, what is stated as being there
currently, and what's on the plan?
And what was in the staff report.
Did I hear you correctly say there was discrepancy between
the numbers?
09:45:56 >> Yes, and parking lot A, the plan shows 73 spaces.
That is the shell lot on the plan.
And the shell lot, with the large oak trees in it, and based
on looking at standard parking lot, or parking space
requirement 9 by 18, and drive aisles for circulation in
there, we believe you can only gets 54.
It's not shown on the plan.
It's shown on the plan as 73.
There is a location in parking lot B where they show 75
spaces up on the northern end by the proposed porte-cochere.
They show 73 spaces in the triangle, and -- or 75 spaces in
the triangle, and really when you eliminate some of the
parking spaces underneath the porte-cochere, we believe that
number is 66, a slight reduction but nudges a reduction.
And based on the staff report its appears that there's an
additional 14 spaces that may be lost just to the north of
the porte-cochere.
We would just like to see that clarified.
09:47:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Jonathan, Abbye, somebody?
09:47:15 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Land Development Coordination.
I counted every space on the site plan.
I am not sure what assumptions their expert made in relation
to what's being removed for the porte-cochere.
I did check all of the calculations.
There were other spaces.
This is my own working document.
There were other spaces that were captured that I did not
include.
We did not go back through and recalculate for them a
dimension for spaces within lot A -- I cannot validate
whether what he's saying as far as whether it's 55 versus
73.
I would let the applicant speak to that.
They are use that.
Their engineered provided there were 73 spaces in that lot.
So that's what was counted there.
They asked for a waiver for that lot, to not have the
protective radius.
So I don't know what assumptions he made when he was
calculating to get you down to that other number.
I did say in my report that it needed to be cleaned up, but
I didn't say it needed to be cleaned up by his numbers.
09:48:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Well, you said they were overparked.
09:48:33 >> 331 to 301.
Would you like me to show you where those 331 are?
I can get that information for you while you take other
testimony.
09:48:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Well, I was just counseled counting
spaces.
09:48:49 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Some of the little triangles are a little
difficult to see.
09:48:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I counted parking lot B and its says
that the 32 spaces and I think I only counted 31.
09:49:03 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
In a, there is 7, 5 and 20.
That would be 32.
I spent an afternoon counting and making sure that everyone
they count --
09:49:16 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
You figured --
09:49:19 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
The 5 is to the west of the R 20 future land
use right here.
7, 5, 20.
09:49:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Because I counted four where you counted
five.
That's all right.
I was just curious as to what the differences were between
the 331, the 301 and what they were saying.
Thank you.
09:49:45 >> Ethel Hammer will be our next expert to speak.
And then Tom Rankin will speak.
And then John Muellen will speak.
And that will be the end of our presentation.
09:49:56 >>HARRY COHEN:
And then we will move on to public comment.
You have about ten minutes left.
09:50:03 >> Mr. Chair, we are going to need more than ten minutes.
We need approximately 15 minutes.
09:50:12 >>HARRY COHEN:
We will let your two speakers speak with the
two-minute added for the time allowed.
Then we are going to move on to public comment.
09:50:23 >>GORDON SCHIFF:
It may take a couple more minutes but if
you would indulge, they are prepared to speak.
09:50:27 >> My name is Ethel Hammer.
I'm a land use planner.
I have been a land use planner in the Tampa Bay area for
over 35 years, and I have been qualified as a land use
planner in over 30 jurisdictions in the State of Florida.
My comments this evening are going to focus on the
compatibility, and with the use, with the surrounding
neighborhood, and the proposed intensification use and how
it will affect that neighborhood.
The proposed wet zoning that is requested by the club is too
large.
We agree with your staff.
The legal descriptions that were submitted with their
application includes the children's playground, it includes
a portion of the barn, the entire riding ring, a portion of
the tennis courts, their maintenance buildings and all of
the all of the submerged part of Hillsborough bay that is
within their ownership.
The enormous extent of this area significantly increases the
intensity and the negative impacts of this proposed
expansion on the residential neighborhood.
Approval of over 13 acres for wet zoning enables the
occurrence of multiple events that could occur at the same
time, east and west of inter bay Boulevard.
The club is proposing expanded hours of operation.
Over 13 acres of unlimited outdoor activity with amplified
sounds till midnight, Monday through Thursday, till 12:30 in
the morning Friday and Saturday is just simply incompatible
with the surrounding neighborhood.
These proposed hours go way beyond the past operating hours
of the club.
They list their current hours of operation in their monthly
newsletter which I have included in my report.
plified outdoor noise at such late hours severely impacts
the ability of the neighbors to not only enjoy the safety
and the integrity of their own home, but the entire
neighborhood.
These hours are also not supported by your staff.
The Tampa Yacht Club site plan requests approval for a
structure that is near the pool, that is labeled on their
site plan as planned improvements, 1860 square feet.
That structure is going to be an outdoor bar.
Prior permit drawings they submitted to the city indicate
that this will accommodate 161 people.
The design of the bar includes multiple TV screens,
providing the capability of showing multiple TV shows or
sporting events at one time.
This structure will provide an additional venue for
plified outdoor sound.
An outdoor bar or a televised event center is simply not
compatible with the residential neighborhood.
If the Yacht Club plans to operate as they always have, an
expansion and intensification of their evented space would
be unnecessary.
They are requesting an additional 17,700 square feet of
additional space which is 27% greater than the current
improvements on the property now.
As I already mentioned, the wet zoned area will go from
approximately a quarter of an I can acre which is the only
area that they have approved for alcohol use now, which is
inside the clubhouse to over 13 acres.
The club verbally states there are no plans to increase the
membership.
However, there is no limitation included in their
application or in the conditions of approval to limit the
number of members.
There is no limit on the number of events that can occur
simultaneously.
There is no restriction on the number of people that can
attend events at the property at any one given time.
My point is, there are no limits whatsoever on the intensity
of the proposed club expansion.
Limits on intensity are important given the fact that no
parking demands were calculated for the Marina which
functions as a separate use.
The barn and stables which function as a separate use, to in
creased amount of outdoor space which, in and of itself, may
function as a separate destination, separate from the
clubhouse itself.
We have already heard that there is no loading space for the
club.
They are asking to build a requirement of three to zero.
So any trucks that make deliveries park in the right-of-way.
Major events bring participants to the club on buses.
They also park in the right-of-way.
Given the substandard condition of Interbay Boulevard,
congestion from all of these things is illegal first of all
by parking in the right-of-way that it creates a problem for
the neighborhood.
I analyzed the PD application, the AB application, both
applications have deficiencies with respect to the submittal
requirements.
There are also numerous errors on the site plans and the
surveys which I have detailed and is included in my
analysis.
I have analyzed it relative to the goals, objectives and
policies of the comprehensive plan.
I find that this intensification of the Yacht Club's
expansion is inconsistent with many of the goals, objectives
and policies that try to maintain the character and
integrity of residential neighborhoods.
The unlimited and uncontrolled expansion of the Yacht Club
to a 13.5-acre outdoor event center is incompatible with
surrounding land uses, will be inconsistent with the
character of the neighborhood, will generate impacts that
are commercial in nature, and create an intensity such that
the off-site impacts cannot be mitigated.
We request that you review the four point plan that Mr.
Schiff entered into the record by doing the following.
Number one, reduce the area of the wet zoning to the area
that was initially requested by the Yacht Club, which is a
little over two acres.
We agree with your staff that what they have requested is
way too big.
Number two, require that the amplified sound be taken
indoors.
You have heard expert testimony that they are already
violating the noise ordinance.
Why would you allow them to continue?
Number three, reduce the hours of operations that they are
requesting.
Midnight, 12:30 in the morning is just too late.
It is incompatible.
And lastly, eliminate the outdoor bar.
The negative impact of outdoor bars have already been
documented by neighbors in the Howard Avenue corridor.
The request to operate an outdoor bar every night, every day
of the week, most nights until midnight, will be heard
throughout the neighborhood.
Don't introduce this incompatible use to Ballast Point.
Thank you.
09:58:43 >>HARRY COHEN:
Are there any questions for Mrs. Hammer from
council members before we hear from the remaining two
speakers before we go to public comment?
09:58:57 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Mrs. Hammer, is that information of your
suggestion in one of these books?
09:59:01 >> Yes, ma'am, it is.
I have a very detailed analysis of what sections did not
meet the seminal requirements of code --
09:59:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
No, I heard the last part of your
testimony there.
09:59:16 >> The four point plan that I handed out in the single page.
09:59:20 >> It's not in the binder?
09:59:24 >>GORDON SCHIFF:
No, that's correct, Councilwoman.
09:59:25 >> Thank you.
09:59:27 >> Good evening.
My name is Tom HANIKEN, Interbay Boulevard, 33611.
Ballast Point is our home.
When I was born, I was brought home toll my grandmother's
house in Ballast Point which is built in 1895.
My great aunt built the Ballast Point home that we raised
our two children in and that we live in today.
A family Yacht Club sits between city park and our home.
These proposals before you totally conflict with our
established residential neighborhood.
The club is asking you to sanction noise, commercialization,
expansion, and congestion.
We object.
To be clear, this is not about Gasparilla.
The club does not need any approvals for you to continue
hosting Gasparilla.
Instead, this is about extreme overreach.
It's about incompatible commercial expansion.
The club described needing flexibility.
That is double speak for asking you to give them carte
blanche for a loud outdoor event center.
Noise is not a provision of Tampa Yacht Club except of
course one morning each year where all celebrate Gasparilla.
The noise of Gasparilla at the club ends by 10:30 in the
morning.
The current plans for having staff monitor the noise level
of nighttime outdoor parties and events.
Do you really think that having the wait staff using little
hand held devices is equivalent to professional noise
monitoring by a third party?
Do you really think the wait staff is going to shut down a
wedding or party of those who pay their wages? Staff does
not work, has not worked and will not work.
(Bell sounds)
If allow the club to have outdoor noise they will violate
the noise ordinance.
They have told us privately that of they know they have
noise problems.
They have also told us they know the solution is to move the
noise inside.
10:01:36 >>HARRY COHEN:
Mr. Rankin, I am going to ask that you take
an additional two minutes because we are over the 30
minutes.
You have two minutes.
10:01:45 >> The club violates noise ordinance on a regular basis.
We are here.
The noise rattles the windows in our homes and wakes up at
night.
Calling or e-mailing the club is not a solution and has
proved to be futile.
The club told us if we don't like noise, call the police.
The police line is a nonemergency number with a 72 hour
response window.
This is all very wrong.
This is a nuisance.
The neighborhood should not have been to call the police.
The neighborhood should not have to police.
The Tampa Yacht Club board members who sit before you today
say they love Ballast Point.
But not a single one of their 16 officers and governors
lives in Ballast Point.
Not one.
They don't have than to experience the noise of the beer
truck blocking the road, when buses are idling and blocking
the sidewalks, they don't have flashing blue lights shining
in their living room at night, they don't have to deal with
the congestion and the unsafe situation they are causing for
drivers, walkers, bikers and strollers.
They just gets in their car, leave Ballast Point and go
home.
Why is the club before City Council?
It is here asking you not to legitimize its -- is not only
to legitimize its ongoing unlawful and inappropriate actions
and behavior, but the club expanding actions and behavior.
What is the public purpose of allowing a noisy outdoor event
venue or allow outdoor bar in the quiet established
residential neighborhood?
We say the public purpose is to stop this noise.
We are proposing a four point plan.
One part of our plan is to require the club to move its
noise back inside this building which used to be its
tradition.
We understand this may take a little time, but the noise
must go.
Please preserve and protect historic Ballast Point from
these Ringling Brothers extremely intrusive commercial and
nonhistorical proposals.
Thank you very much.
(Bell sounds).
10:03:51 >>HARRY COHEN:
Mr. Mueller, you have four minutes as well.
10:03:53 >> I have been working here all day and waiting here for
three minutes.
Thank you very much.
My name is John Mueller, Lykes Lane, Tampa, Florida 33611.
I have lived on Ballast Point for nearly 30 years.
I am a member of the Yacht Club.
At least as of this moment I am.
Our neighborhood has experienced increased issues with
noise, traffic and congestion related to activity at the
club.
Just this morning on my way to work, I drove by the Yacht
Club and there's a huge tractor trailer blocking Interbay
Boulevard, one Lane of it, and people have to go around it.
Couldn't even see around it.
More over, I was driving home a recent Saturday afternoon,
and to avoid a tractor trailer beer truck coming down
Interbay Boulevard from the club, had to drive onto the
sidewalk.
And I have always been privileged to listen to music and
celebrations from the club while lying in bed at home trying
to sleep.
I live south of Mr. Rankin on Lykes Lane.
Giving the club the authority to expand its alcohol sales an
showers will operation will contribute to additional noise
and more traffic congestion.
I oppose giving the club authority to build a more permanent
outdoor bar on the waterfront with multiple television
screens.
More over, we don't want to have Gasparilla every day or
night of the week.
We ask you not to allow the creation of another SoHo.
We want you to take care of the problem now rather than us
having to come back in a year and saying, oh, my God, we
have noise problems, can you help us?
So here is the four point plan one more time.
It's on a legal sheet of paper that was handed out to you to
resolve all of this.
First of all, limit the sale of alcohol to the area on which
the club has traditionally served alcohol.
Or at least a year ago that was the area that they claimed
that they always served alcohol on.
When they filed the vested rights petition.
Number two, require that outdoor alcohol sales at the
already constructed outdoor pavilion or outdoor stop at
9 p.m. Monday through Thursday, 10 p.m. on Friday and
Saturday, and 1 a.m. on special event nights.
Three, no new outdoor bars.
Totally inappropriate.
Four, amplified sound outdoors.
We are willing to give a grace period for two years so the
club can move that noise --
10:06:16 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
We have that.
Thank you.
10:06:17 >> That's our presentation, Mr. Chairman.
10:06:22 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
We are going to, unless council members have questions, move
onto the public comment portion of the hearing at this
point.
As council's earlier determination, two minutes per speaker,
and we would just ask that speakers line up and try to get
in front of us as expeditiously as possible.
I am going to ask again anyone planning on speaking if you
have not been sworn, now is an opportune time to go ahead
and be sworn. If there are people downstairs that can
lawyer this, perhaps they will take this opportunity to come
up and be sworn if they will alert us if they weren't when
they get here.
10:06:58 >>THE CLERK:
Anyone to be sworn? Finance so raise your
rate hand.
(Oath administered by Clerk)
Thank you.
10:07:16 >>HARRY COHEN:
Before everyone begins let me remained you,
you don't have to use the whole two minutes.
And we certainly -- we certainly appreciate brevity and the
ability to make succinct comments when necessary.
Councilwoman Montelione.
10:07:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Mrs. Feeley has the parking calculation
for me.
10:07:36 >>ABBYE FEELEY:
Just very quickly.
I did recount everything in all the lots.
There is a total of 331.
And finance we make the adjustments that staff described to
you in our presentation and remove those spaces, it would be
313, and they are required 301.
So it still would be overparked.
10:07:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Okay.
10:07:56 >> First up.
10:08:01 >> My name is Hank Ennis, 288 Marlin Avenue in Ballast
Point.
My wife and I lived there for 25 years and we raised two
children in Ballast Point.
I'm a member of the Ballast Point neighborhood association
board, served as its president for a couple of years, and my
wife and I are members of the Yacht Club.
Ballast Point board is made up of volunteers who live in
Ballast Point for many years.
We represent a total ever 245 years living in the
neighborhood, among eight board members.
And we represent everybody in the neighborhood including the
neighbors surrounding the club.
Just as with any planned development, the Ballast Point
Yacht Club plan and special use. We went over each issue
raised by the neighborhood.
Jerry Miller our president is here to speak and he will give
you more detail.
But we had two major issues.
One with the 50-inch oak tree.
We don't want that removed and is very glad to hear the
Yacht Club will save that.
Two, regardless of where or how alcohol is served, the noise
ordinance must be met.
And we have every confidence that the leadership of the
Yacht Club will meet the noise ordinance requirement.
We didn't have any other concern.
We felt that the Yacht Club planned development and special
use as submitted is reasonable, and it was very clear at the
Yacht Club board that the club not -- and I am going to go
for one minute here, and I know Gordon talking to people in
the Ballast Point neighborhood but the people in Ballast
Point are not opposed to the Yacht Club plan, only your
client.
And Ethel -- to say that the Yacht Club is a parking issue
that point is untrue.
It's a wonderful, wonderful park.
It's being misused.
And we need to tackle that issue together.
Thank you very much.
[ Applause ]
(Bell sounds).
10:10:10 >>HARRY COHEN:
Ladies.
Ladies.
This is very -- listen, it's going to be a long night.
I would really like to ask you not only the applaud and call
out because it only makes the night go longer.
Go ahead.
10:10:25 >> My name is Don pleasant, 5222 south Crescent drive. I
have been sworn.
We live on Crescent drive.
Our backyard is approximately 130 feet from the Yacht Club
stables.
I think we contained of have agreement here.
May not seem like it but nobody objects, I do not think, to
the Yacht Club improving their property by building more
building.
What we object to is imposing the function within the
building such as noise on the rest of the neighborhood.
Addressing what my good friend Dave Smith mentioned a couple
of points.
He said the barn will stay a barn. If so why do we need
alcohol service there?
The setbacks, 1,000 feet is what's currently required.
Reduce to 75 feet.
What a tremendous reduction.
What an imposition on the surrounding homeowners.
Relative to the surrounding homeowners, truly the Yacht Club
was there before we built our homes.
However, the other side of that coin is we built the homes
on the reliance of the function of the Yacht Club as it
exists, not with alcohol sales and entertainment 75 feet
from our property lines.
I think that covers it.
Thank you.
10:11:52 >> My name is Lee Williams.
I live at 2414 west country club Avenue.
I have lived in Ballast Point neighborhood for 33 years, and
for the last 22 years have been 200 feet from the Yacht Club
property.
I have been going to the Yacht Club for as long as I can
remember.
My father, a former club commodore, is a life-long avid
boater and our times on the water together are some of my
fondest memories.
It's the only tradition now includes my children.
Three generations of my family have enjoyed everything the
club has to offer.
I hope that tradition continues.
I have been become increasingly alarmed by the misleading
claims led by the group opposed to the Yacht Club plan.
One claim which has been repeatedly made here tonight also,
is that the plans and alcohol expansion would result in the
creation of a commercial -- that's not true.
And as far as the bigger than Amalie arena property is just
sort of boggles mind mind
A website created by those opposed showed 7 congestion
photos.
These I believe are supposed to show an increase in traffic
already caused by the Yacht Club.
In fact three of those photos are of cars parked along
people visiting Ballast Point park.
This I consider to be the biggest problem our neighborhood
is having these days.
The invasion of Pokemon Go players -- and a serious parking
problem is worse and resulted in trespassing effecting the
surrounding neighbors including the Yacht Club.
And for serving alcohol --
(Bell sounds).
10:14:10 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
Next.
10:14:12 >> Good evening.
I'm representing -- tonight that owns the property directly
south.
Directly south of what is identified in the PD as parcel 1.
They have agreed to conditions in connection with
withholding our objections tonight and we want to put it on
the record and also confirm for you that they have agreed to
those conditions.
They relate specifically -- and forgive my chicken
scratch -- they relate to -- this is parcel 1 specifically
which is west of Interbay.
The first is a reduced alcoholic beverage area on parcel 1.
It's going to be -- this is the first area.
This big black area with a small amount of red.
That represents the area around the equestrian facility
outside of the ring where people I believe look to watch
what's happening in the rink.
And then the second area is around the tennis facility, and
it also includes two tables that go further south.
So the boundary that you see on your original plan is 75
feet from the southern boundary. This would push that
boundary up to about 150 feet with the exception of those
two tables.
So that would be the first condition.
They have also agreed to a path only between the two parcels
being no more than eight feet wide, so folks can go from one
of the alcohol beverage areas to the other.
(Bell sounds)
The second point, no amplified bands on parcel 1.
DJs would be permitted -- I north you want -- we agreed to
plified sounds.
DJs are permitted up to four times a year only on the
equestrian wet zoned parcels.
That's the second point.
And the third is that the hours of alcoholic beverage sales
are limited on parcel 1 to be more restrictive than the
overall alcoholic beverage requests.
Monday through Thursday and Sunday ads 9 p.m. and Friday and
Saturday 11 p.m.
Grace, can you confirm that's the agreement?
10:16:30 >> Grace Yang, counsel for club.
We are willing to agree to those conditions, and the smaller
AB area on parcel 1.
We thank Elise and Lykes brothers for negotiating and
discussing this with us.
10:16:46 >>HARRY COHEN:
Councilwoman Montelione has a question.
10:16:50 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.
Do you have that in writing for us?
10:16:56 >> If you can read my writing, I trade to.
10:17:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Maybe we can get a copy of that for all
search of us.
Mr. Shelby can handle that.
10:17:08 >>HARRY COHEN:
We are going to move on with public
comments.
Next.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are open for business here.
(Laughter).
10:17:23 >> My name is Jerry Miller, 2815 praise Avenue, president of
Ballast Point neighborhood association.
And I am here tonight on behalf of the association.
We understand and recognize and respect that some of our
neighbors object to this plan.
However, we have been involved in meeting with the Yacht
Club very early on.
Early on, we had several, several suggestions.
Every one of those suggestions has been met to our
satisfaction.
Therefore, the Board of Directors the other night voted
unanimously to offer support for this plan, which is
unusual.
Very seldom do we support a rezoning plan.
Also they requested we support the liquor license
application.
Three also asked that I be here tonight to express that
support.
I have done so and I thank you for your patience.
10:18:12 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
Next.
10:18:15 >> My name is Arthur savage and I have been sworn N.I have a
letter that I would like to put into evidence to the
neighbors in a 2 that you foot radius.
I'm sorry I did not make seven copies but I do have one.
10:18:32 >>HARRY COHEN:
I believe it's already in our record because
I know I have seen it but we would be happy to take a copy
into the record.
10:18:38 >> I will just paraphrase.
Short little history lesson, in 1852 my great great
grandfather James McKay purchased approximately 158 acres
on a point of land from levi collard, the first U.S. pioneer
in Tampa.
The land we call Interbay was wilderness.
McKay brought his cattle to feed and load on the ships for
export to Cuba.
It's believed the ships would drop balance last rocks from
that point.
When the deep water Port Tampa was developed, he ended up
selling that land in 1886 to his daughter's husband's
family, the Lykes.
A few years later in 1892, around 50 acres on the north end
went to Mr. Chester Chapin who had consumers electric.
His wife Amelia was credited with owning the entire
subdivision and is an avid reader of Jules Verne helped
designate the nearby space Jules Verne park which we now
call Ballast Point park.
The land was later leased and then later sold to the Tampa
Yacht Club.
(Bell sounds)
I mention that because I'm one of many that have a deep love
for that area.
I don't live there.
I never lived on Ballast Point but I grew up on Ballast
Point on our boat with our friends.
And I'm not unique.
There's a lot of people are in that club, in that
neighborhood, that absolutely love it and would never prone
anything that threatened the community.
So thank you.
And we would appreciate your support.
(Bell sounds).
10:20:33 >>HARRY COHEN:
Next.
10:20:34 >> Wellman Martin, and I want to say a few words.
I'm a native South Tampan.
I won't tell you how many years.
But I have been a member of the Yacht Club over 60 years.
My husband Charlie was a commodore as his brother Fred.
So we have always enjoyed the Yacht Club.
And then about 22 years ago, we built a home right across
from the tennis courts.
And I have always thought that the Yacht Club was such an
asset to the neighborhood, but not only that, to the City of
Tampa.
And I just have so many good memories.
And I just hope sincerely that we can work everything out
icably.
Thank you.
10:21:25 >> Mr. Chairman, members of council, my name is Steve
Reynold, 5810 south Gordon Avenue in Ballast Point.
I have been in the neighborhood for about 35 years.
I had the privilege of being the first president of the
neighborhood association.
I made the mistake of going to the first meeting.
It took me six years to find a replacement.
But during that time and since, I have always found the
Yacht Club to be a caring member of the neighborhood.
They have been interested in the neighborhood.
And they have been a good steward of their part of the
neighborhood.
It's a family oriented club, a place where people want to go
on Mother's Day.
They want to go on Easter and they want to go celebrate an
important birthday, whether it's the first one or the
100th one.
I hope that you will approve both petitions that are before
you this evening.
They are important to the continuation of the neighborhood
as we know it.
Thank you very much.
10:22:31 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
10:22:33 >> Good evening.
Scott Fairbanks, I live at 4007 west San Rafael street.
I'm the general manager of the Tampa yachted and country
club.
I have been employed by the club for 25 years starting as a
summer intern during college, eleven years as assistant
manager and now general manager for the past ten years.
I have seen Tampa grow during these years due to the hard
work and dedication of leaders such as yourselves.
During this time the Tampa yacht and country club has not
intensified its use as some may suggest but rather has
worked very hard to remain relevant to the 1450 members and
their families. We employ 74 full time individuals
intelligence an additional 50 plus part time employ that's
rely on the club to support their families in return for
their ability to provide the membership with the highest
level of please and efficient service.
We have a team who is proud to be part of the Tampa yacht
and country club family.
They are also proud of history, traditions, as well as the
role of the club has played within the Ballast Point
community.
Like me, many stay at the club because the family
atmosphere.
It is rewarding to play a role in the life celebrations of
so many generations of members and their families.
You heard neighbors concern about outdoor sounds.
I'm here to tell you that my management team and I, not
waiters as some my suggest, take readings at the property
line whenever there is an outdoor music event.
And to ensure that we comply with the local noise
ordinances.
We log the decibel readings and we have a sound policy with
consequences for the host bands and my team should we not
comply.
I don't want to lose my job over a loud band but it could
happen.
Members can be fined for up to a thousand dollars for
violating this policy, and bands can be shut down if they
violate, which has happened.
You may have heard the club wanted extended hours and serve
drinks till 3 a.m.
Please allow me to impress upon you over the past 24 years
I have been part of the time and closing hours have been
remained the same. The Yacht Club is not a commercial
establishment.
Only members and their guests may visit.
Providing for severability parties must be sponsored by
members of the club.
QITC status is a 501(c)3 status.
We do not want to lose that status.
10:25:00 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
10:25:00 >> 401 south Crescent, two blocks from the club in either
direction of the tennis courts or the main building.
I have been a member of the club for over 30 years.
My daughters grew up there.
It's a private club.
It has a limited membership.
We don't want a commercial facility.
Pleas don't buy into the high hyperbole espoused by the
opposition.
Thank you.
10:25:43 >> My name is Brent Jones.
I live on Jules Verne.
I lived in Ballast Point for about 20 years.
Approximately about 200 feet from the west property line of
the Yacht Club.
I am a member of the Yacht Club.
And certainly the Yacht Club and the park is certainly a gem
for the area.
We would do nothing to jeopardize the neighborhood.
It is consistent with the use.
And certainly we use it.
It's family establishment.
We use the pool.
We go to events. We go to the kids' party, the Halloween
party at the stables.
I assume that has something to do with the AB application
and the wet zone for the stables.
So certainly, being in the neighborhood, we certainly have
seen a number of mailings that I have been disappointed to
see, and highly inaccurate, really describing what this
application is about.
It really is disappointing.
I think it's intended to inciting the reaction it has with
misinformation.
And I don't think that's appropriate.
I think if they have a complaint, if it's about noise,
that's what they should be saying and telling the
neighborhood and the neighborhood can make a decision, does
it affect them or not?
And respond appropriately.
Not about building apartments, not about Amalie west.
It's not surprising why people have been under the
misunderstanding.
They just have to read what was mailed out to the
neighborhood.
Thank you.
10:27:17 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
10:27:20 >> My name is Rodney, 2003 north village Avenue.
I am a native, historian.
I am not a member of the Yacht Club but I am an interested
party in that historic preservation, preservation of
historic uses.
And a lot about history today.
Just to show everybody, the Yacht Club building, 1905, is
when this chart was made, Hillsborough bay and Tampa Bay.
And this was Tampa. This was Port Tampa.
And this was all the country, and that's Ballast Point and
that's where the Yacht Club was and is located.
This photograph taken the year after.
That's what Ballast Point looked like.
This is a pavilion who owned the property and eventually
went to Tampa Electric.
Part of it went to the Yacht Club.
This is a home, likely the original Lykes home.
The Yacht Club is around the cove inside between those two
secures structures.
And that was the original Yacht Club building out over the
water.
That one burned.
And another one as well.
So you can see, inside and outside uses here with the large
wrap around porches, and the space between these two
buildings.
So not only was this used, but the upland was used as well.
This believe it or not is around Gandy and Bayshore. This
was the late 19-teens.
(Bell sounds)
So while it was being used there was nothing else around.
Somebody mentioned farms, and cattle ranches.
That was what was around there.
This is looking from the south to the north.
1923, 24.
And you can see there is really nothing there.
Of course, there were some homes.
The homes, some farms, and of course Ballast Point and the
Yacht Club.
And so I think all they are trying to do is preserve what
they had there for 111 years and I think they can do it.
Thank you all so much.
10:29:26 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
Next.
10:29:29 >> Good evening.
My name is Tom Rankin, 514 Rivera drive, 33606.
I was raised next door to the Tampa Yacht Club and my
parents are the closest neighbor.
The Tampa Yacht Club, the club is a boisterous neighbor.
You think Howard Avenue is loud, try sleeping in my parents'
house while a band party next door.
People asked if my parents would consider moving due to the
noise, congestion, intensification of the club.
Recently a member asked are if my parents would consider
installing sound resistant windows as a solution to the
problem.
Moving from a neighborhood, moving from the home my parents
have lived in for over 40 years and a home my family has
owned for over three generations is unacceptable.
The club has presented the case and just wants to continue
doing what they have since 1904.
However, there was a time when bands were inside, the party
was temporary and outside bars were an exception.
These things are now the norm.
I want to make this clear.
Tradition is not an excuse to be noisy.
Tradition is not an excuse to violate code.
Tradition is not an excuse in our neighborhood.
I ask that City Council find a solution that would enable
the club to thrive while ensuring neighborhood compatibility
into the future.
My parents have been neighborly for over 40 years, and now
it's time for the club to act accordingly.
These are reasonable requests.
And I feel that everyone in this room would feel the same
way if this were happening in their neighborhood.
Thank you.
(Bell sounds).
10:31:08 >> 9112 south Oregon Avenue.
[Off microphone.]
It's been quite a day.
I had two board meetings in between as well.
With I wrote a letter and I'm standing here to tell you will
that I am in support of both the zoning and the rezoning and
the wet zoning application.
Taken together or singly, they are not seeking to join the
operational practices of the club.
The applications are not going to drive additional traffic
into the neighborhood.
The membership is around 150 families.
Talk about improving the quality of the experience for the
money that we pay to belong to the club, not about drumming
up more members.
The club has been more than conscientious in monitoring its
noise level.
There's a documented including noise meters that are
collected with the results logged every 30 minutes when
there's an event.
There's never been a police report but citation regarding
noise level or alcohol consumption on the property.
The club should be commend commended for where are the
collaboration with neighbors in the community.
As immediate past president historic Hyde Park and my many
years as active citizen in zoning and compliance, I have
never seen this level of true cooperation.
The includes a buffer zone around the property for alcohol
consumption, limited hours for amplified music, speaks to
retain the stables, the parking garage does not include an
event center, it further beautifies the streetscape as green
space, trees, built on the track record of preserving its
grand oaks.
These are all allowable uses, all the allowable uses are
quite specific in the end.
If they wanted to do something more, it requires public
participation, due process and council getting involved
again.
It is not open ended. While I am a relatively new member of
Tampa Yacht Club I use it extensively.
My husband and I go for date night, my kids ride at the
stables, we go to tennis clinics, we swim, and spend an
extensive amount of time researching this application.
And in summary please support us.
I find it to be a respectful business relative to the health
safety and welfare.
It's a neighborly business.
Thank you.
10:33:31 >> My name is Kent Evans, 2504 Tyson Avenue.
I'm a neighbor. I live about as close to the Yacht Club as
anyone can except for the Rankins, and some of the Lykes.
I do want to make clear that you have heard a lot about the
opposing neighbors and such.
Really, there's two groups.
There's the neighbors that live in what I call the Lykes'
compound, and then the rest of the neighbors that live sort
of in the surrounding neighborhood, single-family homes, and
I'm one of them.
And I am one.
Ones that received a lot of mail in a mail campaign
describing what's going to happen to our neighborhood,
because of these club plans.
And I am also a commercial real estate appraiser.
In fact, the city is one of my clients.
And they hire me occasionally on valuation issues.
And it's my job, one part of my job is to read PDs and plans
like that.
And I read the Yacht Club in great detail.
And I can tell you, what was being sent in the mailings and
what's really in that plan are very, very different.
And I just want to say that from those neighbors that I
know, like in the block that I live, the overwhelming -- and
I am saying this under oath -- the overwhelming majority do
support the Yacht Club's plan.
And I just encourage you to support the plan, and I thank
you very much.
10:35:02 >> Good evening.
My name is Susan Mueller.
I live at 5420 Lykes Lane.
I wasn't planning to talk tonight but I wanted to make a few
quick points.
I'm a member of the Yacht Club.
All these people are my friends.
I grew up at the Yacht Club.
I lived on Ballast Point for almost all of my 68 years.
And it isn't the country.
It is a neighborhood.
I walked to Ballast Point school as a little girl in the
third grade.
An elementary school there and there were children living
and going to school.
But I just want to say that the club has met with the
neighbors.
It has made some accommodations.
If these issues had not been raised, those accommodations
may not have been made.
And so I don't think there's any point in finger pointing at
this stage of the game.
I would urge you to consider the four point plan that has
been put forward to protect the neighborhood by limiting the
hours of operation and the hours of outdoor operation, in
particular, because that's how you will control the noise
and the traffic.
Sound carries over water.
We hear it when there's parties at the Yacht Club.
No, we don't call the police on our club.
Because we are good neighbors.
Okay.
And because we don't think the police can do much in time
for us to get a good night's sleep.
I gave a party, a big wedding party last year at the Yacht
Club.
We had 300-plus guests.
We had a band.
We had a ball.
And it was all indoors at the Tampa yacht and country club
and it was a beautiful party.
Thank you for your time.
10:36:54 >> My name is Bobby canto, I have been sworn, and I live at
5,000 south Crescent drive.
I have been there for 20 years. This is my neighborhood.
I know it.
If you will, we have the north side which is Lykes compound
as I heard it referred to.
And in my neighborhood, my daughter's window looks out onto
Ballast Point park, and the Yacht Club.
The Yacht Club are great neighbors.
They have been respectful.
They have been conscientious.
The place is always kept up.
Our problem is Ballast Point park.
And to sit here and to say that this plan is going to
disrupt the neighborhood, effect traffic, these people are
out of touch.
They need to come on a Saturday when Pokemon Go is going on.
That's the problem we have experienced on our side.
The Yacht Club can be accuse them of anything but exemplary
conduct is just unfair.
And I wonder, I got the mailers, too, extreme, intrusive,
commercial?
It's misleading.
And why do that?
I question, what is the agenda?
Why mislead us like this?
I strongly encourage you to approve it.
My dad told me when you -- to me they have been throwing
dirt, and so thank you.
10:38:33 >> Richard park, Jr., 5139 south Nichol, Tampa 363611.
I have not yet been sworn in.
10:38:40 >>HARRY COHEN:
If we need to swear anybody in or who came
from downstairs. Also if you are watching downstairs.
(Oath administered by Clerk)
10:38:55 >> I do live in Ballast Point.
You live across the street from the Yacht Club.
I can throw a rock and hit the stable.
I lived there for 15 years.
I am also the president of Crescent Place Condominium
Association.
I have been president for up to four years.
I have been on the board for 14 years.
The one thing I can tell you is that those 14 years, we have
never ever had a resident who said anything to me about
noise.
They have complained about other things, but I can't do
anything about the POKEMON and things like that and they
ever never complained about noise.
I have never had a noise problem with the Yacht Club.
I never heard anything.
I have never been bothered.
My board voted unanimously all six of us in support of the
Yacht Club.
My neighbors, my unit owners, who I polled personally voted
overwhelmingly for the Yacht Club.
I ask you very much to favor the Yacht Club with a positive
decision.
Thank you.
10:39:58 >> Good evening.
My name is Jennifer Galloway, a member of the Tampa Yacht
Club and I'm also a resident of Ballast Point, 5801 -- the
president of my homeowners association, lived there about 12
years.
And my son is going to speak and it is a school night.
Thank you for hearing us tonight.
I just want to say that him also proud to --
10:40:28 >> What is your homeowners association?
10:40:30 >> Town reserve association.
10:40:32 >> You didn't mention it.
10:40:33 >> Sorry about that.
South town reserve.
I am a member of the Tampa Yacht Club and have been since I
was little.
I learned to drive boats by driving my father's boat in the
bay from there.
When my son learned to drive a boat at age six.
It is a wonderful family Yacht Club that provides such great
opportunities to so many family members there.
And it would just be a shame to see them not get the permit
to move forward.
I am proud to say I am the first female fleet captain.
There really enjoyed serving on the board.
And was on the board and we worked through the noise
ordinance.
Noise internal requirements and the decibel readers.
And we worked really hard on that.
And I found as a representative of the board at the time
that it was a great result.
Scott and team worked really hard to make sure it is solid
and I just ask that you support these initiatives and grant
them a in favor of the country club.
Thank you.
10:41:34 >> Hi.
My name is Jay and I am 13 years old.
I have been at the Yacht Club for most of my life.
And I have learned to do many things there, and have a lot
of fun with friends and family.
I would one day like to raise my kids there, too.
Thank you.
10:42:01 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
[ Applause ]
10:42:05 >> My name is Teresa cannon, South Westshore Boulevard.
I'm a receptionist at the Yacht Club.
I have been a team member for the last five years.
I retired from the county school district of 36 years.
My mother, and my niece and my granddaughter are there now.
As a receptionist, I am many times the first impression that
many of them, contact for members and their guests as well
as vendors and employees.
The members and my co-workers of the Lykes family, the club
provides a home away from home atmosphere for the members,
the families and guests to relax and socialize.
The club provides us with an opportunity to be a part of a
wonderful organization, and many wonderful tradition.
The Yacht Club is also listened to the concerns of the
members and neighbors.
The Yacht Club is not a commercial establishment.
Only members.
I enjoy my work there and it allows me to bring home a good
paycheck.
But I'm afraid if the applications are not approved, that
may not the case in the future.
So I respectfully ask the City Council to please approve the
application.
Thank you.
10:43:19 >> Good evening.
Maybe I should say good morning.
I'm here to support the Yacht Club.
Serving alcoholic beverage application.
My family and I have not been members as long as many of the
other people who have spoken here.
The club has made a significant impact on us.
It's a home.
And we frequent it very often.
I think I would be aware of any excessive noise and I am
not.
My daughter and my son were so impressed with the club that
they eventually applied for membership and we were fortunate
enough to receive membership in the club.
My daughter is politically active, she travels extensively
in the United States.
But when she comes home, it's a little -- her first comment
is, dad, let's get our friends together and go to the club.
The club is home to her.
I think that's the real value of the club for members like
us.
It's home.
My son who is also a member did not use the club very often
in the last, oh, 10 or 12 months.
That's because he was deployed in a combat zone.
And when he mobilized, in Texas, he called and said, hey,
dad, I'm coming home, sometime in the next couple of weeks,
and we have got to go to the club.
So after 10 months in a combat zone, what he wanted was to
come home to the club.
I'm sure he as well as Mace have experienced loud noises in
our time.
We don't experience that at the club.
What we experience is a real family environment, our
friends, the staff, the management, other members.
It is home.
(Bell sounds)
And I would hate to see anything happen with respect to the
rezoning proposal that would somehow restrict the ambience
that the club has supported my family and others.
10:45:46 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you for your comments.
Next.
10:45:48 >> Hello.
My name is John Philip.
I worked at the dining room manager at country club for 28
years.
I consider the Yacht Club a family of main.
I started as a busboy.
And now the dining room manager.
I have worked hard to gets that spot.
It allows me to know the members of the family.
The great leadership, the major was a great mentor of mine,
for about 30 years.
He showed me a lot of values, quality, to succeed not only
in the club but life as well.
Also, I grew up at Ballast Point.
My son Quincy at Ballast Point, I played and fished at
Ballast Point pier.
I love the serenity and the peacefulness of the area.
Not only do I live there, I work there.
I want to retire there.
And anything we can do to -- it is a private club, not a
commercial club.
Also, the traditions that we offer to our members.
Thank you very much.
10:47:11 >> Good evening.
Patricia Jenkins, a retired certified industrial hygienist.
I'm very familiar with the noise standard, EPA, and I find
it to be very confusing.
The greatest protection you can give the neighborhood is
time.
Everyone understands how to read a clock.
If you go ahead and give a residential restriction on hours
of operation, it is the easiest, cleanest, matter to protect
the neighborhood.
Thank you.
10:47:46 >> My name is drew Eckhoff and I have a green folder which
means I am supporting the Yacht Club.
The last time I was here this late is when about ten years
ago I think Hyde Park was considering adding condominiums
and various things.
We had a lot of the same discussion.
Most of it had to do with density.
I live a block wherever that area so that's why I was here.
This isn't that type of issue.
I can tell you as a member of the Yacht Club, if I had any
inclination that this was going to be taken advantage of in
a way that would adversely affect the neighbors because of
my experiences coming here before and having that type of
experience, I likely wouldn't support that.
I can empathize with the neighbors that are there.
You are never going to have a perfect situation but the
members here of this club drive what happens at the club,
and I think what you will see and what the record has shown
is that very responsible with its behavior and we intend
doing that in the future.
I thank you and hope that you support the Yacht Club's
proposals.
10:48:57 >> My name is Cindy Murphy Thomas.
My husband Michael Thomas is a former commodore and I have
lived within 50 feet of the Tampa Yacht Club for over 30
years.
The Yacht Club has always been a good neighbor and an asset
to the Ballast Point community.
None of the noisy neighborhood.
We have never encountered any problems whatsoever from
parties or activities.
I know the Yacht Club wants to keep Ballast Point a nice
quiet neighborhood and see the applications as sensible
planning and therefore I enthusiastically support both
applications.
There's one thing I want to say about residential at 11:00.
If purchase everything a weddin' or a party, I got 11:30
which some of the parties I believe have to stop, and we
have the sound meters.
I don't hear it on the street. I don't know what they hear
on the water but I don't hear it and I think you can still
get a good night's sleep after 11:30 at night.
And they have always been very respectful, and also when
they talk about the liquor license and being able to have
liquor, why do you need it?
Well, I play tennis and I think it's nice to sit on the
porch with my tennis players and have a wine cooler or have
a bare.
And it's not that it's going to be multiple parties going
on.
That's not going to happen.
Never has.
It's not the situation at all.
Thank you for your consideration.
10:50:31 >> I'm Bo Harry.
I live at 5210 Interbay at the BRIGANTINE, the neighbor to
the north.
And I have been the president of the association for most of
the last ten years.
With when I talked to the other eight families that live
there, there have been no issues in the last ten years.
So we are about directly across the street from the stables
and about 200 yards from the front gate.
Problem one has not occurred.
So I'm empowered by the board at the BRIGANTINE to offer our
endorsement for both plans.
Thank you very much.
10:51:20 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
10:51:23 >> George Stafford, 709 south Willow Avenue, tan.
I want you to know there are still dozens and dozens of
people downstairs in the Vrooms that are here in support of
the Tampa Yacht Club's zoning proposal and liquor license
proposal.
But I am going to make your night.
Because they do not want to come up and get in line.
But they do wanted you to know that they are down here, they
are here in moral support, including several non-members.
Thank you.
10:51:56 >> I'm Don Barnes, and I'm not a member of the Yacht Club
but I am the executive officer for ye mystic Krewe
Gasparilla and I want to take a second and talk about the
unique relationship between the Tampa Yacht Club and Ye
Mystic club.
Both were established from 1904.
Both comprised of some of the leading citizens of the City
of Tampa.
Currently, we boast fourth generation members who grew up on
the grass going behind the Tampa yacht and country club
watching the fathers and their grand fathers getting ready
to invade this great city, but they were formed for the same
reason, to support and promote the City of Tampa, what began
in 1900 when the population of Tampa was only 16,000 people.
They said Tampa yacht and country club and ye mystic krew of
Gasparilla came up with a way to support this city.
They had 50 pirates riding into the city on horseback from
the Yacht Club, turned into an event that's participated by
20,000 individuals and seen by half a million people around
the world.
Ye Mystic Krewe couldn't do this without the enormous
partnership of Tampa yachted and country club.
Over the years we held over 1200 events and held eleven
afteryear.
We lost the site for officials luncheon where hundreds ever
people came out and we honor them whether they are
firefighters, civil service members that are supporting.
It's just a wonderful relationship.
And I'm so very proud to stand before you here today and
highlight some of the great support and tell you that with
your support, the relationship that we have forged for over
a century can continue for a century.
Thank you.
10:53:46 >> I'm Jim hoffen, prospect road.
I have been sworn.
I'm a club member and fortunate to be in leadership of the
club.
As a number of my family members.
Two relevant points to make tonight.
One of those, my father who has been the architect of the
club since 1950s, many of the drawings you talked about he
drew.
Many improvements that he talked about he designed.
He's focused on keeping those.
He couldn't be here tonight.
But in keeping with the neighborhood and the tradition of
the club.
I have the privilege now of being chair of the master
planning committee for the club.
And we do have some plans that hopefully we will be able to
go forward after tonight's meeting.
And I can assure you that those plans are going to be in
keeping with what has been out there for the many years that
the club has been in existence.
Those improvements that have been made, and appropriate
scale and tradition with the neighborhood.
So thank you.
10:54:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Sir?
Come back.
So if you are the chair of the planning committee, and you
mention that some of those plans if this were to be approved
would come to fruition, and that they were in keeping with,
you know, tradition, it would be really helpful if maybe you
shared some of those plans with us.
10:55:11 >> Sure.
I would be happy to if you would like me to.
10:55:13 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Just don't tap too long.
10:55:15 >> No, I won't.
I won't.
(Laughter)
The plans we are focused on are what we call our upland
plans.
We substantially have redone or Marina.
If you ever seen that, it's still in progress.
We are desperately in need frankly of the last improvements
played to our clubhouse were almost 25 years ago.
And we need to expand some of the uses and change some of
the uses within our clubhouse.
We have two larger areas for formal dining.
Not enough areas for family and informal dining.
We want to switch some of those things around.
Our members, if you see on the north side of the plan,
there's an expansion up towards that oak tree we have been
talking about.
That's to expand the room that has become a very popular
dining room area for our members.
That was originally designed just as a cocktail lounge.
And our adult members very much want to expand that use.
We also do have the outside pavilion, Marina bar area.
It's been shown.
That's in keeping with a desire particularly amongst many of
our members including family members that want more access
to the outside that we have there, and the great view we
have, and frankly the Marina, we fixed it up, we are taken
down the sheds.
It's a very nice place to be.
10:56:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
[Off microphone.]
10:56:43 >> Well, I am not as familiar with the sail pavilion but to
take advantage of the outside area.
It would be an open area -- air area.
It does contemplate some televisions.
I think the contemplation there, though, is those would have
to be turned up and be a place where people could gather and
be outdoors.
Those are the maker major things that we have talked about.
We also have talked about it was a concern about traffic.
Reworking substantially our loading dock areas, our kitchen
delivery areas so that we can get trucks offer the street,
and ingress-egress particularly on the north side of the
club for members at Ballast Point, the gate areas coming in
and out of the club L will be much better in terms of
getting traffic in and out off Interbay.
So those are some of the things we have talked about.
10:57:33 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Are these changes within the footprint that
is there now?
Or are you adding?
10:57:42 >> Yes and no on the footprint.
The footprint would be expanded to the north -- I'm sorry I
don't have the square footage out toward the tree that we
have talked about.
There would also be the Marina bar that's talked about in
the outdoor pavilion area that's outside.
Those are the two significants expansions of the clubhouse
footprint, if you will.
10:58:05 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
And all the others are within the
footprint?
10:58:10 >> A lot of swapping around with the footprint.
And there are would be -- thank you there.
Would be on the south side, there would be some expansion.
There are some offices and some restrooms.
The restrooms have to be reworked on the south side of the
club to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
And so there would be modest expansion.
It's what's being shown I think in the pink areas of the
plan that you all have.
10:58:39 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
All right.
10:58:43 >> I hope that's helpful.
10:58:45 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Yes, it is.
10:58:46 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you very much.
Next speaker.
10:58:48 >> I'm a member of the Yacht Club.
I have been sworn in.
I'm at 5107 south Nichol street.
We walk to the Yacht Club.
We really have found them to be extraordinary neighbors.
21 years ago, when we lived off of Bayshore, the City of
Tampa sent me to the Yacht Club to be see what they were
doing to save that oak tree that you are still talking
about.
They were one of the first places to do the drain in the
driveway area to help the root system of the tree.
So I think the Yacht Club, I walk by there just about every
single day.
With all the traffic that they have, they are maintaining
it, they are great neighbors.
I haven't had a problem with noise.
But one of the things that I have had to handle, and my
townhouses, they were built in the 80s, but I did have to
upgrade and put in better doors and windows that had good
sound protection, not because of the Yacht Club but the
noise from Gandy and the planes from MacDill. But
that's just because the area has grown tremendously.
I don't think that everyone realizes that south of Gandy
looks really good now.
But it didn't.
This Yacht Club has been there for 100 years.
I left some of the those initial pictures.
But if looked at the Yacht Club, the Ballast Point area in
the sixth, 70s, 80s, I want to thank the Yacht Club for
anchoring this area during some real depressed times when
that market was not so wonderful.
Right now Ballast Point has a horrible, horrible problem
with Ballast Point, the POKEMON situation.
Thank you very much.
(Bell sounds)
I guess I have to wrap up.
Thank you.
11:00:31 >> Good evening.
Thank you.
Andrew galaveze, I have been sworn in, west San Nicholas,
33629.
I am in favor of approval of the Yacht Club.
I have been a member for a number of years.
My wife third generation.
Actually got married there outdoors.
It was a wonderful time.
The tent was taken down the next day.
I have also been to plenty of outdoor weddings at Palma
Ceia, women's club, Davis Island, et cetera, et cetera.
In listening to opposition tonight, they are contained of
basing everything on hypotheticals.
They say that we are creating Gasparilla 365 days a year.
Or are open to that.
If you look at our track record for 112 years.
We haven't done that.
We only do it once a year.
If you look at the variance, they are asking that we are
shrinking that.
We are not shrinking that.
We are actually wanting to do what we have always done.
They say that we are creating a new SoHo.
I don't think anyone in here is going there tomorrow night
so I can certainly say we are not a Howard crowd.
They are saying that we are increasing the trip counts by
1500.
I know personally my wife and I, even if we have a new bar
outdoors, we are not going to bring our 20 month old to the
bar and hang out because there's a new bar.
We simply bring our child to the pool, to learn how to swim,
and have fun with him, whether there's a bar or not we are
going to be there.
Thank you.
I appreciate your time.
11:02:14 >> Patrick Willis, 2908 west Villa Rosa park, a couple
blocks north of Ballast Point.
But still in the neighborhood regularly.
I am a member of the Yacht Club, and in support of their
application.
You know, it just seems to me that the misconceptions sorted
of continue to be perpetuated even here tonight, some new
ones came up.
But again, the size of the drinking request isn't because we
want to have a party on 13 acres every night.
The size is that if I am walking from the pool to go check
on my nephew, who is 13 and at the playground or my niece
who is 10 and at the playground I don't wanted a police
officers to be able to cite me because I walked to the
playground to collect on someone who is old enough to be
there and play on their own.
Same with the stables.
Same with the tennis courts.
We are not having rages on the tennis courts.
We are going to have a beer maybe when we finish tennis.
We want to comply with the law so some of us are just old
enough to be passed being the South Howard crowd, that we
are not the SoHo Gasparilla every night crowd.
Actually some of the older members are still in the South
Howard crowd.
It was also characterized that our board has no continuity
in the leadership an the club has no continuity.
That was said several times.
And I happen to be the intermediate liaison to the board so
represent the members, 37 and younger.
I have been amazed by the continuities on the board.
The board members before your commodore here on the board
for five or six years.
So there is amazing continue knot on the board.
So I want to say that.
Finally just in closing, we joined the Yacht Club for the
tennis, for the he quested ran, for the trees, the oak
canopy, the beauty of the neighborhood.
And as this continuity on the board continues, and as this
club gets passed down from the -- shall we call them the
more experienced members to the less experienced members, we
intend to maintain the partnership between the neighborhood
and the club and maintain the beauty of that neighborhood
that is paramount to us to the younger members.
Thank you.
11:04:32 >> Paul Schmitt is the Stein, Tampa.
I have been sworn in.
My wife and I, 33 years ago this month, celebrated our
wedding and our reception was held at Tampa Yacht Club.
Her parents had their reception at Tampa Yacht Club before
that.
And my daughter last November had her wedding reception
there as well.
I am not here to take you on a trip down memory Lane.
My point is that the Yacht Club is very serious about the
sound issues, that before she could have her wedding
reception, I had to sign a form saying you will comply with
all sound ordinance issues, as well as having the band that
performed sign the same form.
We both agreed that if we violated that, each could be find
up to a thousand dollars.
So the Yacht Club is very serious.
My son and future bride had their wedding recension there
next February so we'll go through the same process again.
So I am just hear to reaffirm the Yacht Club is serious
about the sound issue.
Thank you for your support.
11:05:39 >> Bob Martinez, 4647 west San Jose street, Tampa, Florida.
I'm a member but don't live near the club and I don't have a
budget to present to the City Council.
(Laughter)
I think you heard some wonderful statements from people very
respective of their neighborhood from both sides of the
issue.
I don't think there's anything left out that should be said
here tonight.
What I would like to spend time on is that field behind you
that I have been living in for the last several hours
created a great city.
Oddly enough, Port Tampa got a city charter.
17 years later, the Yacht Club was born.
In essence, the Yacht Club and the city have grown together.
It's been a partnership that we both are as a city, as a
recreational area.
It has great leadership. Always has.
The bulk of the people that belong there are in love with
the city.
Most -- not most but tremendous numbers are mates.
Many of us involved in one community organization or
another.
We always respect the city, respect the City Council,
respect the mayor of the City of Tampa.
There's no desire for us as a club to do anything outside of
the law.
But we lake is being in compliance with law.
And that's what this whole thing is about.
What we have been doing in the past, we have been doing for
over a hundred years.
And over that 100 years, there has been no, absolutely no
complaint about what's been happening there.
I think to codify what's happening over all these years
simply puts us under the auspices where we can better
regulate, notice what the rules are.
We know what the rules are and I think all of you will be
much happier.
Thank you.
It's a late night for you. It's a late night for me as
well.
Thank you.
11:07:46 >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen of the council.
I have three minutes to try to talk very quickly.
My name is John C. Kim he will and I reside at 3013 west
Hawthorne road Tampa 33601.
I was commodore from May of 2014 to May of 2014 when all of
this was getting started, and served on the board of
governors for six years prefer to be that and still on the
board today two years later.
So I have going on nine years of service, and argued that we
do not have continuity.
After all that you heard this morning you may be wondering
if all we need is just a little bit more time to discuss
this issue or maybe if we could just give a little bit more
that we would be able to work out a solution.
I can assure you that we have spent countless hours, and
more time or more will accomplish absolutely nothing.
We have been bent over backwards three years and exhausted
every conceivable approach we as neighbors no matter what we
offered it was never enough.
For each new solution the goal posts were moved further
away. In mid April last year after almost a year of
negotiation as group of us met with are Mr. Rankin and his
attorney for over six hours.
I was nearing the end of my term as commodore, wanted to be
a good neighbor while representing the very reasonable needs
of our membership and really wished to put all of this
behind us.
The meeting ended with a draft document just over four pages
long but handshakes all along me thinking, hoping we had
finally reached an agreement.
I gave my board of governors a high degree of optimism that
issues had been resolved.
When we received a where he write of the agreement under the
guidance of their attorney who is frankly the real
instigator and culprit behind much this colossal waste of
time and energy, a four-page document and more than tripled
in length with grocery overreaching demands, in the spirit
of cooperation we were happy to accommodate to the realm of
dictating what type of movie we could play for our children,
on move night by the pool.
We indicated everything -- we would abide with more than a
few concessions but they would not accept it.
As their attorney said --
11:10:09 >>HARRY COHEN:
You are out of time but you can turn the
statement in and it will become part of the record.
11:10:13 >> Thank you very much.
11:10:14 >>HARRY COHEN:
All right.
11:10:16 >>HARRY COHEN:
If you like you can hand to the Mr. Shelby.
11:10:22 >> Truett Gardner, north Ashley drive.
I had the privilege coming before you for 18 years as a land
use attorney and am before you tonight in a different
capacity.
This is my fifth year on the club's Board of Directors and
hear on behalf of the alcohol and zoning petitions.
I have been intimately involved with zoning efforts for
three years and now with three different commodores, John
Tim he will, Arthur savage and.
The priorities of the board have always been the same.
Number one, protect the club and its operations.
Number two, pursue a modest expansion that will allow us to
better serve our current members and continues to attracted
new members.
And number three, as representative of the club, conduct
ourselves with integrity and show a willingness to work with
our neighbors.
Working closely with these three commodores each of whom has
a different personality we have never wavered from these
priorities especially our desire to try to accommodate any
questions or concerns.
In fact the reason it has taken us three years to gets to
this point is because we devoted our time to work with our
neighbors.
We have had countless meetings with neighborhood and
homeowners associations and we are proud that these
associates have spoken in support of us.
We worked through today and are happy to reported that we
have satisfied Lykes brothers incorporated concerns.
We are down to a small handful of people who still oppose us
and quite frankly we have worked harder and longer to try to
appease them than anyone else combined.
There are so many accommodations in our site plan, the most
complicated site plan I have ever been a part of.
(Bell sounds)
The four point plan is simply overreaching.
We just agree to a reduction of the alcohol area and I in
conclusion this this hardest and most difficult outreach
effort I have ever been a member of.
While I feel we have been like 99% successful we simply
cannot appease the remaining 1%.
While this is the disappointing I have complete respect for
this council and its ability to properly weigh these things
and arrive at a conclusion for the Yacht Club and as well as
for the community as a whole.
Thank you.
(Bell sounds)
11:12:32 >> Good evening.
My name is Jim, saint Croix drive.
I am speaking as I was sitting here, it probably appears for
the last 35 years before this group.
Many things have changed.
The only thing that hasn't is Charlie Miranda is still here.
(Laughter)
Same hair-do, Charlie.
You know, I want to commend the council.
Many of the changes that we see around, every one of them
want great improvements in this community.
Every one of them had to come before this board and be
improved.
And there was always opposition.
There's going to be opposition to progress wherever we have
it.
And I was thinking back when I did my first zoning, and the
name is always going to come out.
I remember sitting there with Tom Henderson, our lawyer and
one of the neighbors came in.
We said maybe we are going to have some opposition.
Maybe our project will be killed.
The name was Bobby Elliott, president of Jesuit high school,
and revered in the community.
And he stood up.
We didn't know hundred he was going to testify.
And he said, I speak in behalf of the society of Jesus.
Had to bring God into it.
But at any rate, Father Elliott said, I'm a neighbor, we own
a lot of property downtown.
And I don't know how it's going to affect our property.
But what they are doing is in the best interest of the
community.
I would ask you to follow the advice of Father Elliott and
do what's in the best interest of the community.
Thank you so much.
11:14:20 >>HARRY COHEN:
Thank you.
And to what I can see, that is the end of our public comment
on this matter.
And we thank everyone who took the time to speak to us about
it tonight.
Councilwoman Capin, you asked for the floor.
You have some questions.
11:14:36 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Yes, about the outdoor amplification.
And most people know how I feel about outdoor amplification.
So if the question could be answered.
Apparently, it seems to be the hours are not prohibited.
What I wanted to ask, one of the things that has been
considered in other places is whereby they adjust the
speakers so that they are not facing toward a neighborhood
or toward an open area, and that helps a lot.
I'm just wondering if that's something that you all have
considered.
That is resounding -- you know, with the people who support.
11:15:30 >> Yes, ma'am.
I think I can probably address some of the issues in my
rebuttal.
I assume that we have approximately 10 minutes in rebuttal.
11:15:37 >>HARRY COHEN:
You will have rebuttal.
At the end. But we are going to go to council members
questions first.
11:15:43 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
But you haven't answered.
11:15:49 >> I have an expert on that.
What that letter says is there are four or five different
ways you can solve a noise problem, orient your speakers,
turn down the volume, build structures around it, it
automatically regulates.
There's a variety of things that can be done.
You can tell by this letter the Yacht Club is looking into
the kinds of things we can do.
We do not have an option.
I cannot stress that more emphatically.
We have to comply, and we will comply.
And we are getting an expert to assist us and we will do it.
And I will wait for my rebuttal.
11:16:35 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
Yes.
That 55-decibel.
That was just my concern, and what was said about adjusting
the speakers would probably work very well.
11:16:49 >>HARRY COHEN:
Anything else from council members before we
go to the applicant's rebuttal?
Mr. Miranda.
11:16:58 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Chairman, I just wanted, we will receive
this and I want to make sure that the young lady, the
attorney representing, I guess, the Lykes brothers, without
objection, with changes made between first and second
reading, if anyone on was anyone privy to this on city
staff.
11:17:33 >>HARRY COHEN:
Anyone else before we go to the applicant's
rebuttal?
All right, Mr. Smith.
11:17:40 >>DAVID SMITH:
I would like to request to receive and file
this which is a letter.
He's a traffic engineer that does much work in this area.
He basically supports your staff.
Your staff has said there's not a traffic analysis
necessary.
They provided the analysis pursuant to the ITE rates.
Randy's analysis corroborates that.
You heard a lot of things said.
I do not have time to disabuse you of all the mistaken
notions that occurred. But what I wanted to do is tell you
what happens and why this came about this way.
I think I finally understand.
The original application clubhouse submitted, we weren't
interested in rezoning the eastern portion of the property.
That portion from the western boundary of the clubhouse to
the water.
That's where we thought was the appropriate area.
But guess what.
When we sat and talked to your staff, Gloria Moreda who is
incredibly bright goes, what happens when your guy walks out
to the boat with his beer?
He's violated the open container law.
Why don't you include that in your application?
Oh, what happens when a person walks out to watch a match
with somebody else, also the open container law.
It was suggested to us we consider wet zoning, excuse the
term, 18.77 acres.
Yes, that included the water.
Are we really going to swim in the water and drink?
No.
Are we going to drink in the parking lots?
No.
We are not allowed to.
So the point was to avoid creating problems for our
neighbors so they would not be in violation of the law, if
they happened to take their bloody Mary from lunch to go
over to see Becky sue in the playground.
So what you got was an expense of application.
Is it really expansive use of the property?
No, it isn't.
And everybody knows that.
I also provided you in my record a history of what we have
done.
You will look in the history portion.
Now I have three different Yacht Clubbers.
The same Yacht Club hours as the 2016, and like 12 or 12:30,
10:00 or whatever it was during the week, yeah, the law
allows us to stay open till 3:00.
We don't do that.
So at some point in time, you have to factor in a little bit
of understanding of the people you are dealing with.
The neighbors need to factor that in as we do with them.
Mr. Rankin is right, he's entitled to a quiet house and we
are going to have to do that.
But they need to exercise some common sense as well.
For 112 years.
Granted the footprint has changed. We haven't done the
kinds of things they are talking about.
The one issue mentioned about somebody who put a public
advertisement out for -- by the way, a Sinatra party, the
man was sanctioned.
It was not proper.
He jeopardized our 501 (C) 7 license, to come to a Sinatra
party.
You can't do that.
Guests can invite their friends but you can't submit it to
the public at large.
That would violate our obligations. So we are not going to
are be and do not intend to be a commercial event center.
We just don't want our members to violate the law when they
walk from one area of the property to the other carrying a
beer, going out, checking on their boat, whatever it is they
are doing.
Yes, it's a big piece of property.
Our original application, by the way, was for two and a half
or whatever acres it was east of the facade.
And we said, give us 10 or 12 temporary permits on the west
side because we have events periodically.
That wouldn't work.
They didn't realize there was beer in the tennis facility so
we needed to at least wet zone that.
But he will what happened.
By talking with the Lykes brothers, people immediately to
the south, we are shrunk the area on the west side, what we
call parcel 1.
It serves an area around the equestrian center where people
gather and maybe sip mimosas and champagne and a riding
event and people who gather after a tennis event.
This is not the raucous wild-wild west.
This is a private country club doing what private country
clubs do and doing what this one has done for 112 years and
protecting the members by providing an application.
Yes, on its face it looks expansive.
And what we have heard is the objective intensification.
You can argue that.
And you heard that argument.
But at some point you have to temper that with an
understanding of the nature of the people you are dealing
with, the character they have evidenced over 112 years, and
the way they behave day to day and night to night.
And that's not the kind of behavior that exists out there.
And I ask you to take that into account and approve these
applications so that the club can move forward with what
they are doing.
I'll tell you one other thing about the little improvement
in the restaurant area.
I have seen that area.
It's one of those things when you stand up you can't move
from the table without bunching somebody at the next table.
They need to expand that area so it functions a little
better, as a casual dining experience. Sorry for the
graphic description.
But it's been amazing to me.
I'm being paid to do what I do.
These people are not.
They work day and night.
I get e-mails all the time.
I get it on the weekends.
Steve works in an automobile business.
They work their jobs, and they are still communicating with
me like they are doing my job.
This is a commitment to an organization and to a club that I
have never seen before.
It's an admirable commitment.
And I hope that you honor that, and you will provide them
the approval that they need in order to make it move forward
in the future.
Thank you very much.
If you have any questions I am happy to answer.
11:23:24 >>HARRY COHEN:
Councilman Montelione.
11:23:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Thank you.
You have agreed to the proposal that is presented a few
minutes ago.
11:23:44 >>DAVID SMITH:
Yes, ma'am.
11:23:45 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
The only thing -- you have already
agreed to it.
But for me, to be as specific as having an 8-foot or less
walkway connecting the equestrian AB area to the tennis AB
area means somebody wonders off the AB, I mean, just drawing
a rectangle around the whole thing --
11:24:10 >> We had that originally.
We had the rectangle.
And I do not know the inner thought processes of Lykes
Brothers but we agreed to that.
We had the same question you had.
11:24:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Two rectangles, one north and south of
each other.
Can't we do one big rectangle?
I mean, that needs to be a little -- I won't use that word
either.
And the DJs and permitted up to four times a year on the
equestrian area, and no amplified bands on parcel one.
DJs can be a lot louder than amplified bands.
11:24:51 >> They can.
We really have two basic events.
I know we have a Halloween party and Christmas party in the
stables.
And there's maybe two others.
But we understand that.
But still, the overriding thing here is we still have to
adhere to the noise ordinance.
11:25:10 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
It doesn't seem to matter to me whether
it's an amplified band or a DJ.
It's going to be noise.
It's going to be outside.
And it's going to be four times a year.
11:25:25 >>DAVID SMITH:
I can only tell you when you engage in
negotiations of this nature for the duration which we have
been engaged in, you begin to learn people.
You will never understand them.
You won't explain them.
You won't disabuse them.
We have agreed to that not as an ideal solution but as a
solution that they would accept and we could live with.
That's why I would hope that you would support that even
though in many ways it's not ideal.
11:25:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
Understood.
That's all I have.
11:25:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
Chairman, I just want to make an
observation.
Yesterday we passed a budget of 905 million, almost 906
million.
There was one person that showed up.
(Laughter).
One person spoke.
One person.
I'm really confused.
I understand the issue here.
And I understand the agreements.
Maybe it's not perfect but that's what the two parties
agreed to.
I don't know what else to say, Mr. Chairman, other than if
you are ready to close the hearing so am I.
11:26:46 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion to close from Councilman
Miranda, seconded by Councilman Reddick.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
All right.
What is the pleasure of council?
11:26:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I'll take the item, sir.
I move an ordinance being presented for first reading
consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the general
vicinity of 5320, 5321 and 5322 Interbay Boulevard and 5118
south Nichol street in the city of Tampa, Florida and more
particularly described in section 1 from zoning district
classifications RS-60 residential single-family and
residential 150 residential single-family to PD planned
development recreational facility private, providing an
effective date, including the revisions between first and
second reading as suggested by -- as stated by staff and
including the negotiated -- [Off microphone.]
11:27:51 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion on the floor from
Councilwoman Montelione.
Seconded by Councilwoman Capin.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
11:28:10 >>THE CLERK:
The motion carried with Suarez being absent.
Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
9:30 a.m.
11:28:19 >>HARRY COHEN:
Councilman Maniscalco, please take item
number 14.
11:28:25 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
I have an ordinance being presented for
first reading consideration, an ordinance approving a
special use permit S 2 for alcoholic beverage sales, large
venue, consumption on premises only, and making lawful the
sale of beverages regardless of alcoholic content, beer,
wine and liquor, on that certain lot, plot or tract ever
land located at 5320, 5321 and 5322 Interbay Boulevard,
Tampa, Florida, and 5118 south Nichols street, Tampa,
Florida, as more particularly described in section 2, that
all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict are
repealed, providing an effective date, as well as the
agreement that's already on record.
11:29:09 >>HARRY COHEN:
We have a motion by Councilman Maniscalco,
seconded by Councilwoman Capin.
All those in favor please indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
11:29:19 >>THE CLERK:
Motion carried with Suarez being absent.
Second reading and adoption will be on October 6th at
9:30 a.m.
11:29:26 >>HARRY COHEN:
Ladies and gentlemen, we still have a bit of
business to conduct so I would appreciate it if everyone
could leave as quietly as possible.
Mrs. Moreda.
11:29:42 >>GLORIA MOREDA:
I talked about the November and December
hearing.
And was curious if council made a decision.
11:29:50 >>HARRY COHEN:
What Mrs. Moreda is asking has to do with
our calendar in November and December.
We do not have any alcohol beverage hearings scheduled in
the evening.
And she was suggesting to us that we need to give her a date
that she can schedule the four items that I believe she has.
I was going to suggest December 1st combining them.
Instead of having a November and December, just have one.
Let's have it on December 1st.
Ladies and gentlemen, please.
We have an awful lot that we need to continue to do here at
11:30.
I was going to suggest doing it on December 1st.
We have a day meeting that day.
11:30:31 >>YVONNE CAPIN:
So not having another one.
11:30:35 >>HARRY COHEN:
Not having another one.
And if that's acceptable.
Okay.
That is moved by Councilman Miranda.
Seconded by Councilman Maniscalco.
All those in favor pleas indicate by saying aye.
Okay.
So we'll do those on December 1st.
We have a motion to receive and file by Councilman Miranda,
seconded by Councilman Reddick.
All those in favor pleas indicate by saying aye.
Opposed?
11:30:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY:
Just for clarification, you are setting it
during the day.
11:31:05 >>HARRY COHEN:
We set it during the day.
That's correct.
11:31:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
As part of what's received and file I am
supporting AB memorandum voting conflict from the day
meeting we had last week.
11:31:20 >>HARRY COHEN:
We are going to move now to information
reports.
We can go left to right.
Councilwoman Montelione.
11:31:30 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
I think I had some but I forgot what
they were.
11:31:32 >>HARRY COHEN:
Okay.
We'll take that as a no.
11:31:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE:
That's a no.
11:31:37 >>GUIDO MANISCALCO:
We finished three and a half hours
earlier than I expected.
11:31:42 >>HARRY COHEN:
Councilwoman Capin.
11:31:45 >> No.
11:31:49 >>FRANK REDDICK:
No.
11:31:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA:
None, sir.
11:31:53 >>HARRY COHEN:
With that we are adjourned and we will see
you on October 6th.
(City Council meeting adjourned.)
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.