FRIDELLA. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GOOD AFTERNOON, CALL THIS TO ORDER. >>GWEN HENDERSON: PRESENT. >>LUIS VIERA: HERE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: HERE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: HERE. >>CLERK: WE HAVE A PHYSICAL QUORUM. WE ARE GOING TO BRING UP BEFORE THE 1:0 HEARING THE 77, 78 REAL QUICK WE WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER. YES, MA'AM. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, McLEAN EVANS, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. PER THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL, I REVIEWED THE CASE LAW AND STATUTE RELATED TO THE QUESTION OF POTENTIALLY CONTINUING ITEMS 77 AND 78 ON THE NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS AND MY RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THE MATTER TODAY AND THEN TAKE UP ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BUDGETARY MATTERS IN THE SUBSEQUENT DAYS LEADING UP TO AND DURING THE BUDGET HEARINGS. IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ON MY RECOMMENDATION, I AM HAPPY TO GO INTO FURTHER DETAIL ON THE CASE LAW. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, TIME TRYING TO MAKE IT SHORT FOR YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALL RIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS? MR. SHELBY? NO? >>MARTIN SHELBY: NO, SIR. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MOVE THE RESOLUTION FOR 77? >>LUIS VIERA: I WILL MOVE 77. >>GWEN HENDERSON: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. ITEM 78. MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >>LUIS VIERA: MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN VIERA. IS THERE A SECOND? >>MARTIN SHELBY: YOU NEED TO ADOPT BOTH RESOLUTIONS AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >>LUIS VIERA: I MOTION BEFORE -- COUNCILMAN CARLSON JUST WALKED IN. CLOSING PUBLIC HEARING ON 77 AND 78, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >>MARTIN SHELBY: THE CORRECTION THAT MR. MASSEY IS ASKING FOR NUMBER 78 AS ONE ITEM. TWO RESOLUTIONS. SO BEFORE -- BEFORE YOU CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, YOU MOVE THE SECOND RESOLUTION. >>LUIS VIERA: OH, I AM SORRY. MY BAD. >>MARTIN SHELBY: DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING UNDER STATE LAW. >> ALSO, MR. CHAIR, TECHNICALLY I AM NOT SURE THAT YOU -- THAT YOU OPENED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ASSESSMENTS EARLIER THIS MORNING. SO COULD WE MAKE SURE WE COVER THAT ALSO BEFORE YOU TAKE A VOTE O 78. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ON 78, YOU SAID? >> RIGHT. SO SERVICE IS 77. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANYBODY HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM NUMBER 78? >>MARTIN SHELBY: DON'T CLOSE. OKAY. WHERE ARE WE NOW? THE FIRST RESOLUTION ON 77, IS THAT CORRECT, MR. MASSEY? THEY HAVE ADOPTED THE -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: 77 HAS -- 78 IS -- >>MARTIN SHELBY: ONE RESOLUTION FOR 77. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 77. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: NO. >> FOR NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS CONDUCT THE VOTE WHILE THE HEARINGS ARE OPEN. WE CAN'T CLOSE THE HEARING UNTIL THE VOTE IS COMPLETED AND THE MOTION -- AND THE RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE ARE AT 78. WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WITH 78. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THEY ARE SAYING DON'T CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 77 UNTIL WE DO 78, DID I HEAR THAT CORRECTLY? >> NO, SIR. I WAS SPEAK FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL ITEM. EACH ONE IS A SEPARATE HEARING. SO WE STILL HAVE THE HEARING OPEN FOR 77. WE VOTED ON IT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MADE A MOTION TO CLOSE. >> YOU MAY CLOSE 77. BUT 78 MUST STAY OPEN. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THAT IS FINE. YOU ARE CORRECT, MR. VIERA. A MOTION TO CLOSE NUMBER 77. >>LUIS VIERA: I STUMBLED ON THAT. SO DO I -- SO MOVED. >>GWEN HENDERSON: AND I SECONDED IT. >>BILL CARLSON: 77. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE 77 BY COUNCILMAN VIERA. SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED? NOW WE ARE ON 78. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THAT'S CORRECT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THEN IN THE PUBLIC -- WAIT, YES, SIR? >> YEAH, ITEM 78 IS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT. I WOULD LIKE TO -- SORRY, VIK BHIDE, DIRECTOR M, OF THE MOBILY DEPARTMENT RELATED TO THE IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT. THIS ASSESSMENT FUNDS OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. THIS IS WHAT HAS FUNDED HISTORICAL AND CURRENT PROJECTS, WHICH ARE IN THE WORKS AS WE SPEAK. THIS ASSESSMENT IS ALSO CORRELATED WITH THE QUARTERLY REPORT THAT COUNCIL RECEIVES ON DIFFERENT STORMWATER PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS. AND IT IS TIED TO OUR ACTIVE BOND ISSUANCES AS WELL. SO I JUST WANT TO PROVIDE COUNCIL WITH THAT BACK GROUND THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE VOTING ON. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: I HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS DURING THE BREAK THAT NOTHING GOT RESOLVED IN THE LAST HOUR AND A HALF. I AM GOING TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE FOR THIS. THE FIRST ONE I MISS BY ACCIDENT. THE SECOND ONE I AM GOING TO VOTE FOR. NOT BECAUSE I AM HAPPY WITH IT, BUT BECAUSE -- BECAUSE WE CAN'T GO FORWARD WITHOUT IT. BUT WE NEED TO HAVE NOT A PRESENTATION NOT FROM YOU BUT FROM CFO AND OUR -- OUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR TO -- TO GO THROUGH THE NUMBERS AND REALLY EVALUATE. THE ISSUE IS NOT THE BIG PICTURE WHAT IS BEING WORKED ON, PART IS THE BALANCE WHAT IS BEING WORKED ON HOW VERSUS STAFF. AND THE OTHER THING IS ALL THE MONEY EFFICIENTLY BEING USED. I CAN RECOMMEND -- I CAN MAKE THE MOTION UNDER NEW BUSINESS, WE NEED SOME KIND OF ACCOUNTING, ANALYSIS OR PRESENTATION OF THAT BEFORE THE BUDGET OR AT LEAST SHORTLY AFTER, SO WE CAN SHOW THE PUBLIC WE ARE BEING GOOD STEWARDS OF OUR MONEY. OBVIOUSLY WE NEED STORMWATER ARE HAVING. OF THE PROBLEMS WE- BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE ARE SPENDING THE MONEY DIRECTLY AND IF THEY ARE, HATS OFF TO EVERYBODY AND CHANGE LABELS AND SOMETHING. IF WE ARE NOT, WE NEED TO TWEAK AND MAKE SURE WE ARE FIXING A PROBLEM. THANK YOU. >>VIK BHIDE: I THINK THE STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT WAS COCOVERED AS ENTERPRISE FUND UNDER THE CIT AND WORK. SHOP AND WHAT THE BOND OCCURRENCES ARE. AND ANY ADDITIONAL DETAILS THAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO PRESENT. >>BILL CARLSON: I AM TALKING ABOUT GOING IN THE NEXT LEVEL OF DETAIL. PRESENTING BIG PROJECTS IS ONE THING. LIKE ON PIPES, TENS OF HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF FEEDBACK AND ALL THE FEEDBACK FROM THE CONTRACTOR COMMUNITY WE ARE PAYING TOO MUCH. SPEND TOO MUCH. WE NEED HELP NEXT PLAINING THAT WE ARE SPENDING THIS MONEY PRUDENTLY. AND TO COME BACK AND SAY WE FOUND SOME WAY TO SHIFT AND -- THEN GOOD, WE ARE BEING GOOD CUSS TOW STOWED IANS OF THE PUBLIC'S MONEY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NIP HERE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? YES, MA'AM. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> STEPHANIE PPOYNOR. I WOULD LIKE TO THANKS MISS CAPASKI TO SAY THESE ARE THE NUMBERS. THIS IS HOW THEY ADD UP BY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM OF PASSING THIS TODAY. I WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS. THAT IS SUPPLY JOB. I DON'T GET PAID TO BE HERE, BUT MY JOB TO ASK QUESTIONS. MISS CAPSKI, RIK, THEY ASKED ME TO SHOW DOCUMENTS DURING LUNCHTIME. YOU TOY THIS IS IMPORTANT TO THIS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MOVE THE THE RERESOLUTION FOR 78. >>LUIS VIERA: SO MOVED. >>GWEN HENDERSON: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSE? CAN I GET A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION WITH FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. SECONDED FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. OPPOSED? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>VIK BHIDE: THANK YOU, COUNCIL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THE 1:30 PUBLIC HEARING. MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE 1:30 PUBLIC HEARING. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: SO MOVED. >>LUIS VIERA: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: FOR NUMBER 84, REQUEST TO WITHDRAWAL. CAN I GET A MOTION. >>LUIS VIERA: SO MOVED. >>GWEN HENDERSON: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN VIERA. SECONDED FROM COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ALL RIGHT, FOR 83, A QUASI JUDICIAL PROCEEDING. I DON'T HAVE ANYONE REGISTERED ONLINE, IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE SPEAKING ON 83 IN ANY CAPACITY, PLEASE STAND AND A I YOUR RIGHT HAND AND WE WILL SWEAR YOU IN. EVEN IF BUT SIGNED THE SPEAKER WAIVER FORM AND PASSING IT ON. [SWEARING IN] MR. SHELBY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THANK YOU, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY. BEFORE WE BEGIN, A REMINDER THERE ARE SPEAKER WAIVER FORMS. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. THE COUNCIL'S RULES, YOU CAN SPEAK FOR THREE MINUTES OR SIGN A SPEAKER WAIVER FORM AND YOU WAIVE YOUR THREE MINUTES AND ALLOW THE SPEAKER TO TAKE AN EXTRA MINUTE FOR YOU TO DO THAT. REQUIRES YOU TO FILL OUT THE FORM. I HOPE DID YOU LEGIBLY AND YOU NEED TO BE PRESENT AND ACKNOWLEDGE AND I WILL CALL YOUR NAME TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE HERE. DON'T SIGN MORE THAN ONE WAIVER SPEAKER FORM. I BELIEVE THERE HAVE BEEN EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS AND LIKE THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO BE RECEIVED AND FILED INTO THE RECORD AT THIS TIME. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE FROM COUNCILMAN VIERA. SECONDED FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MISS SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: THANK YOU, SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ, LEGAL DEPARTMENT. THIS HEARING IS A REVIEW HEARING FOR A PETITION FOR REVIEW F FOR VRB 23-70. THE PETITIONERS IN THIS CASE STEVEN STANLEY AND MICHAEL FRIDELLA. THEY ARE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ON DAVIS BOULEVARD. AND THE VRB APPLICANT WAS MR. MICHELINI WHO IS REPRESENTED BY BEN DACHAPALI. THE VARIANCE REQUEST -- FOUR REQUESTS. THEY WERE ALL RELATED TO THE SETBACKS FOR THE EXISTING BUILDING. THE FIRST REQUEST WAS TO REDUCE THE EAST FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 45 FEET TO ONE FOOT. THE SECOND WAS TO REDUCE THE WEST FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 45 FEET TO ONE FOOT. THE THIRD WAS TO REDUCE THE SOUTHWEST SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 27 FEET TO ONE FOOT. AN THEN FINALLY, THE FOURTH REQUEST, TO REDUCE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 27 FEET TO ONE FOOT. THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE RM-24 ZONING DISTRICT. AND THE TYPICAL SETBACKS FOR THAT ZONING DISTRICT FRONT YARD OF 25 FEET. SIDE YARD OF 7 FEET. AND REAR OF 20 FEET. BUT FOR EACH FOOT OF BUILDING HEIGHT ABOVE 35 FEET WITHIN THIS DISTRICT, THE REQUIRED YARD SETBACK IS INCREASED BY ONE FOOT. THAT IS WHERE WE HAVE THE 45-FOOT DOWN TO THE ONE FOOT. AND THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE HAVE THE NUMBERS FOR THE SETBACKS IN THE REQUEST. THE VRB HELD A HEARING ON MAY 14, 2024 FOR THIS APPLICATION. AND VOTED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST 5-0. I PROVIDED CITY COUNCIL WITH HEARING PROCEDURES. PROPOSED HEARING PROCEDURES THAT BOTH PARTIES HAVE AGREED TO FOR THIS HEARING, PROVIDING IN A PACKET TO COUNCIL. I ALSO PROVIDED COUNCIL WITH CODE SECTIONS 27-61-J-2 WHICH ARE THE PROCEDURES FOR COUNCIL'S REVIEW OF A BOARD'S DECISION. AND I PROVIDED THE ENTIRE -- ENTIRETY OF 27-61, BUT J-2 CRIMINALS STARTS AT PAGE 6 AND THEN 7. AND WILL GIVE YOU A RUNDOWN OF THE -- OF THE HEARING PROCESS. I ALSO PROVIDED COUNCIL WITH CODE SECTION 27-80 WHICH IS APPLICATION OF THE VARIANCE POWER. FIVE DIFFERENT CRY TERESA THAT THE VRB IS REQUIRED TO CONSIDER IN REVIEWING A VARIANCE APPLICATION. FINALLY CHAPTER 27, ARTICLE 7, THE ENTIRE EXCEPTION OF NONCONFORMITIES WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND PROVIDED COUNCIL WITH SAMPLE MOTIONS FOR YOUR USE AT THE CONCLUSION OF PUBLIC HEARING. IF -- I MAY BE ALLOWED TO AFTER YOU HAVE HEARD THE EVIDENCE AND I CAN OUTLINE COUNCIL'S DIFFERENT OPTIONS ONCE YOU HEARD ALL THE EVIDENCE. STANDARD OF REVIEW UNDER SECTION 27-61-J-2 IS DE NOVO. THAT MEANS THAT THE BOARD OR COUNCIL IS NOT LIMITED IN ITS REVIEW TO INFORMATION, DOCUMENTATION OR EVIDENCE THAT THE VRB BASED ITS DETERMINATION ON. CITY COUNCIL MUST FOLLOW THE APPLICABLE ORDINANCE. IN OTHER WORDS, THE ONES I PROVIDED NEW MAKING A DECISION AND COUNCIL MAY HEAR NEW EVIDENCE. STAFF PRESENT IS STEVEN EYSTER, THE VRB COORDINATOR PROVIDING THE HISTORY OF THE CASE. WE HAVE PRESENT DAVE JENNINGS, THE CITY FLOOD PLAIN MANAGER AND DENNIS FERNANDEZ, HISTORIC PRESERVATION MANAGER FOR THE CITY. THEY ARE AVAILABLE IF COUNCIL SHOULD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS IN THE COURSE OF THE HEARING. AT THIS TIME, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO MR. EYSTER AND HE WILL PRESENT THE PROCEDURE HISTORY. >> STEVEN EYSTER: GOOD AFTERNOON. STEVEN EYSTEW DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION. SO AS SUSAN STATED, A PETITION FOR REVIEW FOR VRB 23-70, 16 DAVIS BOULEVARD. THIS IS THE OWNERSHIP INFORMATION. THE OWNER IS CLP 16 DAVIS LCC. APPLICANT IS STEVE MICHELINI. PROPERTY ADDRESS 16 DAVIS BOULEVARD. ZONING IS RM-24. AND THEN THE REQUEST WHAT SUSAN STATED BEFORE TO REDUCE THE EAST FRONT SETBACK FROM 45 TO ONE FOOT. REDUCE WEST SIDE FRONT YARD QUARTERBACK FROM 45 FEET TO ONE FOOT WEST SIDE SETBACK 27 TO ONE FOOT AND SIDE SETBACK FROM 27 TO ONE FOOT. THIS WAS DETERMINATION MADE BY THE BOARD ON MAY 14. AND APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS. 5-0. THESE WERE THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED TO THE BOARD. LIMITED TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, THE STRUCTURE LISTED ON THE NATIONAL REGISTRY OF MISS STORIC PLACES. MULTIPLE PROPERTY REFERENCE NUMBER 64500118. IN THE EVENT THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS DAMAGED OR DESTROYED, ANY REPAIRS OR WILL BE LIMITED BY THE OPERTY - PROVISIONS GOVERNING NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES AND USES SET FORTH IN THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND IN EFFECT AT THAT TIME. IN THE EVENT THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS DAMAGE OAR DESTROYED GOVERNING NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES AND NONCONFORMING USE AS SET FORTH IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT THE STATE AGENCY APPROVES THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE STRUCTURE TO THE EXACT SAME PHYSICAL STANDARDS AS -- AS -- BY THE PLANS ATTACHED, THE VARIANCE SHALL TERMINATE AND BE AND VOID AND ANY DEVELOPMENT AND THE CITY OF TAMPA REGULATIONS IN EFFECT AT THAT TIME. THIS IS A MAP OF THE SITE. A LOT CLEARER WHEN IT IS IN COLOR. BUT IT IS THIS TRIANGULAR PROPERTY RIGHT HERE. THIS IS THE CURRENT VIEW OF THE SITE. YOU CAN SEE A HORSE SHOE STRUCTURE WITH A COURTYARD IN THE CENTER AND LARGE AREA. A SIDE PHOTO OF THE SITE. HERE IS THE ADDITIONAL FRONT PHOTO TO SHOW THE ADDITIONAL STEPS OF THE COURTYARD. THIS IS AN ADDITIONAL SIDE VIEW SHOWING THE TWO TREES HERE AND HERE. AND THEN HERE IS THE LAST SITE THAT YOU HAVE NOT SEEN YET, AND THEN AN EMPTY -- AN EMPTY LOT HE HERE. THIS IS THE EXISTING SITE WITH CONDITIONS AND THE LARGE COURTYARD WITH THE AGENDA. THE ENTIRE BUILDING IS BEING ELEVATED. THERE IS A PARKING STRUCTURE UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING. SO IS THE COURTYARD AND EVERYTHING IS ELEVATED ON TOP OF THAT PARKING STRUCTURE WITH THE ADDITIONAL STEPS HERE. YOU CAN SEE THERE IS -- INSTEAD OF JUST THREE OR FOUR STEPS, THERE IS NOW ABOUT A DOZEN. THIS IS THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND SITE CALCULATIONS FOR THE SITE. GENERAL INFORMATION. THIS IS THE GROUND FIRST-FLOOR PLAN SHOWING THE PARKING. HERE IS THE -- THE SECOND FLOOR. WHICH STAYS IN A SIMILAR CONFIGURATION. THIS IS THE THIRD LEVEL. YOU CAN SEE THERE IS AN ADDITION TO THE FRONT HERE WHERE I BELIEVE THERE IS AN ELEVATOR SHAFT. THIS IS THE THIRD THE FOURTH. AND THEN FINALLY THE FIFTH. HERE IS SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON OF THE SITE. THIS IS THE SITE AS IT EXISTS TODAY. THIS IS THE SITE AFTER THE PARKING GARAGE IS PUT IN UNDERNEATH IT. HERE IS KIND OF THE EXPANDED VIEW TO SEE A LITTLE CLEARER. AND HERE IS THE PROPOSED ELEVATION. SO YOU GUYS CAN SEE IT. WE HAVE THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS. SO ALL PARTIES FOUND THE PROPOSED PROJECT CONSISTENT WITH CONDITIONS OR NO CONDITIONS. FOUND CONSISTENT. AND LET YOU READ THROUGH SOME OF THE COMMENTS BECAUSE SOME OF THEM ARE LENGTHY. ARC AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION. IF YOU NEED ANY FURTHER INFORMATION, LIKE SUSAN SAID, DENNIS IS AVAILABLE. APPROVED IT WITH CONDITIONS. REQUIREMENTS OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, FEMA COMMENT. ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO ELEVATE ABOVE IS NOT IN DIRECT BENEFIT TO THE CITY OR CSS RATING. NATURAL RESOURCES HAD IT CONSISTENT WITH CONDITIONS. ANT COMMENT WAS TO ADDRESS THE TREES IN THE CENTER OF THE COURTYARD. AND AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION THEY WILL HAVE TO VERIFY HOW THEY MITIGATE THE TREES NOW. AND RIGHT-OF-WAY IS CONSISTENT WITH CONDITIONS. TECO FOUND IT CONSISTENT WITH CONDITIONS. AND TRANSPORTATION ALSO FOUND IT CONSISTENT WITH CONDITIONS. STORMWATER CONSISTENT. WATER AND WASTEWATER BOTH CONSISTENT WITH CONDITIONS. HERE IS THE STANDARD FOR THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD. AS YOU GUYS KNOW, THE VARIANCES ARE BASED OFF OF HARDSHIP. AND THAT IS THE CRITERIA THAT SUSAN PROVIDED FOR YOU AS WELL. AND WE WILL BE AVAILABLE NOR ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. CAN YOU JUST PUT THAT ELEVATION MAP UP AGAIN, THE ONE THAT SHOWS BOTH. I DON'T SEE THE DIFFERENCE HERE. AND THEY ARE HERE FOR AT THAT QUARTERBACK WAIVERS FROM 45 TO ON ONE . >> STEVEN EYSTER: THE BUILDING CURRENTLY EXPANDS -- THE APPLICANT MAY BE -- BECAUSE THEY ARE CHANGE WHAT IS EXISTING -- BECAUSE IT IS A -- THEY WENT THROUGH A FORMAL DECISION TO VEST THE PROPERTY AS IT IS CURRENTLY. THEN CHANGING THE BOTTOM BASE HERE, THEY NEED TO ASKOR THE SETBACK REDUCTION. >>LYNN HURTAK: I SEE. IT ALREADY IS A VESTED STRUCTURE CURRENTLY, BUT TO BUILD SOMETHING UNDER IT, THEY WILL NEED TO GET THE VARIANCE TO MATCH THE CURRENT VESTING. >> STEVEN EYSTER: CORRECT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR PRESENTATION? THAT CONCLUDES THE STAFF'S PRESENTATION. WE WILL GO WITH PRESENTATION OF MR. STEVEN STANLEY AND MICHAEL FRIDELLA. AND YOU HAVE BOTH BEEN SWORN IN. SO GO AHEAD. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, SIR. >> MY NAME IS STEVEN STANLEY, I AM AN ATTORNEY. I LIVE AT -- >>MARTIN SHELBY: STORY, MR. STANLEY, MARTIN SHELBY. JUST QUESTION. BOTH YOU AND FLORIDA MR. FRIDELLA ARE PETITIONERS. WILL YOU BE PRESENTING THIS TOGETHER. >> I AM PRESENTING FIVE MINUTES AND MY PLANNER SUSAN SWIFT WILL DO TEN MINUTES. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THAT WILL ALSO INCLUDE MR. FRIDELLA'S OPPORTUNITY? HE IS INCLUDED IN THIS? >> YES. HE CAN SPEAK AS A RESIDENT NOT AS A PETITIONER. >>MARTIN SHELBY: IS HE A PETITIONER? >> HE IS A PETITIONER. >>MARTIN SHELBY: IS HE WITHIN THE NOTICED AREA? >> YES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: IS HE ALLOWED TO BE PART OF GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: GENERALLY IF HE IS A PETITIONER, THE ANSWER WOULD BE ULTIMATELY NO, HE WOULDN'T BE. UNLESS THERE IS NO OBJECTION AND COUNCIL WISHES TO WAIVE IT. YOU ARE SAYING HE WOULD TAKE ANOTHER ADDITIONAL THREE MINUTES? >> YES. >>MARTIN SHELBY: WE WILL TAKE THAT UP AS THE TIME COMES. THEN THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU WANT TO INCLUDE HIM WITHIN YOU ARE IN 15 MINUTES OR -- IS HE HERE, MR. FRIDELLA? >> I AM. >> WE WILL GO AS PLANNED. HE IS NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK AS A RESIDENT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: YOU CAN -- IF YOU FEEL A NEED FOR EXTRA TIME FOR HIM, YOU CAN REQUEST EXTRA TIME. BUT THE FACT HE IS A PETITIONER AND HE IS PARTICIPATING AS SUCH. >> WE WILL SEE ABOUT REQUESTING . >>MARTIN SHELBY: OKAY, THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. >> STEVEN STANLEY, I AM AN ATTORNEY DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM 16 DAVIS BOULEVARD. FOUR TOWN HOUSE, NOT THE CONDOMINIUMS ACROSS FROM 16 DAVIS. THE CONDOMINIUMS ARE ON THE CORNER. TO START THE PRESENTATION, I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK WITH SOME PICTURES. THESE PICTURES FROM DECEMBER OF 2019. THIS SHOWS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. AND I WANT YOU TO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT -- THAT WITH THE CIRCLE. MISS HURTAK BROUGHT UP A POINT. IS IT THE SAME FOOTPRINT? NO, IT'S NOT. FIRST OF ALL, THE -- THE WHOLE CENTER COURTYARD IS GOING AWAY. IT HAS BECOME A GARAGE. INSTEAD OF A HORSE SHOE WITH GROUND, DIRT, TREES AND PLANTS, IT IS CONCRETE. CAN THEY PUT ARTIFICIAL TURF ON TOP OF IT, MAYBE. I DON'T THINK THEY WILL BE ABLE TO PLANT TREES AND GRASS AND FOR THE NMBC CIRCULAR BUILDING WHERE THEY TRIED TO PUT THE GRASS OVER THE CONCRETE GARAGE THERE AND IT NEVER WORKED. IT IS NOT GOING TO PERCOLATE. GOING TO BE DIRT OR GROUND. IT IS GOING TO BE CONCRETE. THE OTHER EXPANSION IS -- AND THE GENTLEMAN SHOWED YOU -- AND THERE IS PLAN PLANS -- THERE AI HAVE COPIES OF THESE FOR COUNCIL IF YOU WOULD LIKE THEM, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF THE PICTURE OR THESE DRAWINGS WILL COME OUT AS GOOD. IF YOU WOULD LIKE THEM. >>MARTIN SHELBY: CAN YOU PUT THEM ON THE OVERHEAD. >> YES. I CAN DO THAT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: OKAY. >> SO IF YOU LOOK CAREFULLY -- IT CAME OUT BETTER THAN I THOUGHT. IF YOU LOOK CAREFULLY, THE ONE ON THE LEFT IS EXISTING. I WANT TO YOU LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE LINES AND NOW IT COMES ALL THE WAY OUT TO ENCROACHING INTO WHAT IS THE CIRCLE, THE BUILDING. IT IS BEYOND THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT. EVEN THOUGH IT IS HARD TO SEE UNLESS YOU ARE STARTING TO LOOK FOR THIS. BECAUSE SLICK PRESENTATION, SLICK PLAN. IF BUT LOOK AT -- THIS IS -- THIS IS THE EXISTING. THIS IS THE EXISTING. SO IF YOU NOTICE YOU DON'T SEE ANY EXPANSION. BUT IF BUT LOOK AT THE NEW PLAN, THE EXPANSION. LOOK AT THE DARK AREAS IN THE FRONT. THAT SECRETARIES PANGS. AND THERE ARE SOME OTHER AREAS ON THE BOTTOM. LOOKS LIKE A L. EXPANSION. THIS IS AN EXPANSION BEYOND THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT. THIS IS AN EXPANSION ENCROACHING. OUTSIDE THERE IS NO SITE. IT IS TAKING AWAY THE ORIGINAL CENTER OF THE SITE WHICH WAS DIRT, AND THE BUILDING HAS NOW EXPANDED INTO WHAT IS A DIRT COURTYARD WITH THE BEAUTIFUL OAK TREES. WITH A ONE-FOOT SETBACK, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY PLANT OAK TREES. THERE IS NO ROOM. WE NEED KEEP THAT IN MIND AND COUNCIL EXPLAINED TO YOU THAT ONE OF THE THINGS WE ARE LOOKING AT IS THE FIVE CRITERIA. I ALSO WANT TO YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT IS BUILDING LOOKS LIKE NOW AND WHEN YOU ARE GOING TO HEAR THAT THEY WANTON RAISE THE GARAGE TO PROTECT PROTECT THIS BUILDING, BECAUSE IF THEY DON'T RAISE THE BUILDING EIGHT FEET, PROTECT IT AND IT WILL DETERIORATE. THEY ARE NOT PROTECTING IT NOW. THERE IS ONE PICTURE. I WILL SHOW YOU THIS PICTURE. AND LOOK CLOSELY. IT IS NOT JUST THE DOOR. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE STUCCO DOWN AT THE BOTTOM. NOW I COMPLAINED OF THE DOOR AND HE DIDN'T REPLACE THE DOOR. THEY ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING TO MAINTAIN THIS AND BROUGHT IN 2022. NOT THE FACT THAT IT IS ON THE GROUND. IF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH DAVIS ISLAND AT ALL. HISTORICAL FAMILY BUILDINGS THAT AREN'T ON TOP OF THE PARKING GARAGE HERE AT GROUND LEVEL. MY MOTHER-IN-LAW IS IN HUDSON MANNER. USED TO BE THE ISLANDS CLUB. BEFORE THAT A MULTIFAMILY AND ON THE GROUND. NO UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGES ON DAVIS ISLAND. WE REALLY NEED TO GET TO THE POINT. THE POINT IS, IN ORDER TO GET THE VARIANCE THE DEVELOPER, THE APPLICANT MUST DEMONSTRATE A HARDSHIP. MOST DEMONSTRATE A HARDSHIP FOR PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY AND CANNOT BE ONE THAT IS SELF-CREATED. SO THEY WILL WANT TO RAISE THE BUILDING. AT FIRST, THEY TOLD US THAT FEMA IS REQUIRING IT. WE HAVE TO DO THIS. NO, NO REQUIREMENT FROM FEMA. NONE IN THE EVIDENCE AND WILL NOT BE IN THE EVIDENCE. THEY WANT TO R RAISE THE BUILDING TO BUILD A PARKING GARAGE UNDER IT. YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER IF THEY ARE ABLE TO DO THIS, CONCRETE PARKING GARAGE IN THE GROUND COMPLETELY COVERING THE SITE WITHIN ONE FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINES WITH THE BUILDING ON TOP IN IT MAKES IT. SO NOW WE HAVE A COMPUTATION IF THE BUILDING COMES DOWN, WHAT IS THE COMPUTATION? 60% OR 70% OR 75% OF WHAT. THE ORIGINAL BUILDING? OR FACTOR IN A PARKING GARAGE. THEY WILL HAVE THAT PARKING GARAGE IN THE GROUND FOREVER. THEY WILL NEVER HAVE TO TEAR IT DOWN. THEY WILL TEAR DOWN THE BUILDING ON TOP OR IF IT GETS TORN DOWN, THE NEW PARKING GARAGE IN THE BOTTOM THAT BUILT SOMETHING NEW ON TOP OF IT. MAYBE THE SAME DESIGN, I DON'T KNOW. YOU NEED TO KEEP THAT IN MIND. WE LOOKED AT A PRESENTATION. AND SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ GAVE THE VRB A WORKSHOP. AND THE EXAMPLE SHE USED FOR THIS HARDSHIP, IF SOMEBODY BUYS A HOUSE WITHOUT A GARAGE, YOU CAN'T COME AND GET A VARIANCE TO BUILD A GARAGE. YOU SHOULD HAVE BOUGHT A HOUSE WITH A GARAGE OR SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT A HOUSE WITH ENOUGH LAND TO BUILD A GARAGE. YOU CAN'T BUY A HOUSE AND SAY I HAVE A HARDSHIP. I NEED A GARAGE. THEY BROUGHT THE PROPERTY WITHOUT A GARAGE AND NOW THEY WANT TO BUILD THE GARAGE. RAISE IT TO PROTECT IT. NONE OF THE OTHER THINGS. ULTIMATELY THEY WILL RAISE THE BUILDING, BUILD THE GARAGE AND CONVERT THOSE INTO 22 LUXURY DOND MINIMUMS WITH THE GARAGE UNDERNEATH THEM. SO YOU NEED TO KEEP IN MIND WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON WITH THIS CA CASE. ONCE YOU CAN'T FIND THE HARDSHIP, PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY, GAME IS OVER WITH THE VARIANCE. SHOULD HAVE BEEN OVER RIGHT THEN. CAN'T GO ANY FURTHER. BUT THEY DID. CAN'T BE SELF-IMPOSED. IT WAS. SO NOW WHAT IS IT GOING TO DO FOR THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE THIRD CRITERIA BY ALLOWING A 22-CAR PARKING GARAGE. WE ARE NOT REALLY SURE, BECAUSE THEY WERE GOING TO DO A ROBOTIC PARKING GARAGE ON THE VACANT PROPERTY NEXT DOOR WITH THE DESIGN EXCEPTION AND DIDN'T GO THROUGH IT. I DON'T KNOW 22, 40, HOW MANY CARS, BUT YOU ARE BRINGING IN 22 MORE VEHICLE TRIPS TO THE INTERSECTION OF DAVIS BOULEVARD AND ADALIA. WHERE IS THAT? RIGHT WHEN YOU COME ACROSS THE BRIDGE AT THE BASE OF THE BRIDGE FROM DAVIS GOING OUT A BUSY INTERSECTION THEY WANT TO INCREASE IT AND THE TRIPS THEM GENERATE. TAKE AWAY THE COURTYARD, GRASS AND DIRT THAT PERCOLATES INTO THE GROUND. KEEP IN MIND THIS BUILDING IS UP ALREADY. IT HAS A CRAWLSPACE UNDER IT. NOT UNDER THE COURTYARD BECAUSE IT IS DIRT. RAIN, STORMS GO INTO THE COURTYARD INTO THE GROUND AND PERCOLATE THROUG THE GROUND AND OUT. NOW ARE WE ARE GOING TO ELIMINATE THE COURTYARD AND WE WILL HAVE CONCRETE. NOW WE HAVE RAIN WATER RIGHT INTO THE STREETS THE ADALIA AND DAVIS. NO PLAN -- NO MENTION IN THEIR PLAN OF COLLECTING THE ADDITIONAL STORMWATER RUNOFF THIS IS GOING TO CREATE OKAY, VARIANCE IN HARMONY. CONTRADICTORY TO THE PLAN. YOU CAN'T EXPAND A NONCONFORMING USE. I AM SURE YOU GOT THE CODE THERE. 27-297-1-B AND 297.298. YOU CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE THE CODE RESTRICT THE POWER OF THE VRB TO EXPAND OR EXTEND A NONCONFORMING PROPERTY. RIGHT WITHIN YOU ARE IN MUNI CODE. ELIMINATING THAT COURTYARD AND EXPANDING THE GARAGE INTO THE -- OUTSIDE THE BUILDING LINES IS AN EXPANSION I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE OPINION TO ADALIA, BUT FAMILIES THAT LIVE ON ADALIA. HOUSE AND YOU HAVE KIDS. N. - THEY PLAY OUT THERE. PETS. THEY ARE RUNNING OUT THERE. ALL OF A SUDDEN WE ARE GOING TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES COMING INTO THAT STREET BY AT LEAST 22 OR 40. AND THE TRIPS. SO IS THIS HELPING THE NEIGHBORHOOD? NO. WHAT ABOUT THE STORMWATER RUNOFF. ONE OF THE RESIDENTS SAY A MAN HOLE AND GETS BLOCKED UP AND THE WATER DOESN'T DRAIN AND IT FLOODS. THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD THIS BUILDING RIGHT UP TO IT AND INCREASE THE RUNOFF. SO, YOU KNOW, I AM SURPRISED THIS THING GOT BY THE VRB. I MEAN, I SAW THE VIDEO OF THEIR ATTORNEY TELLING THEM ABOUT THE GARAGE STORY WITH THE HOUSE I DON'T GET IT. I DON'T KNOW HOW IT GOT OUT OF THERE. I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY APPROVED IT. FIRST THING IS, THEY COULDN'T BE APPROVED BECAUSE WASN'T A HARDSHIP THAT WASN'T SELF-INFLICTED.I AM SAVING THE REST OF MY TIME FOR SUSAN SWIFT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: PLEASE SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONE. >> I AM SORRY? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: NO, THE CELL PHONE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. HOW MUCH TIME IS LEFT? >> MY NAME IS SUSAN SWIFT. I -- MAY I ASK FOR SOME MORE QUESTIONS. SUSAN SWIFT, PLANNING DIRECTOR. HERE ON BEHALF OF MIKE FRIDELLA AND STEVE STANLEY. I AM AN EXPERT PLANNER. I SUBMITTED MY RESUME TO THAT EFFECT. I DO THINK I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN UNIQUE QUALIFICATION FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW ME. I WAS THE ZONING DIRECTOR FOR THE CITY OF TAMPA FOR 11 YEARS. MANY MOONS AGO. SO I UNDERSTAND THE CODE AND I UNDERSTAND THE PROCEDURES. I HAVE A SLIDE -- A POWERPOINT IF SOMEONE COULD PUT IT UP THERE. IT WAS SUBMITTED. THERE IT GOES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU. THIS BECAUSE OF RAN OUT OF TIME ALREADY. THE MOST -- BIGGEST CONCERN FOR THE NEIGHBORS AND MY CLIENTS ARE PROCESS AND TRANSPARENCY. THERE ARE A LOT OF INCREMENTAL APPLICATIONS FOR THIS PROJECT. NEXT SLIDE. AM I SUPPOSED TO BE DOING THIS? SORRY, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO IT. CAN I -- CAN I STOP MY TIME. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: IT'S STOPPED. >> OKAY. OKAY, SIDEWAYS. ALL RIGHT. CAN IT COME UP HERE OR NOT? ANYBODY COME UP HERE? NO? I CAN STAND BACK HERE AND HOPE YOU CAN HEAR ME. THERE IS A LOT OF COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT WE PROVIDED AT THE VRB. TO REPEAT -- THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THEY PUT THE SLIDE DOWN HERE. THE BIGGEST QUESTION OR THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS -- WE AGREE WITH THE DECISION LETTER. THIS IS A LEGAL NONCONFORMING USE AND A LEGAL NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE. THEREFORE, THIS BUILDING FOOTPRINT IS GRAND FATHERED. THEY DIDN'T NEED A SETBACK VARIANCE TO BUILD, TO KEEP WHAT IS THERE. THEY NEED IT TO BUILD A GARAGE UNDE UNDERNEATH, BUT THEY DON'T NEED TO HAVE ANY VARIANCE. THAT IS THE BASIS. A LOT OF SMOKE AND MIRRORS AND DIFFERENT SITE PLANS. IT DOESN'T MEET THE HARDSHIP CRITERIA. EXPANDING THE NONCONFORMING USE. YOU HEARD A LOT OF THAT. ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES IS THE APPLICATION ITSELF WAS DEFICIENT. MORE THAN HALF THE ITEMS IN YOUR VRB APPLICATION WAS NOT PRESENTED ON THE SITE PLAN OR THE APPLICATION. THE PREMISE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE RAISED. YOU HEARD THAT. UNLIKE THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLES, NO GOVERNMENT AGENCY IS MAKING THEM DO THIS. THEY ARE DOING IT TO BUILD THE PARKING GARAGE. I AM NOT A PROPONENT OF PDs I THINK THEY ARE OVERUSED IN THE CITY. THING IS A PROJECT THAT SHOULD BE PROCESSED AS A FD. ITEMS IN YOUR CHECKLIST THAT ARE NOT PROVIDED ON THE SITE PLAN. AND THIS APPLICATION IS COMPLETELY DEFICIENT. SHOULD NEVER HAVE GONE TO THE VRB IN THE FIRST PLACE. THERE IS SO MANY INCONSISTENCIES. I DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME IN MY TEN MINUTES. I CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME IN MY THREE MINUTES. SO I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM. AT LEAST FIVE SITE PLANS SUBMITTED. TO THE POINT EARLIER, THE STAFF PERSON PRESENTED VARIOUS SHEETS OF A SITE PLAN. THOSE WERE NOT INCLUDED -- SEVERAL OF THOSE SMILES ARE NOT ON THE DECISION LETTER. THE PARKING IS NOT ON THE DECISION LETTER. THERE ARE ONLY TWO -- TWO LITTLE CUTOUTS LIKES YOU SEE IN THIS SITE PLAN 3 THAT ARE COMPLETELY INELIGIBLE AND THEY ARE MEANINGLESS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THIS IS MY IMPORTANT SLIDE. CAN I COVER THIS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WHATEVER EXTRA TIME, WE GIVE IT TO THE OTHER SIDE. A MINUTE. >> THE MOST IMPORTANT SLIDE. THE FOOTPRINT OF THIS BUILDING IS GRANDFATHERED. LEGAL NONCONFORMING USE AND STRUCTURE. THE BLUE IS WHERE YOUR CODE SAYS, SHALL NOT EXTEND TO OCCUPY LAND OUTSIDE SUCH BUILDING. THE BLUE IN THE CENTER COURTYARD, THAT IS AN EXPANSION. THE VR SDPSHGS NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO EITHER OF THESE THINGS. THE PINK IS -- THE PINK IS AN EXPANSION AS STEVE SAYS. IT IS EXPANDING THE BUILDING BEYOND WHAT IS THERE NOW THIS IS THE SECTIONS THAT PROHIBIT THAT. SIX SECTIONS IN YOUR CODE. THEY SAY THIS IN SIX DIFFERENT WAYS. THEY CAN'T EXPAND THE USE. THEY CAN'T EXPAND THE BUILDING OR THE STRUCTURE IN ALL THESE WAY AND IT GOT GOT WORSE BECAUSE WE NEVER SEEN THE SHEETS THAT WERE SHOWN AND SKIPPING TO THE END, THE WE DO NOT HAVE THE SHEETS THAT THE STAFF JUST SHOWED YOU. THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE PRESENTED -- THE APPLICATION PRESENTED A NEW SITE PLAN AT THE VRB HEARING, NOT IN THE RULES OF PROCEDURES AND WE NEVER SEEN. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AT THIS TIME A PRESENTATION BY MR. STEVE MICHELINI. YOU WILL HAVE 16 MINUTES. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. BEFORE WE GET STARTED AND MY TIME BEGINS, I HAVE HOUSEKEEPING. BEN DACHAPALI. I AM WITH THE LAW FIRM BRADLEY, BOLTON CUMMINGS. DAVIS STREET. I AM A DAVIS ISLAND RESIDENT. BEFORE I BEGIN MY TIME, I HAVE HOUSEKEEPING MATTERS, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF THAT IS OKAY? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GO AHEAD. >> I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF ITEMS. I WANT TO ENSURE THAT THE OFFICIAL RECORD FOR THIS PROCEEDING INCLUDES THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS IN THE VRB FILE, SPECIFICALLY THE VARIANCE APPLICATION. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THIS SHOULD BE PART OF THE PRESENTATION. SO WE WILL START YOUR TIME. >> OKAY, GREAT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: PROCEDURAL? >> I AM JUST TRYING TO CONFIRM THAT THE DOCUMENTS ARE ALL ON THE RECORD. >>MARTIN SHELBY: WELL, I CAN'T -- >> WE LOOKED ONLINE AND WE DIDN'T SEE THEM. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY. I CAN'T VOUCH NOR CAN COUNCIL AT THIS TIME WHAT IS IN THE ORIGINAL RECORD. WILL SOMEBODY BE ABLE TO STATE THAT IF THAT IS THE CASE? >> STEVEN EYSTER: STEVEN EYSTER WITH THE CITY OF TAMPA. A PACKET THAT WAS 350 PAGES CONTAINING ALL INFORMATION FROM THE RECORD CONDENSED SO YOU GUYS CAN FLIP THROUGH IT WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH ACELA. >>MARTIN SHELBY: OKAY, THANK YOU. PRESENTING A POWERPOINT AND INTRODUCING A HARD COPY OF THAT INTO THE RECORD AS WELL. LASTLY, HOUSEKEEPING MATTER. I UNDERSTAND OBVIOUS THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING. IT IS KIND OF AWKWARD TO EVEN LAST, BUT IN LIGHT OF RECENT 13th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OPINION BY JUDGE MOE IN THE LIBERTY HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT VERSUS CITY OF TAMPA CASE, I HAVE THE LEGAL DUTY AND OBLIGATION ON BEHALF OF MY CLIENT TO ASK THE COUNCIL ATTORNEY OR THE CITY ATTORNEY WHETHER THERE IS LEGAL -- WHETHER CITY COUNCIL HAS THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO EXERCISE QUASI JUDICIAL POWERS IN THIS MEETING. IF SO, WE ARE MORE THAN READY TO PROCEED. AND JUST WANT TO RESERVE OUR RIGHTS ACCORDINGLY. >>MARTIN SHELBY: AS HAPPENED THIS MORNING WHEN MR. MASSEY SPOKE TO CITY COUNCIL, THE CITY ATTORNEY AND MISS JOHN SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ AND NEEDS TO PINE IN, SHE AS OPINED THAT YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING AND IT IS APPROPRIATE TO DO SO. >> THANK YOU. WITH THAT I AM READY TO PROCEED. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALL RIGHT. >> ONCE AGAIN, I REPRESENT ADAM SCHLESINGER WHO IS SITTING HERE AND THE APPLICANT, STEVE MICHELINI, REGARDING 16 DAVIS BOULEVARD, THE RESPONDENT IN THIS MATTER. YOU KNOW, MY CLIENT SOUGHT THIS VARIANCE TO PRESERVE, PROTECT AND UPGRADE A 99-YEAR-OLD HISTORIC BUILDING. THE VRB EVALUATED ALL THE CRITERIA AND ON MAY 14, 2024, UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED VRB 23-270 TO LIVE THE BUILDING SIX FEET SEVEN INCHES BECAUSE SUBSTANTIAL COMPETENT EVIDENCE WAS SUBMITTED AND WE MET ALL THE CRITERIA. PA TERRY EXTRA AND WHAT THE VRB. THIS WAS A LENGTHY HEARING. IT WAS OVER TWO HOURS LONG. THE VRB LISTENS TO THE TAMPA AND THE FIVE VARIANCE CRITERIA I WILL DISCUSS LATER IN THIS HE THINKS WERE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE VRB CONDITIONS -- THE VRB INCLUDED CONDITIONS AS PART OF THEIR APPROVAL. AS WAS STATE BY CITY STAFF, THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS TO SAFEGUARD AGAINST ANY CONCERNS THAT THE VARIANCE WILL APPLY TO ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY. THIS VARIANCE APPLIES TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND VARIANCE TERMINATES IF EXCEEDS GOVERNING NONCONFORM STRUCTURES. I WANT TO GIVE YOU BACKGROUND ON THE BUILDING ITSELF AND SIGNIFICANCE. BUILDING HAS REMAINED IN THE SAME CONFIGURATION 99 YEARS. THIS OWNER MR. SCHLESINGER WANTS TO REMAIN FOR ANOTHER99 YEARS. LOCATED 16 DAVIS BOULEVARD AND CONSTRUCTED BACK IN 1925. A RICH HISTORY TO THIS -- TO THIS BUILDING. BUILT IN 1925. THIS IS AN ORIGINAL PHOTOGRAPH. IT WAS ORIGINALLY CALLED THE SPANISH PARTS. IT WAS DEVELOPED BY DP DAVIS TO BE A GATEWAY STRUCTURE ON BE INTO DAVIS ISLANDS AND ANNOUNCES THE DAVIS ISLANDS' MEDITERRANEAN WITH 22 APARTMENT UNITS COVERING TWO AND A HALF LOTS AND NO PARKING. AUGUST 3, 1989, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LISTED ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. NOMINATED BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA BUREAU OF PRESERVATION. BEFORE THIS APPLICATION, THIS VARIANCE APPLICATION WAS MADE, THE CITY ISSUED A NOTICE. IT CONFIRMED THAT THE STRUCTURE REMAINS IN THE SAME LOCATION ON LOT ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED WITH 22 UNITS. SETBACKS ARE LEGAL NONCONFORMING AND THE DENSITY IS ALSO LEGAL NONCONFORMING. THAT BRINGS US TO THE VARIANCE REQUEST ITSELF. THE PURPOSE OF THE OWNER'S REQUEST IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE TO PRESERVE A HISTORIC STRUCTURE. TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT FEMA REQUIREMENTS EVEN THOUGH NO OBLIGATION TO, AND TO ALLEVIATE THE ON-STREET PARKING, AND A LOT OF THE E-MAILS AND LETTERS OF SUPPORT THAT THIS COUNCIL RECEIVED IS JUST THAT. THEY WANT TO SEE THE RELIEF OF ALL THE ON STREET PARKING THAT THIS BUILDING GENERATES WITH 2 UNITS. IT WILL NOT CHANGE DESPITE WHAT THEY ARE TELLING YOU. AND THE DENSITY AND THE SETBACKS WILL NOT CHANGE. THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO NONCONFORMING ISSUES THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH FOR THIS VARIANCE REQUEST. LIFTING THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT INCREASE THE NONCONFORMING SETBACKS. AND HERE ARE THE SETBACKS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY HAVE BEEN THE SAME SINCE 1925. THESE ARE THE MEASUREMENTS OF THOSE SETBACKS, AFTER THE LIFT, THE PROPOSED LIFT, THE SETBACKS WILL REMAIN EXACTLY THE SAME. THIS IS A VISUAL RECOMMENDATION OF THE APPROVED SITE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL RECORD TO THE VRB. ON THE LEFT IS THE ORIGINAL EXISTING SITE PLAN. AND NEXT TO IT ON THE LEFT -- OR ON THE RIGHT, EXCUSE ME, IS THE PROPOSED. ALL THE QUARTERBACKS ARE GOING TO BE EXACTLY THE SAME. IDENTICAL. WE ARE ONLY LIFTING IN ADDITION LIFTING THE BUILDING TO SEVEN FEET SEVEN INCHES, IT WILL REMAIN UNDER THE 60-FOOT HEIGHT LIMITATION FOR RM-24 DESIGNATION. AFTER THE LIFT 54 FEET, FOUR INCHES. THIS WAS SHOWN DURING CITY STAFF'S PRESENTATION, BUT THIS IS FROM THE APPROVED SITE PLAN. THIS SHOWS THE EXISTING SIDE ELEVATIONS. 13-FOOT ELEVATION THAT IS REQUIRED FOR THIS BUILDING. CURRENTLY EXISTS EIGHT FEET, SIX INCHES AS THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION. AS WE FLIP TO THE PROPOSED ELEVATION, THERE ISN'T -- WHAT IS STRIKE BEING THIS. THERE IS NOT A LOT OF DIFFERENCE IN APPEARANCE OR SCALE, EXCEPT THAT THE BUILDING WILL NOW HAVE A DESIGN FLOOD ELEVATION THAT COMPLIES WITH FEMA'S AND THE CITY'S ELEVATION STANDARDS. SO LET'S TALK OF THE PROPOSED WORK TO THE BUILDING. WE ARE PROPOSING TO LIFT IT 7 FEET, 6 INCHES. SIDE ELEVATION OF DAVIS BOULEVARD AND HOW IT WILL LOOK AFTER THE LIFT IS COMPLETED. THIS IS A SIDE ELEVATION ON ADALIA AFTER THE LIFT IS COMPLETED. IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE ELEVATION OF THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT REQUIRE IT TO BE SHIFTED OR MOVED HORIZONTALLY. THIS IS STRICTLY A VERTICAL LIFT. NOW THE OWNER HAS TAKEN GREAT CARE TO SELECT A SPECIALIST IN STRUCTURAL LIFT BIG MAINTAINING BROWNIE STRUCTURAL MOVERS, WHO HAVE BEEN DOING STRUCTURAL LIFTS FOR OVER 100 YEARS ALL OVER THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND THE SOUTHEAST UNITED STATES. MR. JACKSON BROWNIE IS HERE. IF THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ANY QUESTIONS OF THE METHODOLOGY THAT WE INTEND TO EMPLOY, AND HE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT HIS EXPERIENCES AS WELL. TO HIGHLIGHT BROWNIE'S STRUCTURAL EXPERIENCE IN THIS, I WANTED TO SHARE THREE CASE STUDIES ALSO SHARED WITH THE VRB, OF BUILDINGS THAT WAS SIMILAR TO 16 DAVIS. HISTORIC HOLLOW CLAY TUNNEL BUILDINGS ALSO RAISEDED TO PRESERVE THE STRUCTURES AND REDUCE THE IMPACT OF FLOODING. HERE IS THE SECOND ONE. HERE IS THE THIRD ONE. THE SCOPE AND WORK THAT BROWNIE DOES OVER THE STATE IS THE TYPE OF PROJECT THAT HE WILL BE DOING HERE. TO PROTECT THE PROPERTY AND ITS RESIDENTS, THERE IS ALSO SIGNIFICANT HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE REASONS FOR THIS VARIANCE. LIFTING THE BUILDING WILL RAISE ALL ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT OUT OF THE FLOOD ZONES. FEMA SUPPORTS THIS APPROACH EVEN THOUGH THE OWNER IS NOT REQUIRED TO MEET CURRENT FLOOD ELEVATION STANDARDS. THE CURRENT U.S. SECRETARY OF INTERIOR RECOMMENDS THIS RAISING METHOD AS A GUIDELINES FOR RESTORING HISTORIC BUILDINGS. A APERTURE IN PRESIDENT NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM AND CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT CITY COUNCIL HAS OF AN IMPROVED FLOOD MITIGATION METHOD UNDER T THE NIFB. HISTORIC PRESERVATION EXPERT CASSIE GARDNER. A FLORIDA CERTIFIED GENERAL CONTRACTOR, AND SHE HAS OFFERED A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR THIS ENDEAVOR TO PRESERVE A BUILDING AND EXPLAIN WHY THIS LIFT IS SO IMPORTANT FOR THE BUILDING'S FUTURE IF COUNCIL HAS ANY QUESTIONS. PER HER LETTER THAT I ENCOURAGE YOU TO READ, MISS GARDER SAY WILL SUPPORT THE SUSTAINABILITY OF STRUCTURE THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS. THE VR BB I WANT TO GO FLEW EAC ONE AND SHOW WHY YOU THE VRP UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THIS REQUEST. THE PETITIONERS KEEP TALKING OF THE LACK OF HARDSHIPS, BUT THE VARIANCE CRITERIA NUMBER ONE IF THERE ARE HARDSHIPS TO ARE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE HERE. SIX PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES TO THE STRUCTURE. THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT IN 1925 PRIOR TO SETBACKS AND HEIGHT REGULATIONS AND LEGAL NONCONFORMING. ON AN ODD LY SHAPED STRUCTURE SINCE DEVELOPED IN 1995. THE PROPERTY HAS TWO FRONT SETBACKS INSTEAD OF ONE. THREE SIDE SIDEWALKS. AND NO REAR SETBACK. IF THE CURRENT RM SETBACK -- THE CURRENT RM SETBACKS OF TWO 25-FOOT AND THREE SEVEN-SIDE ARE APPLIED, THEN THE PROPERTY WOULD HAVE VIRTUALLY NO CAPACITY TO USABLE STRUCTURES. I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU ON THE ELMO, IF I COULD. JUST A DIAGRAM OF -- OF WHAT THE BUILDABLE FOOTPRINT WOULD BE IF THERE WAS IF IT HAS TO COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT SETBACK. HERE IT IS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE CURRENT -- THE CURRENT AREA AS IT EXISTS NOW IS 5950 FEET. IF IT HAS TO GO DOWN TO THE CURRENT SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR MR 24, THAN 94 IT IS REALLY WHAT THE OPPOSITION WANT. THEY DON'T LIKE THE DENSITY AND THEY WOULD RATHER SEE IT LOSE ITS CONFORMING STATUS. WE WILL INTRODUCE THIS INTO THE RECORD FOR EVIDENCE AS WELL. CAN I GO BACK TO THE POWER POINTS PLEASE. IT IS GOING TO COME. THERE IT IS. >> OKAY, GREAT. THE NEXT CRITERIA, CRITERIA NUMBER TWO IS THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES WERE NOT SELF- SELF-CREATED THAT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE. THE PREVIOUSLY CITED PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES ARE NOT BY THE APPLICANT. CONDITIONS HAPPENED SINCE 1925 BELONGING BEFORE OUR APPLICATION. AND FEMA FOR OPERATION OF LAW. NOT BY THE APPLICANT. HISTORIC DESIGNATION OCCURRED IN 1989 WITH THE NOMINATION OF OTHERS NOT MY APPLICANT, NOT MY CLIENT. CHANGING WEATHER PATTERNS EXTREME WEATHER NOT CAUSING WATER DAMAGE IS OUTSIDE OF THE CONTROL OF THE APPLICANT AND NONE OF THESE ARE SELF-CREATED. PRESIDENT THIRD CRITERIA THAT THE VARIANCE WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. ABSOLUTELY TRUE. ALL THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES BUILT AND DEVELOPED WITH THE 16 DAVIS. ALL THE WORK. AND BY LIFTING THE BUILDING, THE OWNER MINUTE RISING THE CURRENT NONCONFORMITIES AND PARKING ALL THE ON-STREET PARKING ISSUES THAT MANY OF THE SUPPORTERS HAVE WRITTEN TO THE COUNCIL ABOUT AND WHY THEY SUPPORT THIS VARIANCE. THE FOURTH CRITERIA IS THAT THE VARIANCE SERVING THE INTENT AND PURPOSES OF THE COMP PLAN. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE. THE VARIANCE SERVING THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE COMP PLAN, AS WELL AS THE GOALS AND POLICIES OF THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. I HAVE LISTED THEM ALL HERE FOR YOU SO YOU CAN SEE HOW THIS VARIANCE SERVES THAT PURPOSE. AND HERE ARE THE FEDERAL REGS. AND HERE IS THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE FOURTH CRITERIA -- EXCUSE ME -- THE FIFTH CRITERIA IS THAT SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE WILL BE SERVED. THIS IS TRUE. THE COMPETING INTEREST OF PRESERVING THIS HISTORIC STRUCTURE INCLUDING ALL THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE REASONS WE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED TO PROTECT THE PROPERTY AND ITS RESIDENTS SIGNIFICANTLY OUTWEIGHS THE NEGLIGIBLE IMPACT OF THIS VARIANCE. IMPORTANTLY, FOR THIS BODY'S EVAL EVALUATION, THE SETBACKS WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED. WE ARE NOT CHANGING THEM AND THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING WILL BE WELL BELOW THE HEIGHT LIMIT. ALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS THAT THIS WAS MERELY A SUBTERFUGE TO REDEVELOP THE PROPERTY AT A ONE FOOT QUARTERBACK TO I DRESS CONCERNS, LIMITED THE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THAT THE VARIANCE SHOULD DETERMINATE AND BE AND VOID IF THE BUILDING IS DAMAGED OR DESTROYED MORE THAN THE PERCENTAGE LIMITATIONS AND THE VRP APPROVED THIS VARIANCE WITH THESE CONDITIONS. IN CONCLUSION, THE RESPONDENT HOPES THAT CITY COUNCIL HOLD UP THE UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF VRB 23-70 BECAUSE WE HAVE MET THE CRITERIA AND HAVE PRESENTED COMPETENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: CAN WE SEE THIS. >> IS MY TIME STOPPING? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES, WE HAVE PAUSED YOUR TIME. I JUST WANT TO READ THIS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, MA'AM. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHAT YEAR DID YOUR CLIENT PURCHASE THIS PROP PROPERTY. >> 2021. >>LYNN HURTAK: OKAY. CAN YOU GO BACK TO ONE OF THE VERY FIRST SLIDES? >>LYNN HURTAK: YES. >> YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: THE SLIDE WHERE YOU HAD THE REASONS YOU WANT TO DO THIS. SO YOU WANT TO DO THIS TO PRESERVE, COMPLY AND ALLEVIATE. OKAY. I HAVE A COUPLE OF OTHER QUESTIONS, BUT I WILL WAIT UNTIL THE END. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILWOMAN. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANYTHING FURTHER IN YOUR PRESENTATION OR YOUR SECTION? >> I WILL RESERVE THE REMAINING TIME FOR REBUTTAL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THERE IS NO REBUTTAL. >> ACCORDING TO PROCEDURES, WE HAVE TIME FOR REBUTTAL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE DO. I HAVE TWO PAGES HERE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: SOMEBODY IS JESTERING WITH STUFF. MR. DACHPELLI, IS THIS -- IS THIS BEING SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD. >> EVERYTHING THAT I SAID I COMMITTED FOR THE RECORD. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: FOR CLARITY, YOU HAVE REBUTTAL AND MR. STANLEY HAS REBUTTAL. I HAVE TWO PAGES OF INSTRUCTIONS SO. ALL RIGHT, AT THIS TIME WE GO TO CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. STEVEN STANLEY, THE PETITIONERS OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVES. A FIVE-MINUTE CROSS EXAMINATION, FOLLOWED BY FIVE MINUTES FOR MR. MICHELINI OR THE ATTORNEY TO ALSO CROSS-EXAMINE. WHO -- YOU WISH TO BEGIN THE CROSS-EXAMINATION SIR? >> NO WITNESSES HAVE BEEN ASKED ANY QUESTIONS SO I DON'T KNOW WHO IS THE SUBJECT TO CROSS EXAMINATION UNDER THE RULES AND PROCEDURES. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MR. DACHAPELLI, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS PICKED UP ON THE MICROPHONE. >> BEN DACHAPELLI FOR THE APPLICANT. I AM NOT AWARE OF HOW MR. STANLEY WILL HAVE TIME FOR CROSS EXAMINATION SINCE I AM THE ONLY ONE THAT PRESENTED ANYTHING THUS FAR AND ANSWERED ANY QUESTIONS FROM CITY COUNCIL. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MISS SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ, CAN YOU CLARIFY. HEARING PROCEED AUTO US, WE HAVE TWO SIDES OF CROSS EXAMINATION. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ, DEPARTMENT. YES, WELL, I THINK I MENTIONED TO YOU, COUNCIL BEFORE IN PRIOR HEARINGS. THAT ATTORNEYS DO NOT PROVIDE FACT-BASED TESTIMONY. ATTORNEYS KIND OF PRESENT. AND SO THERE HAVEN'T BEEN ANY FACT WITNESSES, SO -- >> WHAT ABOUT STAFF? WHAT ABOUT MR. STEVEN EYSTER? >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: YOU CAN CROSS-EXAMINE MR. EYSTER, STAFF HAS BEEN SWORN IN. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: EXCUSE ME JUST FOR THE RECORD, THERE ARE OTHER STAFF MEMBERS ON TOO. ERIC COTTON AND LAURA MARLEY ARE BOTH ONLINE AND HAVE A LINE TO THE HEARING. >>MARTIN SHELBY: IF YOU COULD STATE WHAT THEIR ROLES ARE. WHO WILL BE SPEAKING. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: MR. COTTON IS THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND MISS MARLEY IS INVOLVED IN THE VRB PROCESS. SHE WAS AT THE HEARING, WITH THE HEARING. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THEY ARE AVAILABLE TO CITY COUNCIL IF CITY COUNCIL HAS ANY QUESTIONS OF THEM. OKAY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: OKAY. IF YOU WISH TO CROSS EXAMINATION, SIR, THERE IS A GENTLEMAN FROM THE VRB OVER HERE. >> YES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: IF HE CAN COP UP AND STATE YOUR NAMES BOTH FOR THE RECORDS. >> MY NAME IS -- FOR THE RECORD AGAIN. >> STEVEN STANLEY ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YOU ARE CROSS-EXAMINING. >> RIGHT NOW, STEVEN -- >> STEVEN EYSTER. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GO AHEAD, YOU HAVE PHI MINUTES. >> MR. EYSTER, ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THE EXISTING INTO THEPRINT OF THE BUILDING IS GRANDFATHERED IN. >> WE TYPICALLY DON'T USE THE TERM "GRANDFATHERED." IT WAS VESTED BY THE CITY. >> THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT IS VESTED. A AND. >> SO YOU SHOWED COUNCIL MULTIPLE PAGES I AM ASSUMING -- ALLEGEDLY PART OF THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED. HAVE YOU SEEN THE ACTUAL LETTER THAT WERE ATTACHED DRAWINGS THE APPROVAL LETTER. >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. UPDATED FROM HEAD FROM THE ORIGINAL VRB PROCEEDING AND WE USED THOSE SAME SITE PHOTOS -- THE SAME SITE PLAN. >> WHY DO WE HAVE ONLY TWO? THE LETTER AND TWO DRAWINGS? CAN I HAVE A MOMENT. THAT'S WHY WE FILED THE PETITION. I STAND CORRECTED. IT HAS THE SURVEY AND THE DRAWINGS. IT ONLY HAS -- ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THE LETTER -- THE LETTER -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WILL COME UP IN A SECOND. >> FIRST PAGE OF THE LETTER. SECOND PAGE OF THE LETTER, A SURVEY. AT TWO FOOT PRINTS, THE EXISTING AND THE PROPOSED THE EXPANDED VERSION. >> CURRENT AND PROPOSED ELEVATION ONE FOLLOWD BY THE OTHER. >> BUT THAT'S IT. THOSE ARE THE ONLY PAGES THAT ARE PART OF THE LETTERS, IS THAT COR CORRECT? >> YES. >> ISN'T IT TRUE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THIS EXPANSION WHAT WAS BEFORE. >> I SEE THE ELEVATION OF THE GARAGE. >>THE EXPANSION. >> I WILL DIRECT TO THAT WE ARE RICK TO DECIDE IF THAT IS -- >> STILL ON MY TIME. CAN WE GETTER RICK. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: BE MR. COTTON IS ONLINE. ERIC, ARE YOU LISTENING TO THE QUESTION? >>ERIC COTTON: YES, SIR. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: SORRY, YOU ASK THE QUESTION. HE IS ON CAMERA. >>ERIC COTTON: I HEARD THE QUESTION. MR. STANLEY, I'M HERE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: LET'S WEAR NEW JUST IN CASE. >>ERIC COTTON: I WAS SWORN AT THE BEGINNING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GO AHEAD, SIR. >>ERIC COTTON: SO THE QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS AN EXPANSION OF THE BUILDING. AND NUMEROUS SITE PLANS SUBMITTED AS PART OF THE RECORD AND IT DOES APPEAR TO BE AN EXPANSION OF THE STRUCTURE AT THE FOOTPRINT, YES, IT DOES APPEAR TO BE THAT WAY. >> AND ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THE -- TURNING THE DIRT COURTYARD WITH TREE INTO A CONCRETE GARAGE IS AN EXPANSION OF THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING? >>ERIC COTTON: JUST STRICTLY LIFTING THE BUILDING UP AND PUTTING ANOTHER LEVEL ON THE BUILDING WOULD NOT BE AN EXPANSION -- EXPANSION OF THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING BUT NOT NECESSARILY OF THE NONCON FORE FORMITY OF THE SETBACKS. >> BUT AN EXPANSION OF THE BUILDING? >>ERIC COTTON: CORRECT. >> OKAY. SO YOU ARE SAYING IT IS NOT AN EXPANSION OF THE NONCONFORMITY? >>ERIC COTTON: THE DISCUSSION FOR THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD WAS THE REQUIRED SETBACKS OF THE PROPERTY. SO THERE WAS A NONCONFORMITY THAT THE APPLICANT WAS TRYING TO CURE THROUGH A VARIANCE PROCESS. IT WAS THE EXTERIOR SETBACKS. SO THAT IS WHAT THE BOARD REVIEWED AND WHAT THE BOARD HAD APPROVED WAS A REDUCTION OF THE SETBACK FROM X TO WHY FROM 45 FEET TO A FOOT WHATEVER THE ACTUAL NUMBERS WERE. THAT WAS THE REQUEST BEFORE THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD. THE VARIANCE WOULD HAVE CURED THAT SETBACK ISSUE SO ANYTHING INTERIOR TO THE STRUCTURE WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE AN EXPANSION -- AN EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMITY WITH REGARD TO THE SETBACK ISSUE. >> BUT AN EXPANSION OF THE BUILDING. ISN'T IT TRUE THAT BUILDING A GARAGE WHERE THE -- WHERE THE GRASS COURTYARD OUTSIDE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING IS AN A EXPANSION OF THE BUILDING? >>ERIC COTTON: CORRECT. I AM NOT DISAGREEING WITH YOU ON THAT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: NEXT UP, CROSS EXAMINATION -- COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF FOLLOWING ON THAT BECAUSE IT SAYS WE CAN ASK QUEST QUESTIONS. FOR MR. EYSTER OR MR. COTTON, WHOEVER CAN ANSWER THIS. AT THE END OF THE LAST PRESENTATION, IT BASICALLY -- OR ONE OF THE RULES FROM THE VARIANCE CLEARLY STATED THAT IF THE BUILDING WERE TO BE CONFIRMED, THE FOOTPRINT WOULD GO BACK OREGON THE QUARTERBACKS WILL GO BACK, CORRECT? {CAPTIION PERIOD} >>STEVEN EYSTER:: CORRECT. >>LYNN HURTAK: WOULD THEY GO BACK TO THE CITY'S REQUIRED SETBACKS OR WHAT IS VESTED NOW? {CAPTIION PERIOD} >>STEVEN EYSTER:: I BELIEVE WITH THE CONDITION ON THE RECORD BACK TO THE RM 24 WHICH IS 25 FRONT, SEVEN SIDES AND 20 REAR. >>LYNN HURTAK: I AM GOING TO ASK MR. COULD THETON. THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN VESTED THOUGH. CAN YOU TALK TO ME ABOUT THE VESTING OF THE BUILDING VERSES THE VESTING OF SETBACKS. FROM MY UNDERSTANDING WHEN I WAS ON THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD, ONCE YOU VEST A BUILDING, YOU ARE VESTING THE SETBACKS. >>ERIC COTTON: SO ERIC COTTON, DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION. THE QUESTION IS -- THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS THE VARIANCE -- THE ORIGINAL WAS FOR A FORMAL DECISION THAT WAS MADE FOR BOTH THE NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE AS IT SITS TODAY BEFORE ANYTHING WAS -- WAS CONSIDERED BY THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD AND A NONCONFORMING USE WHICH IS THE NUMBER OF UNITS. THE FDN. THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS. THE BUILDING AS IT SITS RIGHT NOW IS A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE. THAT CAN REMAIN LIKE THAT FOREVER, SO TO SPEAK. ALWAYS REMAIN AS A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T SUFFER DAMAGE UP TO 75% AND WHATEVER ELSE IS IN THE COULD HE HAD FOR THAT. WHAT THE APPLICANT CAME TO DO WAS TO RAISE THE BUILDING UP. THAT IS NO LONGER GRANDFATHERED IN OR A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE, BECAUSE THE STRUCTURE ITSELF IS CHANGING TO THE HIEIGHT THAT IS WHY THEY NEED TO ASK FOR THE VARIANCE FOR THE SETBACKS. BECAUSE THE STRUCTURE IT. >> WAS CHANGING. WHEN THE VARIANCE WAS GRANTED BY THE VRB, THE STRUCTURE ITSELF WAS CONFORMING WITH THE REGULATIONS AT THAT MOMENT. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHAT IT IS SAYING IS THAT IT IS CONFORMING, AND, SAY, A HURRICANE OR AN EARTHQUAKE OR A BOLT OF LIGHTNING HIT, AND THE BUILDING IS DESTROYED. THEY COULD BUILD IT BACK TO THE CURRENT VESTED SETBACKS OF ONE FOOT? >>ERIC COTTON: WELL, NO, IN THAT CONDITION THEY SELF-IMPOSED ON THEMSELVES THAT THE VRB ADOPTED SAID IF IT GOES AWAY WHICH MR. EYSTER JUST COMMENTED ON, IF THE BUILDING IS DESTROYED, THEY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE RM-24 STANDARDS. >>LYNN HURTAK: I AM ASKING ABOUT YOUR -- YOUR FORMAL DECISION? >>ERIC COTTON: THE ORIGINAL FORMAL DECISION, IF THAT BUILDING FELL DOWN TODAY, THEY HAVE TO PUT IT BACK TO THE RM-24 STANDARDS. BUT NOT -- >>LYNN HURTAK: I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. >>ERIC COTTON: NONCONFORMITIES GO AWAY AT THAT MOMENT. >>LYNN HURTAK: I THOUGHT THAT, BUT I WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU, SIR. MISS JOHNSON INVELEZ. NO, YOU ARE GOOD? ALL RIGHT, GO TO ITEM NUMBER 8 WHICH IS CROSS EXAMINATION BY THE APPLICANT, MR. MICHELINI OR THE REPRESENTATIVE, THE ATTORNEY. YES, SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CROSS-EXAMINE ANYONE? >> YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. COTTON A QUICK QUESTION TO CONFIRM HIS TESTIMONY THAT HE JUST PROVIDED. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: STATE YOUR NAME. >> BEN DACHAPELLI ABOUT THE BRADLEY BOLT LAW FIRM ON BEHALF THE APPLICANT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GO AHEAD, SIR. >> MR. COTTON, EARLIER YOU TESTIFIED THAT THE EXPANSION -- YOU HAD SAID THERE WAS NOT AN EXPANSION OF THE NONCONFORMITY SETBACK BASED ON THE VARIANCE, CORRECT? >>ERIC COTTON: YES, SIR. THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. >> OKAY. AND SO EVEN THOUGH -- EXPANSION OF THE NONCONFORMING SETBACK IS NOT ALLOWED AND THAT -- THAT IS THE CONDITION OF THE VARIANCE, CORRECT? >>ERIC COTTON: REPEAT -- I AM NOT SURE I UNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION JUST THEN. CAN YOU REPEAT THAT, PLEASE? >> YEAH. EARLIER YOU HAD TESTIFIED THERE WAS NOT AN EXPANSION OF THE NONCONFORMING SETBACK, CORRECT? >>ERIC COTTON: CORRECT. >> WITH THIS VARIANCE, CORRECT? >>ERIC COTTON: THE VARIANCE GRANTED A -- GRANTED REDUCTION OF SETBACKS TO MAKE THE STRUCTURE CONFORMING TO THE REQUIRED SETBACKS. >> OKAY. AND ALSO THE INTERIOR IS NOT CONSIDERED A PART OF THE EXPANSION OF THE FOOTPRINT, CORRECT? >> NO, I BELIEVE I SAID THAT THE FOOTPRINT WOULD NOT -- THE -- THE EXTENSION OF THE FOOTPRINT ON THE INTERIOR PART WOULD NOT AFFECT THE SETBACKS AS GRANTED BY THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARDS. >> CORRECT. SO THAT DOES NOT EXPAND THE NONCONFORMING SETBACK, CORRECT? >>ERIC COTTON: CORRECT, YES, SIR. >> THANK YOU. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. COTTON, THAT RAISES ANOTHER QUESTION FOR ME. SO THE INTERIOR DOESN'T COUNT. BUT BY LOOKING AT WHAT'S GOING TO BE LEFT OVER, TERE IS CONSIDERABLY OVER THE 50% PERMEABILITY SURFACE, CORRECT? >>ERIC COTTON: YES, MA'AM, AND THAT IS SOMETHING THEY DID NOT ASK FOR FROM THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD. THE BOARD HAS THE ABILITY TO GRANT A VARIANCE TO REQUIRE GREEN SPACE WHICH THEY WILL NOT MEET WITH THE CREATION OF THE NEW COURTYARD CONCEPT WHICH WILL BE CONCRETE. THEY HAVE TO DO THAT AND PREMITIGATION. THEY HAVE TO GO BACK BEFORE THE VRB TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES. >>LYNN HURTAK: OH, OKAY. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: MR. COTTON, WHAT ASK IS A HARDSHIP? IS A HARDSHIP SOMETHING YOU CREATE OR DONE BY NATURE. >>ERIC COTTON: I AM GOING TO TAKE A REALLY POLITICAL ANSWER AND SAY THE HARDSHIP IS DETERMINED BY THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD THROUGH THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD PROCESS. I -- WE ALL HAVE OUR OWN ANSWERS TO THAT QUESTION. I AM GLAD MISS JOHNSON-VELEZ IS UP THERE TO RESPOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES, MA'AM. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ, LEGAL DEPARTMENT. THE FLORIDA COURT HAS A SET ANSWER. VARIANCE IS A CHARACTERISTIC ON THE PROPERTY ITSELF THAT MAKES IT EITHER DIFFICULT TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY OR TO MAKE A REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY. SO HARDSHIP -- I KNOW WE USE THE DETERMINE "PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY." THEY ARE SOMEWHAT INTERCHANGEABLE. BUT DEALS WITH A PHYSICAL CONDITION ON THE PROPERTY. SO -- SO SOMEONE -- SOMEONE'S PERSONAL THING THAT IS PERSONAL TO AN APPLICANT OR A PROPERTY OWNER CANNOT JUSTIFY A HARDSHIP, BECAUSE THESE THIS RINGS THAT -- I BELIEVE COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK ALLUDED TO, THEY RUN WITH THE LAND. THOSE ARE THE RULES, THEY RUN WITH THE LAND. HERE IN THE STA CITY OF TAMPA, WE LIMIT THE VARIANCE APPROVALS TO A SITE PLAN. AND THAT MAKES THE SITE PLAN SO IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT DEFIFINES PARAMETER OF THE VARIANCE. IN ADDITION AND THE COROLLARY TO THE HARDSHIP IDEA, IT CAN'T BE SELF-CREATED. SOMETHING YOU NEED TO DO WITH A VARIANCE ARE THINGS YOU MAY CONSIDER WHETHER THEY ARE A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP BECAUSE THOSE DO NOT JUSTIFY THE GRANTING OF A VARIANCE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: YES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF NOT, WE WILL OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. IF YOU HAVE A SPEAKER WAIVER FORM, PASS IT ON TO OUR ATTORNEY. HE WILL READ OUT THE NAMES. YOU NEED TO BE PRESENT IF YOU ARE LISTED ON THAT FORM IN ORDER FOR THAT TIME TO COUNT. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MISS ZAMERMAN I SEE HAS SEVEN NAMES. LET ME FIND OUT WHO IS HERE. MISS McCASKILL. PAMELA COLPER. THANK YOU. SANDY SANCHEZ. THANK YOU. ADRIAN LARAMIE. THANK YOU. MARLA JAN LORENZO. THANK YOU. MICHELLE DIGIORI -- DID I SAY THAT CORRECTLY? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MICH MICHELLE DIGIONI? I DO NOT SEE MICHELLE HERE. LAST CALL? SPEAK UP, PLEASE, IF YOU WERE HERE. OKAY. FRAN SILCOX. FRAN SILCOX, ARE YOU HERE? LAST CALL FOR FRAN SILCOX. JAMES GARN ESA. ARE YOU HERE? OKAY, LAST CALL FOR FRAN FRFRAN SILCOX. WE HAVE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MARTHA JEAN LORENZO IS THERE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: MICHELLE AND FRAN. ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX NAMES FOR A TOTAL OF NINE MINU MINUTES. >> OKAY. IS IT TIME TO START? >>MARTIN SHELBY: WHEN YOU START. >> DEBBIE ZAMERMAN, 19 192 CORSICA. I HAVE BEEN WORN. A DAVIS ISLAND RESIDENT AND CHAIRMAN -- THE ZONING CHAIRPERSON OF DAVIS ISLANDS CIVIC ASSOCIATION. DID EVERYBODY GET THE HANDOUT AS SOON AS OKAY, THANK YOU. I WILL START WITH HOUSEKEEPING THINGS FIRST. WHAT I HAVE GOT HERE IS THAT -- IGNORE EVERYTHING REGARDING FEMA. IT IS JUST A SMOKESCREEN BECAUSE THIS LIFT SOMETHING SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING PARKING. NO FEMA REGULATIONS REQUIRING THIS CHANGE. THE ISSUES NOT SPECIFIC TO THIS PROPERTY. AND I WILL SHOW YOU AN EXAMPLE OF 45 DAVIS BOULEVARD, WHICH IS THE PALACE OF FLORENCE, WHICH IS -- THIS IS 16 DAVIS, 45 DAVIS BOULEVARD IS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY. ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. YOU LOOK AT THE WINDOWS AND VENTS, SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR HEIGHTS. AND LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR FINISHED FLOOR AND NO EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD THAT THIS SUBSTANTIALLY BUILDING NEEDS TO BE LIFTED.THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE TO BE ADDRESSED VIA THE VARIANCE. WITH REGARD TO THE FEMA REGULATIONS, I SEE DAVE JENNINGS IS IN THE AUDIENCE. AND HE DID SPEAK TO THAT. AND I HAVE GOT TRANSCRIPTS. IF THE TRANSCRIPTS WERE RECORDED CORRECTLY, HE CONCURRED NO FEMA REGULATIONS THAT WERE FIRING THIS LIFT. FEEL FREE TO HAVE HIM CORRECT ANYTHING I MISSTATED. HERE IS 45 DAVIS. YOU CAN LOOK AT THE WINDOWS HERE AND THE VENTING. AND IF GO BACK TO THE DAVIS SITE THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET, SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR IN HEIGHT. WIKIPEDIA PAGES, HISTORICAL LISTING AND THE REFERENCES. NEXT HOUSEKEEPING HEARING I WANT TO SAY AT THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD AND MANY COMMUNICATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THERE WAS -- THERE WAS COMMENTS MADE THAT STAFF, LAND DEVELOPMENT STAFF, WAS MAKING THEM DO IT THIS WAY. I WANT TO PUT IN THIS E-MAIL FROM ERIC COTTON, THIS IS NOT LAND DEVELOPMENT MAKING THEM DO IT THIS WAY. YOU CAN CHECK THAT OUT WITH ERIC, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING THIS WAS THE APPLICANT'S PREFERENCE, NOT A REQUIREMENT FROM STAFF. ON THIS ONE HERE THERE WAS A VERY GREAT VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD WORKSHOP. SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ HAS THE HANDOUT AS WELL AS STEVEN AND EXCELLENT PRESENTERS IN THAT MEETING. IN THAT HANDOUT, IT SAYS COMPETENT EVIDENCE. WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON COMPETENT EVIDENCE. FACT-BASED SYSTEM AT A WORKSHOP VARIANCE. AND THEN NONCOMPETENT EVIDENCE IS LAYPERSON OPINIONS. TO THE FINAL ONE. ATTORNEYS OPINIONS. ATTORNEYS ARED A VO AND NOT WITNESSES. THINGS PUT INTO THE RECORD TODAY BY THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY. BUT NO COMPREHENSIVE TINT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD. IT IS WHAT THEY ARE SAYING AND WHAT THEIR OPINIONS ARE. I DON'T THINK I NEED TO GREATLY GO INTO THE FACT THAT THE CODE DOES NOT MEET THE VARIANCE CRITERIA. WHAT I CAN SAY IS THAT I DO HAVE THE TRANSCRIPTS FROM THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD MEETING WHEN THEY HELD THE WORK. SHOP. I GOT IT RIGHT HERE. I WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PULL OUT ANY COMMENTS FROM HERE IF YOU WOULD LIKE, BUT THE EXAMPLE THAT MR. STANLEY USED WHEN YOU BOO IG A HOUSE AND NOT A GARAGE. IF YOU NEED A GARAGE, YOU SHOULD HAVE EITHER BOUGHT A HOUSE WITH A GARAGE OR SOMETHING -- A HOUSE THAT HAD ROOM FOR A GARAGE. THOSE WERE COMMENTS TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM WHAT MISS SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ SAID. AND I WOULD ASK HER TO GO ASK YOU -- ASK HER, YOU KNOW, DOES THIS MEET THE CRITERIA OF A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP. THAT EXAMPLE I JUST GAVE. SHE SAID IN THE WORKSHOP THAT DOES NOT COUNT AS A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP. WE ABSOLUTELY THINK THAT -- YOU KNOW, THEY KNEW WHAT THEY WERE BUYING. THEY BOUGHT THE LAND. THEY BOUGHT THE PROPERTY. 22 UNITS ON THE SITE. I BELIEVE THE SITE CAN ONLY HOLD SEVEN UNITS. LIKE A RS-75 OCCUPANCY USE ON A RM-24 SITE WITH NO PARKING. ABSOLUTELY I BELIEVE THIS IS A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP. FROM ALL THE OTHER COMMENTS THERE ARE DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE VARIANCE. WE GET INTO THE NONCONFORMITY SECTION. AS RESIDENTS, THESE ARE PROTECTIONS WE HAVE IN THE CODE. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO RELY ON THIS. AND YOU KNOW, IT DOES NOT MEET THE NONCONFORMING SECTION AND I WILL READ RIGHT NOW, A NONCONFORMING USE MAY NOT BE IN LARGE EXTENDED AND INTENSIFIED EXCEPT FOR A CHANGE TO A USE IN THE DIRECT -- IN THE DISTRICT OF WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BELOW. A NONCONFORMING USE SHALL NOT BE EXTENDED THROUGH PORTIONS OF A BUILDING MANIFESTLY ARRANGED. AND A NONCONFORMING USE CANNOT EXTEND TO OCCUPY LAND OUTSIDE SUCH BUILDING AND ANY ADDITIONAL BUILDING NOT USED FOR SUCH NONCONFORMING USE AT THE TIME THE NONCONFORMING STATUS WAS ESTABLISHED. WE THINK IT IS CRYSTAL CLEAR YOU CAN'T EXTEND THIS USE INTO THE BUILDING AND THE BUILDING CAN'T GET ANY BIGGER. AND I HAVE IN THE RECORD IN THE NONCONFORMING SECTIONS. I CAN GO BACK OVER HERE. I HIGHLIGHTED NOTES THROUGH THE NONCONFORMING SECTIONS WHERE WE THINK THIS IS IN VIOLATION THE NONCONFORMING SECTIONS, AND, THEREFORE, IT DOES NOT PROTECT OUR INTERESTS AT ALL. IT ACTUALLY DENIES US OUR RIGHTS UNDER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. NOW THIS IS REALLY INTERESTING. THIS IS ALL FOR PRESERVATION, RIGHT. SO WHAT I DID -- AND THE NEXT SECTION -- AND I BELIEVE COUNCILPERSON HURTAK, THIS WILL ADDRESS SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS. I PUT IN THERE WHEN THEY BOUGHT IT. THIS PROPERTY HAS WORKED FINE UNTIL THIS OWNER BOUGHT IT. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE ACROSS FROM THERE. I HAVE BEEN ON THE ISLAND OVER 20 YEARS, IT WAS OCCUPIED. I WINTER TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S RECORDS AND IN MAY OF 2022, IT LISTED THAT THE PROPERTY WAS 96% OCCUPIED. IT APPEARS THAT REASONABLE USE IS NOT AN ISSUE I STARTED COLOR CODING THINGS TO SHOW WHAT IS GOING TO CHANGE AND SORRY MY ARTWORK IS NOT VERY GOOD LOOKS AT A FIRST-GRADER -- I AM NOT AS GOOD AS A FIRST-GRADER. EVERYTHING IN GREEN ARE THINGS THAT ARE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES. IF YOU LOOK ON THIS SITE RIGHT HERE, YOU GOT SIGNIFICANT MASS DOWN HERE THAT WILL BE RIGHT UP AGAINST THE STREET. AND ALL THOSE Xs, THOSE ARE WINDOWS THAT WILL BE GONE. WE ARE NOT SURE IT WILL MEET HISTORIC PRESERVATION STANDARDS. OVER HERE, AGAIN LOOK AT ALL THE WINDOWS, LOSING A WINDOW FROM A DOUBLE WINDOW ON THEIR SITE PLAN. I WENT TO THEIR SITE PLAN AND COPIED OUT WHERE IT SAID A WINDOW WILL BE BLOCKED HERE IS THE FRONT COURTYARD WILL HAVE THIS WHOLE HUGE CONTEMPORARY LOOKING ELEVATOR AND THEN WHERE I MARKED EVERYTHING UP ON THE INDIVIDUAL PARTS OF THE PLAN. BUT IF YOU COME OVER HERE AND LOOK AT THIS. IF YOU LOOK ON THESE PAGES, YOU CAN SEE -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: UPSIDE DOWN. >> IT HAS ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED THAT THE FOOTPRINT WILL GO FURTHER OUT TO THE STREET. LOOK AT THAT GLASS ENCLOSURE. APPEARS TO BE GLASS ENCLOSURE. I DON'T KNOW THAT FOR SURE, BUT COMPARE THAT CIRCLE TO WHAT IS RIGHT ABOVE. LOOK HERE WHERE YOU GOT THE -- THREE OR FOUR WINDOWS WITH THE SMALL ROOF DOWN THERE. THAT IS BEING EXPANDED. THEY ARE MAKE A LOT OF CHANGES THIS RIGHT HERE WILL SMELL YOU WHERE WINDOWS ARE BEING XED OUT. WE DON'T KNOW IT WILL BE HISTORIC OR ANY REQUIREMENT IT WILL REMAIN HISTORIC AFTER THIS IS DONE. WE THINK THIS IS A HUGE ISSUE SAND VERY PROBLEMATIC THEN HOUSING AFFORDABILITY. I THINK YOU ALTHOUGH I HAVE BEEN IN THE AREA HOUSING FINANCE FOR 30 YEARS. I AM A MUNICIPAL FINANCIAL ADVISOR FOR A LARGE COUNTY IN THE STATE STATE OF FLORIDA. I HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR THEM OVER 40 YEARS. AND BEFORE THAT, I WORKED WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS. TAMPA GENERAL HOSPITAL IS 3/10 OF A MILE FROM THIS SITE. WE HAVE GOT A HUGE, HUGE TENANT BASE SAY ACED FORABLE HOUSING CRISIS FOR TAMPA GENERAL TO BUILD ITS OWN. IT SEEMS LIKE AND HAVE HOUSING THAT IS AVAILABLE FOR RESIDENTS THAT ARE LESS CARD DEPENDENT IN A NORMAL COMMUNITY. MAY I HAVE ONE MORE MINUTE PLEASE? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: NO. >> THANK YOU MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WHO IS NEXT? BATTER UP. >>MARTIN SHELBY: SHE COMPLETED HER TIME. THIS WASN'T SUBMITTED TO ME AT THE START OF THE HEARING. IS THAT A NAME THAT WASN'T CALLED? >> I DON'T -- >>MARTIN SHELBY: WHOSE NAME IS THAT? >> LINDA TISCNER. >>MARTIN SHELBY: LINDA TISCHNER IS NOT ON THE ORIGINAL LIST WHEN I GAVE THE NAMES. >> WHO DO YOU HAVE ON THE ORIGINAL LIST MR. SHELBY THAT WAS HANDED THAT YOU READ OFF OF. THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL LIST. WHERE DID THE NEW 35I7ER COME F FROM. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT IS NOT HOW IT WORKS. >> I WILL RESPECT THE BOARD. I WILL CONVEY MY POINTS. >>MARTIN SHELBY: I AM NOT ACCEPTING IT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WHO IS THE NEXT SPEAKER. >> LINDA TISCHMAN IS HERE. HELLO. THANK YOU. HARUN ILIAS. AND ALISON DATE. MISS BENNETT HAVE THREE ADDITIONAL MINUTES FOR SIX MINUTES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. STATE YOUR NAME. >> HI, CARROLL ANN BENNETT A LIFE-LONG TAMPA RESIDENT. I DID NOT THINK THIS IS PROPERLY A VARIANCE. PERHAPS IT SHOULD BE A REZONING, I DON'T KNOW. BUT STAFF DID NOT CONSIDER MANY IMPORTANT CODE REQUIREMENTS. AND THE VRB SPECIFICALLY SAID THEY COULD NOT CONSIDER MANY IMPORTANT CODE REQUIREMENTS SUCH AS TREE RETENTION, GREEN SPACE AND THE ALLOWED OF PERVIOUS SERVICE. THIS BEAUTIFUL TREE WILL BE DESTROYED AND NO ROOM FOR TREE MITI MITIGATION. MORE MONEY WILL BE ADDED TO THE TREE TRUST FUND THAT THE CITY CAN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO SPEND AND NOT RESULTING IN MORE TREES. A SO-CALLED GREEN ROOF THAT THEY SAY THEY ARE GOING TO DO DOES NOT SATISFY CODE REQUIREMENTS AND NOT PERMEABLE. SAID THAT THESE AND OTHER ISSUE ALSO BE MAGICALLY RESOLVED AT PERMITTING. MY GUESS IS THEY WILL BE RESOLVED WHEN THIS BUILDING WILL BE DAMAGED WHEN THEY TRY TO LIFT IT AND BUILD A NEW BUILDING WITH ONE-FOOT SETBACKS. BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAY, VARIANCES RUN WITH THE LAND, AND A FUTURE OWNER COULD CONTEST ANY RESTRICTIONS THAT CONFLICT TO ESTABLISHED VARIANCE LAW AND PRACTICE. IF A FUTURE OWNER SUES THE CITY OVER THIS, WILL THE CITY CHOOSE TO SPEND TIME AND RESOURCES IN A COURT OF LAW? DO WE WANT OUR TIME AND RESOURCES SPENT THIS WAY WHEN YOU CAN JUST DENY THE IMPROPER ILLEGAL VARIANCE. A LOT OF MONEY TO BE MADE IF THEY GET A ONE-FOOT SETBACK. SO A SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL INCENTIVE FOR FUTURE OWNER TO FIGHT FOR THE NORMAL LEGAL PRACTICE THAT VARIANCES RUN WITH THE LAND. I DON'T KNOW THE RATING OF THE CURRENT OAK TREE AND THE COURT ADD, EVEN IF MOORE CONDITION, ROOM TO PLAN A NEW LIVE OAK THAT CAN HAPPEN IF YOU APPROVE THE VARIANCE. A LOVELY PERMEABLE SERVICE THAT MITT GATES FLOODING THIS LAND WILL BE TREELESS. A CRAWLSPACE UNDER THE WHERE THAT WATER WITH FLOW AND BEST PRACTICES FOR FLOODING. THEY OFFER FLOODING DISCOUNTS. I KNOW THIS FOR A FACT BECAUSE I GET THE DISCOUNT ON MY HOME. THAT SURFACE IS 100% PERMEABLE. IF THIS PERMIT IS APPROVED, IT WILL BE 100% IMPERMEABLE. ADDITIONAL PERMITS FOR PERVIOUS AND GREEN SPACE. VARIANCE REQUIRES THEM TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF CHAPTER 27, NOT JUST SOME OF CHAPTER 27. 27-292 SAYS THE INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER THAT NONCONFORMITY WILL NOT BE USED AS GROUNDS FOR ADDITION OF STRUCTURES OR ENLARGING OF EXPANSION EXPANSION. NOT COMPLYING WITH 27-292. THEY ARE EN LAUNCHING THE BUILDING BY TURNING A GRASS COURTYARD INTO A GARAGE THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE VESTED FOOTPRINT AND NOT REQUESTED A VARIANCE FOR 27-292. IN ADDITION, THEY WILL HAVE TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL VARIANCE FOR PERSONALIOUS SERVICES AND GREEN SPACES AND HAVE NOT REQUESTED THOSE. THEY WILL HAVE TO REQUEST ALL OF THE VARIANCES OF ONE TIME. FLORIDA LAW IS CLEAR. THAT A MERE ECONOMIC DAMAGE OR THE OWNER'S MERE PRESENCE IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO CONSTITUTE A HARDSHIP EN TITLING THE OWNER TO A VARIANCE. A HARDSHIP IS WHERE THE PROPERTY IS VIRTUALLY UNUSABLE OR INCAPABLE OF YIELDING REASONABLE RETURN AND HARDSHIP NEWS BE UNRELATED TO THE EXPECTATIONS OF THEIR OWNERS. THEY BOUGHT THIS IN 2022. THESE APARTMENTS ARE CURRENTLY YIELDING A REASONABLE RETURN AND SERVE A WONDERFUL PURPOSE. THEY ARE PERFECT FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT A CAR. THE CITY IS UNPRESSURE FOR A LOT PRESSURE TO REDUCE PARKING BECAUSE WE NEED MORE PEOPLE WITH CAR-FREE OR CAR-REDUCED LIFESTYLE. THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX IS REASONABLY SUCCESSFUL AND HAVE REASONABLE USE. I WOULD ARGUE MORE THAN REASONABLE USE BECAUSE ALLOW A MUCH GREATER DENSITY AND MORE UNITS THAN THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED BY A CONFORMING STRUCTURE. THEY HAVE REASONABLE USE. WHAT THEY DON'T HAVE IS EXTRA PROFIT BY HAVING UNITS WITH THE AMENITY OF A GARAGE OR THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF AN APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH A ONE-FOOT SETBACK IF THIS BUILDING IS ACCIDENTALLY DESTROYED. THEY WANT A GARAGE TO MAKE MORE MONEY. THAT IS NOT LEGAL HARDSHIP. VARIANCE LAW IS CLEAR. WANT AGAR RAJ IS NOT A HARDSHIP, EVEN IF YOU LIKE THE PROJECT. IT MUST NOT BE APPROVED BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MEET THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR A VARIANCE. PLEASE APPROVE THE APPEAL AND DENY THE VARIANCE. THANK YOU. AND I AM GOING TO SUBMIT THIS FOR THE RECORD. MY CITATIONS AND THE SOURCE OF MY CITATIONS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WHO IS NEXT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? YES, MA'AM. DO OFF SPEAKER WAIVER FORM AS WELL? >> PARDON? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: DO YOU HAVE A SPEAKER WAIVER FORM AS WELL? >> NO. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: OKAY. COME ON UP AND STATE YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. >> GOOD AFTERNOON LORR LORRAINE PERRINO. I LIVED ON DAVIS ISLAND SINCE 1977. I CHAIR THE DAVIS ISLAND SAVE ASSOCIATION TREE PROTECTION AND RESTORATION COMMITTEE. SINCE 2016, I CHAIRED THAT. I REALLY CAME HERE TO DONATE SOME MINUTES, BUT SINCE SHE DIDN'T NEED ANY, I AM GOING TO SPEAK KIND OF IMPROMPTU. MY MAIN CONCERN IS THAT -- I LOOK AT THAT BEAUTIFUL BUILDING WHEN I COME ON TO THE ISLAND EVERY TIME I LEAVE IT. AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT PRESERVED THE WAY IT IS. MR. STANLEY -- ANOTHER CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT MR. STANLEY STATED THAT THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS CORNER. IF YOU HAVE EVER BEEN TO THE WEST SIDE OF DAVIS BOULEVARD TRYING TO TURN LEFT, YOU KNOW, TO EXIT THE ISLAND, YOU WILL SEE HOW DANGEROUS AND DIFFICULT IT IS. I WOULD NEVER WANT TO LIVE ON THAT SIDE OF THE -- OF DAVIS BOULEVARD BECAUSE I WOULDN'T WANT TO BE TURNING LEFT. AND RIGHT THERE IS -- WHERE THIS BUILDING IS LOCATED IS WHERE THE CARS ARE COMING ON TO DAVIS ISLAND ALL THE TIME. SO I IMAGINE ADDING 22 OR 40 EXTRA SPACES AND ALL THOSE PEOPLE TRYING TO TURN LEFT WHILE OTHER PEOPLE ARE COMING ON TO THE ISLAND. AND I THINK ESPECIALLY IN PEAK-HOUR TRAFFIC TIMES AND IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY EVACUATION. IT WOULD BE A REAL PROBLEM. AS FAR AS I KNOW, ALMOST NONE OF THE BEAUTIFUL HISTORIC MEDITERRANEAN-STYLE BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED ON DAVIS ISLAND CONSTRUCTED IN THE 1920s ARE HISTORIC PRESERVATION FORCALLY PRESERVED AND WE LOST TOO MANY OF THEM ALREADY. EVEN D.P. DAVIS'S HOME THAT WAS BUILT -- WHEN DAVIS ISLAND WAS CONSTRUCTED, IT IS KIMBERLEE CURTIS RECENTLY UP FOR SALE AND THEORETICALLY WHOEVER BUY IT IS CAN TEAR IT DOWN. WE NODE TO SAVE OUR HISTORIC BUILDINGS WHENEVER HE THE OPPORTUNITY TO. THIS BEAUTIFUL BUILDING WAS FULLY OCCUPIED BEFORE IT WAS PURCHASED IN 1921. DAVIS ISLAND THIS YEAR IS CELEBRATING ITS 100-YEAR ANNIVERSARY. AND THE DAVIS ISLAND CIVIC ASSOCIATION OPPOSED THIS VARIANCE. AS A THIRD GENERATION TAMPA RESIDENT WHO SEEN TAMPA LOSE MUCH TOO MUCH OF THE XHARM AND AMBIENCE THAT I GREW UP TO NEW CONSTRUCTION, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS 100-YEAR-OLD BUILDING PRESERVED FOR FUTURE USE. AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT RETURNED TO ITS FORMER USE. FOR ALL THE REASONS STATED ABOVE AND FOR THE CONTINUED BEAUTIFUL, AMBIENCE AND THE SAFETY OF DAVIS ISLAND, PLEASE APPROVE THE APPEAL AND DENY THE VARIANCE. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MA'AM. NEXT SPEAKER. A SPEAKER WAIVER FORM. >>MARTIN SHELBY: HOLD ON A SECOND. CATHERINE HERE. ONE ADDITIONAL MINUTE. FOUR MINUTES. >> MIR IAN HANLIN. MY FAMILY OWNS THE BUILDING RIGHT BEHIND 16 DAVIS AT 20 DAVIS BOULEVARD. I JUST WANT TO HIT ON SOME POINTS. I WILL READ REAL FAST. WE HAVE 20 RESIDENTS LIVING AT 20 DAVIS WHICH IS DIRECTLY BEHIND VILLA DeLEON. OUR BUILDING STAYS 100% OCCUPIED TEN UNIT, TWO BEDROOM, TWO BATH UNIT. OUR BUILDING HAS NEVER FLOODED SINCE 1963. WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN A RENTAL BUILDING SINCE NEXT TO THE BUILDING. WE HAVE PLUMING THAT GOES STRAIGHT DOWN THE -- IN BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS RIGHT THERE WHICH I AM CONCERNED. AT THE LAST MEETING THE CITY CONSULTANT SAID VY VY PRAYING DUE TO THE LIFTING PROCESS. HOW LONG WILL THE PROCESS BE? THE DEVELOPER GUARANTEE US THE POSSIBLE LOSS OF INCOME, DAMAGE TO OUR BUILDING AND OUR RESIDENTS' SAFETY? HOW WILL THEY GUARANTEE THIS? HE SAID HE HAS INSURANCE FOR THIS. BUT, YOU KNOW, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING YET. I WANT TO GUARANTEE THAT MY RESIDENTS WILL BE SAFE AND GUARANTEED DURING THIS PROCESS. WILL THE DEVELOPER PUT SOMETHING BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS? YOU KNOW, I AM JUST NERVOUS -- THIS BUILDING IS JACKED UP ON THESE JACKS, WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN? I AM RIGHT THERE. I AM JUST EXTREMELY NERVOUS OF THE SITUATION. I DO NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE UNLESS GIVEN WRITTEN GUARANTEES AND ASSURANCES AND WRITING FROM THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER THAT THE DRAINAGE, SAFETY OF MY RESIDENTS AND BUILDING WILL BE PROTECTED. I REALLY THINK CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS NEED TO BE IN PLACE BEFORE SOMETHING OF THIS MAGNITUDE IS ALLOWED. I AM JUST -- YOU KNOW, I JUST FEEL THAT -- HE IS PUTTING HIS NEIGHBORS AT RISK. AND CREATING THE HARDSHIP ON US NOW. HE SAYS IT IS DUE TO FLOODING, BUT I NEVER HAD ONE APARTMENT FLOOD SINCE WE BUILT THE BUILDING. ALSO WITH THE CEMENT GARAGE, HOW IS HE DOING THE VENTILATION? I HAVE BACK DOORS. I HAVE WINDOWS. IS EXHAUST GOING TO BE COME ING INTO TO MY BUILDING? I NEED HELP AND MAKE SURE THAT MY PROPERTY IS PROTECTED. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: NEXT SPEAKER. >> I WAS NOT SWORN IN. I AM SORRY. I WAS LOOKING FOR PARKING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT IS ALL RIGHT. IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN SWORN IN AND YOU ARE SPEAKING, PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND WE WILL SWEAR YOU IN. >> I DO. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: STATE YOUR NAME. >> LINDA MEISNER AT 55 ADALIA. I LIVED ON ADALIA FOR EVERY 30 YEARS. I OWN MULTIPLE PROPERTIES IN SOUTH TAMPA AND DAVIS ISLAND AND I OWN A 100-YEAR-OLD STRUCTURE. I WENT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING WITH MR. LESS ISSINGBERG. I WANT TO QUOTE HIS EXACT WORDS WHEN WE ASKED HIM WHY HE NEEDED THIS VARIANCE. HE SAID IF SOMETHING HAPPENS, I WANT THE RIGHT TO BUILD IT BACK. HIS EXACT WORDS. SO LET'S NOT PRETEND THAT THEY WON'T TRY TO KEEP THIS VARIANCE IF SOMETHING HAPPENS TO THAT BUILDING. IF A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE IS DAMAGED THEY WANT THE RIGHT TO BUILD IT BACK. THEY WANT TO MAINTAIN THE ONE-FOOT SIDE SETBACKS AND WANT TO MAINTAIN THIS DENSITY. OKAY, THAT IS GREAT. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO AT THE EXPENSE OF THE STREET AND THE NEIGHBORS AND THE FLOODING AND THE PERMEABLE LAND THAT IS JUST KIND OF RIDICULOUS. BEN SAID HE HAVEN'T HEARD A SINGLE NEIGHBOR SPEAK AGAINST THE PARKING. THE THIRD TIME HE HEARD ME SPEAK AND I HAVE TWO LETTERS ON RECORD WITH THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD AS A NEIGHBOR I AM AGAINST THIS PARKING STRUCTURE. SO I KNOW HE HAS HEARD NEIGHBORS SPEAK AGAINST THIS PARK. OKAY, SO I AM STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD APPROVED THE VARIANCE. I WAS AT THAT MEETING. I SPOKE AT THAT MEETING. I SAW THEM HAND A NEW SITE PLAN OVER IN THE MEETING. AND IN THE MEETING WITHOUT EVERYBODY REVIEWING IT FROM THE CITY. WITHOUT EVERYBODY LOOKING AT IT WITHOUT THE VRB SAYING IT WAS DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE IN THE APPLICATION. THEY VOTED ON IT AND IMPROVED IT. HOW DO THEY DO THAT? AGAINST THEIR OWN RULES AND REGULATIONS. THEY VOTED ON A SITE PLAN HANDED TO THEM IN THE MEETING. THAT RIGHT THERE SHOULD TELL US ALL IT SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN APPROVED. OKAY, SO THEN, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE HARDSHIP. THEY -- I HEARD THEM SAY FEMA IS MAKING THEM DO IT. THE INSURANCE IS MAKING THEM DO IT. IT FLOODS. KNOW WHAT? IT DOESN'T FLOOD. THEY DO NOTHING TO PROTECT THE PROPERTY HONESTLY, BUT FEMA IS NOT MAKING THEM DO THIS. THIS IS A SELF-IMPOSED HARDSHIP. THEY WANT MORE PARKING. THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO RENT THOSE APARTMENTS FOR MORE THAN WHAT THEY ARE RENTING THEM FOR. THEY WANT MORE PARKING. THEY HAVE NO PARKING SPACES. THEY HAVE NO PROPERTY. THEY BOUGHT THE LAND NEXT DOOR AND THEY PUT SHELVES ON IT AND TRIED TO USE IT AS PARKING AND GOT IN TROUBLE FOR THAT. SO THEY DO NOT NEED THIS. TO SAY THEY ARE NOT CHANGING THE FOOTPRINT HAVE WRONG. THEY HAVE A HORSE SHOE, TREES AND GRASS AND PERMEABLE LAND AND CLOSE THAT HORSE SHOE AND PUT A PARKING STRUCK UNDER IT THAT IS FULLY CEMENT AND CLOSED. CHANGING THE FOOTPRINT CAUSING ADDITIONAL FLOODING AT AN ALREADY DANGEROUS INTERSECTION. THEY WILL ADD MORE CARS. AS A NEIGHBOR, WE DON'T WANT THIS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: NEXT SPEAKER. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. YES, MA'AM. >> MY NAME IS PG&E DAVIS. BLANCA AVENUE ON DAVIS ISLAND AND I HAVE BEEN SWORN IN. MY CONCERN IS THAT THIS -- THE NONCONFORMING LANGUAGE APPLIES TO THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE. AND ALL THE DIAGRAMS WE SAW FROM PREVIOUS LISTS DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING UNDERNEATH WHEN THEY LIFTED UP HISTORIC STRUCTURE. SO BASICALLY TWO DIFFERENT STRUCTURES GOING ON HERE. THE NONCONFORMING THAT IS BEING LIFTED. AND THEN A NEW PARKING GARAGE THAT GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE LIMITS OF THE LOTS WHEN YOU DO THAT, ONE OF THE THINGS THEY DIDN'T CONSIDER AT THE HAVE,RB MEETING, THE PUBLIC WELFARE OF THE STREET AND DRAINAGE WHEN YOU TAKE A CONCRETE STRUCTURE WITHOUT BREAKAWAY WALLS WHICH ARE REQUIRED. YOU CAN TAKING ALL THAT CONCRETE AND PUTTING IT ON DAVIS BOULEVARD. RIGHT THERE ON DAVIS BOULEVARD, ONE OF THE LOWEST MANHOLES IN THE WHOLE ISLAND. 5,000 PEOPLE, THEIR WELFARE HAS TO GET ON AND OFF THE DAVIS ISLAND AND INTO PROVISION BECAUSE OF THIS SETBACK -- THAT THE -- THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD'S DECISION TO ALLOW EXISTING SETBACKS TO STAND IN ONE FOOT ALL AROUND. NO ROOM FOR RECESSION, DETENTION OF THIS NEW STRUCTURE WHICH IS THE PARKING GARAGE. AND I THINK THAT WAS NOT CONSIDERED AND IT SHOULD BE. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, MA'AM. >> THAT IS ANOTHER GIFT FROM MY FRIEND, DEBBIE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A SPEAKER WAIVER FORM? >> NO, I DON'T HAVE ONE. I DON'T NEED ONE. STEPHANIE POYNOR. YOU KNOW THIS HARDSHIP IS SELF-CREATED. THIS IS A NEW TERM "DEMOLITION BY VARIANCE." LET'S GET A VARIANCE IF WE TEAR THE BUILDING DOWN BY ACCIDENT, WE BUILD WHATEVER THE HELL WE WANT. THAT IS WHAT IS GOING ON HERE. I HAVE TO AGREE WITH LINDA THAT -- WHO IS ONE OF MY FRIENDS -- AND I HAVE TO AGREE WITH HER. THIS IS ALL ABOUT BUILDING BACK. IT IS NOT ABOUT WHAT IS THERE NOW. I WOULD OFFER TO YOU THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE. SO THEY GO TO PUT THIS BUILDING UP ON JACKS TO BUILD THIS. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. WE ARE GOING FROM -- REMEMBER THIS HAS A CRAWLSPACE UNDER IT AND A COURTYARD. SO THIS IS COMPLETELY PERVIOUS AT THIS POINT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE OUTSIDE -- THE OUTSIDE STRUCTURES IN THE -- IN THE PYLONS THAT KEEP IT OFF THE GROUND. I HAVE GOT NEWS FOR YOU AS SOMEBODY THAT OWNS PROPERTY, THIS IS -- I JUST LOOKED IT UP ON THE FEMA MAP, IT IS IN THE A-E FLOOD ZONE. LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING, IF EVERYBODY IN THE A-E FLOOD ZONE HAD TO JACK THEIR BUILDING UP AND PUT THEIR HOUSE HIGHER, WE WOULD BE SOME BROKE FOLKS IN TAMPA THAT IS A CROCK OF CRAP THAT FEMA IS MAKING THEM DO ANYTHING. DON'T LET THEM PEE ON YOUR LEG AND LET YOU TELL YOU IT IS RAINING. STORMWATER. I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR HOW THIS WILL IMPACT STORMWATER BUT WE DON'T GET TO AT THIS PHASE. AND I AM GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT WE HAVE GOT GOING ON HERE AND THIS IS MY FAVORITE. WE ARE JUST TRYING TO RAISE THIS BUILDING BY RAISING IT. THAT'S ALL THIS IS. THE BIGGEST JOKE. WE GOT THE -- NEXT DOOR THEY WANTED TO BUILD AN ELEVATOR PARKING GARAGE THING. THAT DIDN'T FLY. THEN THEY COME UP WITH THIS. I MEAN IT IS LIKE, LOOK, YOU BOUGHT SOMETHING. SUCK IT UP, BUTTER CUP. THIS IS JUST GETTING TO THE.WHERE IT IS ABSOLUTELY ABSURD. THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, KEEP THROWING IT AT THE WALL AND SEE WHAT STICKS. A POT OF SPAGHETTI AND THROW TO THE FALL AND SEE WHAT STICKS. THIS IS CRAP. CRAP BEFORE IT WENT BEFORE THE VARIANCE BOARD AND THE LEGITIMATE REASONS THAT MY FRIENDS CAME UP TO TELL YOU. I AM TELLING YOU THE REAL DEAL. A CRAPPY PLAN. A DANGEROUS PLAN. WHAT ABOUT THOSE FOLKS THAT LIVE DIRECTLY NEXT DOOR. SO THEY GET THIS BUILDING UP HERE AND SOMETHING HAPPENS AND FALLS DOWN ON THEIR APARTMENT BUILDING AND THEY ARE DEAD. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO FEEL ABOUT IT THEN? THAT IS A SAFETY ISSUE. ONE FOOT AWAY FROM THAT OTHER BUILDING. WHAT HAPPENS THEN? WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING IN PRESIDENT APARTMENTS NEXT DOOR? WHAT HAPPENS TO THE CAR THAT ARE DRIVING ON AND OFF DAVIS ISLAND WHILE THEY HAVE THE BUILDING JACKED UP. I AM SORRY, I SAW TO THAT CONDO. IT WAS A HELL OF A LOT MORE STRUCTURALLY COMPETENT THAN JACKING SOMETHING UP THAN PUTTING SOMETHING UNDERNEATH IT. LET'S NOT TALK STUPID AND LET THEM RAZE BY RAISING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT SPEAKER. IF YOU WERE GOING TO SPEAK AND ABLE TO, LINE UP AGAINST THE WALL SO WE CAN GET A NUMBER. GIVE YOUR NAME. >> JILL SOLOMON. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES, MA'AM, GO AHEAD. >> YES, OKAY, THANK YOU. I WAS AT THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD BECAUSE MY HUSBAND AND I HAD APPLIED FOR A VARIANCE OF OUR OWN. SO I SAT THROUGH THAT TWO-HOUR MEETING. AND WHAT I HEARD THE VARIANCE BOARD SAY WAS, I HEARD -- AT THAT MEETING, I HEARD A LOT OF COMPLAINTS THAT I HAVE HEARD TONIGHT OR THERE ARE AFTERNOON. BUT THE VARIANCE BOARD REPEATEDLY SAID WE CAN ONLY RULE ON THE OUTSIDE FOOT -- SETBACK. WITH THE CURRENT BUILDING IS, THEY ARE NOT -- WHATEVER THAT -- THE NUMBERS ARE, THE ONE-FOOT AND THE TWO-FOOT AND ALL THAT ALREADY THAT IS WHERE IT IS. AND THAT IS THE ONLY THING WE CAN RULE ON. WE CAN NOT RULE ON TREES, IMPERMEABLE SURFACE OR ANY OF THE OTHER CONCERNS YOU HAVE. THIS IS THE ONLY THING THIS BOARD CAN DO. SO I WANTED TO COME STATE THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS WHERE THE ISSUE LIES. RIGHT. SO I AM A DAVIS ISLAND RESIDENT. I LIVED ON DAVIS ISLAND SINCE 1987. IF WE ARE GOING TO GO OFF TOPIC WHERE THE SETBACKS ARE, I WOULD JUST SAY AS I SAT THROUGH THAT PRESENTATION, I, FOR ONE, THOUGHT THAT WHAT THEY WOULD TO DO THIS BUILDING WOULD MAYBE BE MUCH BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE. AS FAR AS THE PARKING, I DON'T THINK THAT 2 PEOPLE OR 22 UNITS HAS ZERO CARS. SO THEY HAVE TO BE PARKING ON THE STREET. SO I THINK CONTAINING THAT PARKING WITHIN THE BUILDING WOULD BE A REALLY GOOD IDEA. BUT EVEN MORE THAN ADDING PARKING, I THINK JUST REENFORCING THE STRUCTURE AND MAKING IT VERY SAFE FOR 100 -- 99-AND-A-HALF-YEAR STRUCTURE. BETTER FOR THE ISLAND TO BE REINFORCED AND BECOME A SAFER PLACE. JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THE VARIANCE BOARD SAID THIS IS WHAT WE DO. WE DO NOT DO ALL THESE OTHER THINGS. SO I AM FOR IT. BUT I THINK THEY MET THEIR REQUIREMENTS. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYBODY ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS? ALL RIGHT. ANY -- YES? >>MARTIN SHELBY: MARTIN SHELBY, CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY. FOR PURPOSES OF A COMPLETE RECORD. IF ANY YOU HAVE ADDED ANY VERBAL EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, WILL YOU PLEASE -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: NO VERBAL. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THEY WERE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. ANY VERBAL FOR THE RECORD? I SEE NO RESPONSE. I SEE NONE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY ADDITIONAL STAFF COMMENT AT THIS TIME? NO? MR. COTTON, NOTHING? IS MR. COTTON ON? NO? >>ERIC COTTON: SORRY, NO I DON'T. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: SIR, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? >>ERIC COTTON: NO, SIR. I DON'T. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL GO INTO REBUTTAL. THE FIRST PERSON TO REBUT OR PARTY WILL BE THE ATTORNEY, MR. MICHELINI'S REPRESENTATIVE, THE APPLICANT THERE. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL. >> I BELIEVE JUST HOUSEKEEPING. I HAD ADDITIONAL TIME FROM MY ORIGINAL PRESENTATION INCLUDED AS PART OF MY REBUTTAL. I SHOULD HAVE APPROXIMATELY SEVEN MINUTES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ONE MINUTE, 37 SECONDS, PLUS THE FIVE MINUTES. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AGAIN FOR THE RECORD. >> BEN DACHAPELLI ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT. REALLY QUICK, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE REBUTTAL ITEMS THAT WE HEARD FROM BOTH PUBLIC COMMENT AND FROM PETITIONER. ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS OR ARGUMENTS THAT THE PARKING DEFICIENCY IS SOMEWHAT SELF-IMPOSED PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY. THAT IS ACTUALLY NOT TRUE, THE PARKING DEFICIENCY WAS NOT CREATED BECAUSE THE ON-SITE PARKING AS I STATED IN THE PRESENTATION WAS CREATED IN 1925 BEFORE ANY CODES WERE IN EFFECT. IMPORTANTLY, D.P. DAVIS ALWAYS INTENDED FOR PARKING TO EXIST 416 DAVIS BOULEVARD BECAUSE HISTORICAL PHOTOS SHOW THAT THAT -- THAT THE DAVIS ISLAND PARKING GARAGE ORIGINALLY PROVIDED PARKING FOR THESE APARTMENT RESIDENTS BUT WAS DEMOLISHED. I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU. THIS IS FROM A -- FROM A BOOK ABOUT THE HISTORY OF DAVIS ISLAND. AND SHOW THE PHOTOGRAPH. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS WAS ORIGINAL PARKING GARAGE INTENTED FOR AUTOMOBILES OF PEOPLE WHO LIVED ON DAVIS ISLAND. THAT PARKING LOT WAS DESTROYED AND RESIDENTS OF 16 DAVIS NO LONGER HAD PARKING THUS CREATING ALL THIS ADDITIONAL ON STREET PARKING FOR THAT PARTICULAR BUILDING. IN ADDITION -- AND I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT ANYONE WAS OPPOSED TO THE PARKING ISSUE. WHAT I SAID WAS THERE WAS MANY LETTERS SUPPORT IN THE RECORD FOR DAVIS ISLAND RESIDENTS FOR THIS ADDITIONAL PARKING TO TAKE PARKING OFF THE STREET. THE PARKING GARAGE DOES DECREASE STREET PARK WIG THE D.I. RESIDENTS SUPPORT, BUT I WANTED TO SUBMIT INTO EVIDENCE, THE E-MAIL FROM JONATHAN SCOTT, THE CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER STATING THAT "NO ANTICIPATED INCREASE OF TRAFFIC AND VEHICLE GENERATION" WILL RESULT FROM THIS PARKING GARAGE. THE NEXT ITEM I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS ARE THE BUILDING SETBACKS. ONE OF THE ARGUMENTS WAS THE BUILDING SETBACKS MIGHT CONFLICT WITH ANY FIRE SAFETY OR ANY SAFETY ISSUES THAT IS NOT TRUE. THE CITY OF TAMPA FIRE MARSHAL ARMED THEM, NO FIRE ISSUE RELATED TO THE INTAKT AND I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THAT E-MAIL INTO EVIDENCE. SUBJECT BUILDING HAD PRE-EXISTED. PREEXISTED THE ADJACENT APARTMENT BUILDING THAT SOMEONE FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT THE BUILDING OWNER TALKED ABOUT. 16 DAVIS WAS ALWAYS THERE. THIS OTHER BUILT IN CLOSE PROXIMITY WAS DONE AFTER 16 DAVIS WAS DEVELOPED AND BUILT LITTLE BIT. THE ADJACENT APARTMENTS WERE CONSTRUCTED CLOSE TO THAT APARTMENT BOUNDARY, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. THE FIRE MARSHAL SAY NO KNOWN FIRE REGULATIONS LIFTING THE STRUCTURE AND ANY FIRE DEVELOPMENTS WILL BE IDENTIFIED DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS AND ANOTHER ITEM I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS. MANY COMMENTS OF TREE AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIOS AND STORMWATER. ALL OF THOSE ISSUES ARE COMPARING APPLE TO ORANGES. FOR THIS PARTICULAR VARIANCE, THE ONLY THING GERMANE IF HER INCREASING THE CURRENT NONCONFORMITIES. THE ONLY NONEXISTING CONFORMITIES ARE THE SETBACKS AND DENSITY. LIFTING THIS BUILDING DOES NOT INCREASE EITHER SO ALL THESE OTHER ISSUES ARE EFFECTIVELY RED HEARINGS THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED DURING THE PERMITTING PROCESS AND WE WILL BE GLAD TO DO THAT SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE TREE. WE CONTAINED MR. RICKY PETERIKA OF DARK MOSS AS A CONSULTANT TO HELP US ADDRESS AND ALLEVIATE CONCERNS WITH THE TREE. WE WILL ADDRESS TREE RETENTION AT THE TIME OF PERMITTING. ANY ALTERATIONS TO THE HISTORIC BUILDING. MENTION OF REMOVING WINDOWS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH HISTORIC CHARACTER. THIS BUILDING IS A FEDERAL LANDMARK AS I STATED IN MY PRESENTATION THAT THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED TO YOU AND NOT SUBJECT TO LOCAL DESIGNATION GUIDELINES. FINALLY, I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THE TRANSPARENCY AND THE EFFORTS THAT MY CLIENT HAS MADE IN ORDER OF THE DAVIS ISLAND RESIDENTS. NOT RUN ON THE DICA BOARD AGREES WITH OPPOSING THIS VARIANCE. IN FACT, OFF LETTER OF SUPPORT ON YOUR RECORD FROM MR. PATRICK MUR TREE, A BOARD MEMBER FROM DIC THAT SUPPORTS THIS EFFORT AND MANY OTHER DAVIS ISLAND RESIDENTS THAT SUPPORT IT, BUT WE HAD 94 LETTERS SENT TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS. AND ONLY A HANDFUL OF THOSE 94 ARE OBJECTING. WE HAD FIVE FORMAL MEET W WITH DICA REPS AND THE IN DIKA BOARD. A LOT TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION IN ORDER TO ADDRESS ALL OF THIS. AND THERE IS NO CONCERN ABOUT US WANTING TO DESTROY THIS BUILDING BY RAISING IT. AS YOU SEE WITH THE APPROVAL LETTER WE CAN NOT BUILD WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE. MR. COTTON EVEN SAID THAT. THIS IS WHY HE INCLUDED THE SPECIFIC CONDITION THAT IF THE BUILDING GETS DESTROYED, WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT CODES IN AFFECT AT THE TIME VERY IMPORTANT DISTINCTION AND MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE CONDITION ACTUALLY INCLUDES. FINALLY, RECORD EVIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN SUBMIT IS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE THAT IS SUBSTANTIAL AND COMPETENT THAT YOU AS A BODY CAN -- CAN TAKE INTO ACCOUNT. I AM NOT HERE TESTIFYING AS A FACT WITNESS, THAT IS TRUE, BUT THE A YOU WILL THE DOCUMENTATION THAT IS IN THE RECORD ARE ALL COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AND FOR THAT REASON, WE WILL RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU UPHOLD THE VR B'S UNANIMOUS NEWS DECISION TO GRANT THE VARIANCE BECAUSE THERE IS NO CHANGE TO THE SETBACK AND NO CHANGE TO THE DENSITY WHICH ARE THE ONLY TWO NONCONFORMING USES. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AT THIS TIME, WE WILL HAVE REBUTTAL BY MR. STEVEN STANLEY. >> IT WILL BE SUSAN SWIFT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT IS FINE. GO AHEAD. YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES. SUSAN SWIFT, AICP. FOX ENGINEERING. FIRST, I WANTED TO CLARIFY, I THINK WHAT I HEARD TONIGHT WAS FROM MR. COTTON WAS THAT THE COURTYARD, THE STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE COURTYARD WAS NOT IN EXPANSION BUT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING TOWARD THE INTERSECTION WAS A EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMS USE. AND SPECIFICALLY IN A RENDERING THAT THE GARAGE DOOR WAS, WAS SHOWN. I AM NOT SURE IF HE IS ON THE ONLINE OR IF YOU CAN CONFIRM THAT IF THAT IS SOMETHING YOU CAN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION. IF THAT IS THE CASE, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT ANALYSIS WRITTEN. AND A LEGAL OPINION THAT SOME DAY AFTER TODAY TO THAT EFFECT. THE -- THESE WERE TWO OF MY SLIDES THAT -- I KNOW -- I -- THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SAID A LOT OF THINGS WILL BE DURING THE PERMITTING PROCESS. I BELIEVE FROM ALL THE VARIANCE -- OTHER VARIANCES WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT TONIGHT, THAT MY CLIENTS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE BARRAGED WITH EIGHT OR NINE MORE VARIANCES OR DESIGN EXCEPTIONS BETWEEN NOW AND THE END OF THIS PERMITTING PROCESS. BECAUSE THOSE THINGS DON'T HAPPEN DURING PERMITTING. SO WE HAVE HEARD ABOUT STORMWATER. WE HEARD ABOUT TREES. WE HEARD ABOUT ALL THE THINGS THAT I LISTED JUST FROM MY REVIEW OF THE SITE PLAN THAT ARE STILL TO COME. AGAIN, A PD WOULD HAVE BEEN A WAY TO GO. THE APPLICANT THOUGHT -- SAID IN A PUBLIC MEETING THAT HE THOUGHT THAT WOULD TAKE TOO MUCH TIME. THIS IS TAKING MUCH LONGER. THE SITE PLANS, THE PARKING LOT LAYOUT, I THOUGHT THAT WAS OFF THE TABLE, BUT TODAY, THE STAFF PRESENTED SHEETS OF A SITE PLAN THAT WE THOUGHT WERE OFF THE TABLE BECAUSE WE NEVER SAW THEM AT THE VRB MEETING. WE CAN'T FIND THEM IN ACELA, AROUND I AM EVEN MORE CONCERNED TODAY WHAT THE DECISION LETTER REPRESENTS BECAUSE AS MR. STANLEY SHOWED, THERE IS ONLY THREE PAGES AND THE RENDERINGS SHOULDN'T BE ON THERE. AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN THAT IS SHOWN, ILLEGIBLE AND THE PARKING LAYOUT AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS NOT ON THE DECISION LE LETTER. THAT IS REALLY CONCERNING. SO MY THE CONDITIONS AS WELL ON -- THE SECTION OF THE CODE IS THE FIRST. I DON'T THINK YOU CAN HAVE SECTIONS -- YOU CAN HAVE CONDITIONS THAT BE UNDO YOUR CODE. EVEN THE STAFF DID THIS RED LINE VERSION IN THEIR STAFF REPORT. AND THE VRB DIDN'T -- DIDN'T EVEN ADOPT WHAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDED. AND ESSENTIALLY SAYS TO THE EXTENT THAT STATE AGENCY APPROVES OR ALLOWS SOMETHING SELLS. THAT SIM PROBABLE. PRESERVATION OR NO PRESERVATION. LASTLY, AS I SAID, THE SITE PLAN AND THESE CONDITIONS IN THE DECISION LETTER ARE IN VALID. THERE IS A SITE PLAN THAT IS A CUT AND PASTE WITH PICTURES. THERE IS NO LEGEND. IT DOESN'T SAY WHO PREPARED IT. IT DOESN'T HAVE A DATE ON IT. IT IS JUST A CUT OUT. AND THE CONDITIONS ARE NOT WHAT YOUR STAFF RECOMMENDED. EVEN IF IT WAS, THEY CAN NOT UNDO YOUR KEYED SECTION ON NONCONFORMITIES. AS I SAID TONIGHT WE HAVE SEEN OTHER STATE PLAN PAGES NOT IN THIS DECISION LETTER WE HAVEN'T SEEN OR CERTAINLY HAVEN'T SEEN IN THE VRB MEETING OR SEEM TO BE SWAPPED. SO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU OVERTURN THE VRB DECISION AND THE VARIANCE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> AS LONG AS WE HAVE FEW SECONDS LEFT. STEVEN STANLEY ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER. I WANT TO MAKE IT REAL CLEAR, A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION. EXPANSION OF THAT BUILDING WITH THE GARAGE AND THE ALLEVIATION OF THAT COURTYARD AND ALL THE GRASS AND CONCRETE WITH CONCRETE BUILDING IS AN EXPANSION OF THE BUILDING AND EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING USE AND AN EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE. IT IS IN THE CODE. THANK YOU. FOR THOSE REASONS, THE VARIANCE NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED AND FOR THOSE REASONS, I ASK YOU TO OVERTURN THE VARIANCE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MISS SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ, ARE YOU COMING UP. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: IF EVERYBODY IS FINISHED, I DID ASK COUNCIL FOR TIME AT THE END BEFORE YOU CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO OUTLINE WHAT YOUR OPTIONS ARE. SO WHAT YOUR POSSIBLE ACTIONS ARE AS YOU DELIBERATE, YOU CAN EITHER AFFIRM THE VRB DECISIONS AND YOU WILL BE AFFIRMING THE APPROVAL. YOU WILL BE DETERMINING THAT ALL THE FIVE VARIANCE CRITERIA WERE MET, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT IS REQUIRED, A VARIANCE IS A DEVIATION FROM OUR CODE. AND CONFIRM THE VRB DECISION WHICH MEANS ALL THE CRITERIA ARE MET AND YOU WILL APPROVE THE SETBACK VARIANCE. YOU CAN AFFIRM THE VRB DECISION WITH ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS IF THEY ARE AGREED TO BY THE PROPERTY OWNER OR AUTHORIZED AGENT DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING. YOU CAN REMAND THE MATTER PACK TO THE VRB FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AND GIVE THEM DIRECTIONS INDICATING THE BASIS FOR THE REMAND. AND ON THE REMAND, THE VRB WILL BE LIMITED FOR THEIR DIRECTION TO THEM IF YOU CHOOSES TO DO THAT. THEIR FOURTH AND FINAL OPTION TO OVERTURN THE VRB DECISION IN THIS CASE. DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY -- >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK? OK O OKAY. >>SUSAN JOHNSON-VELEZ: ONLY THE THING, COUNCIL, WHEN YOU HAVE OTHER CODE SECTIONS BESIDE 27-80 WHICH IS THE APPLICATION OF THE VARIANCE. AND ANOTHER SECTION OF THE CODE RAISED BY BOTH PARTIES, THE NONCONFORMITY SECTION. SO WHEN YOU HAVE RELATED PROVISIONS IN THE CODE, REMEMBER ONE OF THE -- I THINK IT IS NUMBER 4 ON THE VARIANCE CRITERIA, IT IS THAT THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL INTENT NOR CHAPTER WHICH INCLUDES THE NONCONFORMITY AND WITH THE TAMPA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. YOU HAVE RELATED SECTIONS LIKE THAT. YOU READ IT. IMMATERIALI AND READ THEM TOGETHER AND HARM MONDAYIZE TO GIVE EFFECT TO BOTH OF THE RELATED SECTIONS. I WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFOREI CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >>LUIS VIERA: IF I MAY -- PULLED MR. SHELBY OUTSIDE. OUT OF AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION IT DONNED ON ME THAT M MR. DACHAPELLI'S LAW FIRM. I ACTED AS COUNSEL REPRESENTING MY WARRIOR'S PLACE OF WHICH ONE OF BEN'S PARTNERS MR. MATTHEW HALL WAS MY CO-COUNSEL. I DISCLOSED THAT. NO RELEVANCY. AND THE CASE WAS RECENTLY DISMISSED, BUT MR. SHELBY, I JUST SAY THAT AS -- I THINK IT WAS BROWN VERSUS MY WARRIOR'S PLACE, IF I RECALL. AND MATT AND I WERE CO-COUNSEL ON IT. SAME LAW FIRM. >>MARTIN SHELBY: THAT HAVING THE CASE, DOES THAT AFFECT YOUR ABILITY OF BEING IMPARTIAL. >>LUIS VIERA: ZERO. >>MARTIN SHELBY: AND BAA IS THIS CASE ON THE COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD. >>LUIS VIERA: YES, SIR. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>GWEN HENDERSON: MOTION TO CLOSE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. AT THIS TIME, WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, STATE THE BASIS OF THAT MOTION AND DISCUSS IT. YES, MA'AM, COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. THIS FEELS LIKE COMING HOME. I WAS ON THE VARIANCE REVIEW BOARD FOR SEVERAL YEARS. AND SO I AM GOING TO START BY QUOTING THE GREAT DUSTIN PASTEUR THE CHAIR WHILE I WAS A VRB. NO ONE OWES YOU A POOL. I WILL EXTRAPOLATE THIS NO ONE OWES YOU A GARAGE. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO OVERTURN THE VRB APPROVAL. MOVE TO OVERTURN THE PROPOSED VARIANCE REQUEST IN VRB 23-70 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED 16 DAVIS BOULEVARD BECAUSE THE PETITIONER FAILED TO PROVIDE COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE OF A HARDSHIP ACCORDING TO THE STANDARDS SET FORTH IN CODE SECTION 27-80 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 27-890, SUBSECTIONS A, NUMBER TWO, THE HARDSHIP OR PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY DOES NOT RESULT FROM THE ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT. SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP OR PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY SHOULD NOT JUSTIFY VARIANCE. THIS -- THE OWNER PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY IN 2021 WITHOUT A PARKING GARAGE. THEY KNEW IT BEFORE THEY BOUGHT IT. THEY KNEW IT WAS IN A FEMA FLOOD ZONE WHEN THEY BOUGHT IT. THIS IS -- THE PARKING ISSUE -- A, THEY ALREADY PROVED THEY DON'T HAVE TO COMPLY WITH FEMA. PRESERVING HISTORY DOESN'T RARE THEM TO RAISE IT. AND ALLEVIATING PARKING IS A SELF-CREATED ISSUE. NUMBER THREE, THE VARIANCE, IF GRANTED, WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH THE HEALTH, WELFARE AND SAFETY OF OTHERS BY THE VARIANCE. WE HAVE HAD EVIDENCE THAT SHOWED THREE TO FOUR FEET BETWEEN THIS PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR. QUICK NOT GUARANTEE THAT THAT PERSON -- OR THAT -- OR THE RAISE WOOING NOT INTERFREER WITH OR INJURY THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THAT PROPERTY, SO WITH THOSE TWO ITEMS, I -- -- I AM -- I COMPLETE MY MOTION. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? IF NOT, I WILL ASK FOR A VOTE. LET'S TAKE A VOTE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: YES TO OVERTURN. >>BILL CARLSON: YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: YES. >>GWEN HENDERSON: YES. >>LUIS VIERA: YES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES. >>CLERK: MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY WITH CLENDENIN BEING ABSENT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE WILL TAKE FIVE-MINUTE RECESS AND WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK. THANK YOU. . >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WELCOME BACK TO TAMPA CITY COUNCIL. >>BILL CARLSON: HERE. >>LYNN HURTAK: HERE HENDERSON HEN PRESENT. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: HERE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: HERE. >>CLERK: WE HAVE A PHYSICAL QUORUM. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: PER REQUEST BY COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. AND 38 WILL BE HEARD TOGETHER. MR. BAIRD ARE YOU HANDLING. AND WE HAVE OTHER REPRESENTATIVES HERE. START WITH BRAD THREE. >> BRAD BARED, DIRECTOR OF INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS IS AN AMENDMENT FOR AGREEMENT FOR THE TPD HOWARD AVENUE ANNEX BUILDING. IT IS PRIMARILY AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOP BIDDABLE PLANS AN SPECS. IF ARE YOU HE CALL WE WERE OVER DOUBLE THE PRICE. SO WE DID TAKE ADVANTAGE OF EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT WAS EXECUTED IN NOVEMBER OF 2023. AND WE ARE -- WE ARE MOVING FROM DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT TO A DESIGN BID BUILD. IN DOING THAT IN A DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT, DO YOU NOT HAVE BIDDABLE PLANS AND SPECS. THE PRIMARY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS AMENDMENT IS DEVELOP THE BIDDABLE PLANS AND SPECS WITH COMPETITIVE BIDDING MAKE UP FOR THESE COSTS. WE HAVE SECONDARY DESIGN COSTS THAT I PUT ON MY MEMO. AND WITH THAT, I WILL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. GLAD WE CAN DO A TIME CERTAIN SO Y'ALL DIDN'T HAVE TO SIT HERE ALL DAY. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ITEM REQUEST. I PRINTED OUT THE AGENDA ITEM REQUEST. THE SUBJECT IS, THE TPD HOWARD ANNEX BUILDING AKA, RELOCATION OF THE TAMPA POLICE DEPARTMENT IMPOUND LOT. BUT DOWN ON THE BUSINESS CASE, IT SAYS, QUOTE "PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS EIGHT-ACRE APPROXIMATE PROJECT INCLUDES A RENOVATION EXISTING 38,000-SQUARE-FOOT WAREHOUSE WITH 7500 APPROXIMATE ADDITION TO ACCOMMODATE THE EVIDENCE, CONTROL AND FORENSICS UNIT OF THE TAMPA POLICE DEPARTMENT, TPD FOR THE HEALTH, WELFARE AROUND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC. THIS PROJECT CLOSE INCLUDES EMPLOYEE PARKING, VISITOR PARKING, OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING, AS WELL AS A RETENTION POND AND DESIGN TEAM WILL MEET WITH STAFF TO MEET THE CITY OF TAMPA DESIGN STANDARDS. BLAH-BLAH-BLAH. WHAT IS NOT IN THAT -- WHAT IS NOT IN THAT EMPLA NATION? ANYTHING ABOUT AN IMPOUND LOT. IF WOULD YOU BRING UP THE SITE PLAN FOR ME. SO WE LOOKED UP THE SITE PLAN. IF YOU CAN JUST ZOOM -- OTHER SIDE. ZOOM IN A LITTLE BIT THE HIGHLIGHTED PORTION SHOWED A FUTURE IMPOUND LOT, BUT NOT A CURRENT IMPOUND LOT SO THIS HAS BEEN CALLED THE RELOCATION OF AN INBOUND LOT. GONE FROM $5 MILLION TODAY 8 MILLION TO $45 MILLION. AND IT IS -- FROM THE SITE PLAN AND FROM THE DESCRIPTION, IT IS NOT ACTUALLY GOING TO CONTAIN AN IMPOUND LOT. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT? >> YES. AND I DO HAVE DEPUTY CHIEF KATE -- RUTH CATE. BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO HER, WE DO HAVE THE EXPANDED PARKING LOT IS TO PROCESS INITIALLY PROCESS THE VEHICLES THAT WERE TO BE MOVED TO THE SITE WE HAVE -- YOU KNOW, THAT WE CONTRACTED FOR. THAT IS WHAT YOU NEED THAT AREA FOR. >>LYNN HURTAK: GO BACK. THE SITE YOU CONTRACTED FOR? >> ORIGINALLY THE MODEL WAS NOT TO OUTSOURCE THAT WHEN THE PROJECT STARTED AND TO PUT THE IMPACT LOT THERE. THAT IS HOW THAT PROJECT HAS MOR MORPHED. >>LYNN HURTAK: ACTUALLY CAN YOU -- I AM CONFUSED WITH WHAT YOU JUST SAID. DO YOU. YOU ARE -- YOU ORIGINALLY HAD A CONTRACT? YOU CONTRACTED OUT? >> GOOD MORNING -- GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL. DEPUTY CHIEF RUTH CATE, THANK YOU FOR TIME CERTAIN. WE HAD AN IMPORTANT RETIREMENT CEREMONY. LET ME EXPLAIN THE IMPOUND LOT. I DON'T WANT TO GET CAUGHT UP ON NAME OF THE IMPOUND LOT BECAUSE CHANGED IT FOR THE ANNEX. IT WAS SIMPLY FOR EVIDENCE STORAGE IN ADDITION TO TWO BAY AND FORENSICS LOCATION WHAT IS WE CALLED THE "IMPOUND LOT "GOINGS PROCESS OUR HIGH VALUE VEHICLES. WE WENT OVER THOSE BEFORE. THE HOMICIDE VEHICLES, HIT-AND-RUN VEHICLES, THINGS LIKE THAT. THERE WAS FOR -- AFTER 4 P.M., OFFICERS HAVE TO GO TO THAT LOCATION TO PROCESS THEIR EVIDENCE. SO THERE WAS FORENSIC STUFF THERE. SO THEY COULD SEPARATE -- SAY THEY GOT TWO OUNCES OF COCAINE. PER FDLE, THEY HAD TO SEPARATE A SMALL AMOUNT TO BE TESTED AND HAVE A SECOND AMOUNT FOR TRAFFICKING AMOUNT, THE 28 GRAMS, AND THE THIRD AMOUNT WILL GO IN A THIRD PACKAGE. ALL BE THERE STORED AT WHAT WE CALL THE IMPOUND LOT AT 34th STREET. I HAVE A DETECTIVE WORKING SEXUAL BATTERY. WE NEED REFRIGERATION UNITS AT THE IMPOUND LOT TO HOUSE THE SEXUAL BATTERY KITS. LATER IN THE WEEK -- USUALLY THE HOPE DAY IF IT WORKED OUT, WE HAD A CURE I DON'T REMEMBER TO GO GET THOSE ITEMS AND BRING THEM BACK TO HEADQUARTERS. SAME THING FOR ANY FIREARMS. THE REASON THE PROPERTY ROOM WOULD CLOSE AT 4:00, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO OPEN UP AS EARLY AS 7 A.M. SO OFFICERS CAN COME GET EVIDENCE FOR COURT AND CHECK IT OUT. AND THEN DEPENDING ON IF YOU HAD LARGE EVIDENCE LIKE MAYBE A SUITCASE THAT WAS USED AT THE CRIME, IT IS IN THE IMPOUND LOT, BUT THE DOPE SEIZED OUT OF IT IS AT HEADQUARTERS. .OFFICERS HAD TO GO TO TWO LOCATIONS TO GET IT. IF A VEHICLE WAS INVOLVED, WE USED TO IMPOUND A LOT OF CARS AND THE LAWS HAVE CHANGED HOW WE CAN RECEIVE PROCEEDS FOR THOSE CARS. SO WE ARE TRYING TO GET OUT OF THE INBOUND BUSINESS USUALLY MANY AS 400 CARS. TODAY I GOT THE NUMBER 126 VEHICLES, 20 BIKES. 51 ARE PERSONAL PROPERTY. AND KEEPING THE STUFF FOR THEM - UNTIL THEY CAN COME CLAIM IT. 35 FOUND BIKES AND 102 ARE EVIDENCE. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE HOUSING THERE. WHEN WE SAY THE LARGE VEHICLES. WHEN WE HAVE -- OUR LARGER CRIME VANS. WE CAN'T PARK THEM AT HEADQUARTERS. WE USED TO PARK AT JACKSON STREET LOT WHICH IS NOW THE HYATT PLACE HOTEL. SO THOSE -- WE HAVE TO SEND OUR TECHNICIANS TO GO GET THEM. WE WILL HOUSE THEM AT THE TRAIN FACILITY. THAT IS NOT IDEA. WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF ROOM AT TRAINING. NOT ENOUGH PARKING. SO WE HAVE THE OVERFLOW PARKING FOR OUR HIGH VALUE VEHICLES WHICH IS OUR MOBILE COMMAND POSTS. SOME OF OUR SWAT VEHICLES. THAT IS WHERE THAT ADDITIONAL SPACE COMES IN. THERE IS ENOUGH ROOM THERE TO SQUEEZE IN THIS AMOUNT OF CARS WITHOUT PAVING IT AND A REAL CONCERN OF FLOOD WANGD HE DON'T WANT TO TAKE TOO MANY OF THE GRAND OAKS. >>LYNN HURTAK: I APPRECIATE THAT DETAIL, BUT MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THE IMPOUND LOT. >>LYNN HURTAK: SAYS THE FUTURE IMPOUND LOT EXPANSION AREA. THAT IS WHAT THE SITE PLAN SHOWS. THAT MEANS THERE WON'T BE CARS STORED THERE NOW. SAYS FUTURE EXPANSION AREA. >> I DON'T KNOW WHEN THOSE PLANS WERE DONE, BUT THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CURRENT PLANS. >>LYNN HURTAK: SAYS MAY '24. >> YOU CAN STILL PARK THE CARS BECAUSE IT WILL BE MILLINGS. IF WE WANT TO PAVE IT LATER BUT THAT COST IS ASTRONOMICAL AND WE DECIDED AGAINST IT. THERE WILL BE THE AREA THAT IS OUTED WITH THE ACTUAL PARKING SPACES THAT WILL ALL BE PAID. THE FURTHER -- WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED AND THE PLANS I HAVE SEEN DEVELOPING THAT. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHERE ARE THE VEHICLES CURRENTLY HOUSED. >> RATE NOW THE VEHICLES ARE HOUSED AT OUR LOT ON LOIS AVENUE THAT IS 4608 NORTH LOIS. UNLESS IT IS A ROTATION IMPOUND THE OFFICERS WILL SAY HAVE A CALL FROM THE PARKING DEPARTMENT. HABITUAL THAT PARKS AT OUR CITY METER AND NEVER PAYS. WE PUT A BOOT ON THE CAR RATHER THAN TOW IT. ONE THING. IF THEY DON'T GET IT BECAUSE OF A BOOT AND WE HAVE TO GET IT OFF, IT WILL COME TO OUR LOT. WE ARE NOT DOING IT ANYMORE. WE ARE TAKING IT TO THE PRIVATE VENDORS AND THEY WILL STORE IT FOR US AND WE CAN STILL COLLECT THE MONEY. >>LYNN HURTAK: HOW MUCH IS THE PRIVATE VENDORS COSTING PER MONTH? >> RIGHT NOW WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH CROCKETTS TO OUR POLICE IMPOUND. SO THEY DON'T CHARGE US FOR THE TOWS AND THAT IS PART OF THE CONTRACT. AND I BELIEVE THE FEE IS $10,000 RENTAL FOR THE MONTH. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHAT IS THE SECURITY AT THAT? >> A COMPLETE SECURE FACILITY. >>LYNN HURTAK: WITH A POLICE OFFICER 24-7? >> CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES. >>LYNN HURTAK: HOW DO YOU MAINTAIN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND OR CHAIN OF CUSTODY? >> ST. PAUL OF OUR EMPLOYEES IN OUR EVIDENCE AND STORAGE ROOMS ARE CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES. >>LYNN HURTAK: I AM ASKING HOW DO YOU KEEP THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY FOR THE CARS THAT ARE IN SOMEBODY ELSE'S LOT? >> SO WE HAVE CITY OF TAMPA EMPLOYEES. >>LYNN HURTAK: 24-7. >> 24-7. >>LYNN HURTAK: AT CROCKETT'S? >> YES. CROCKETT IS NOT THERE AT ALL. IT IS THEIR FACILITY BUT THEY MOVED THEIR STUFF OUT, AND WE ARE THE ONLY ONES THERE. THEY HAVE THE BUILDING WHERE OFFICERS CAN COME AND PACKAGE THEIR THINGS. WE HAVE -- BECAUSE OF THE STORAGE. OUTDOOR STORAGE SHEDS THAT WE PUT STUFF IN AND EVERYTHING IS SURROUNDED BY FENCING AND THE BARBED WIRE AND CAMERAS AND SECURE FACILITY. >>LYNN HURTAK: ONCE THIS IS COMPLETED WE WON'T BE RENTING FROM CROCKETTS $10,000 A MONTH. ALL OF THESE CAR ALSO BE STORED ON THIS PROPERTY. YOU ARE TELLING US RIGHT NOW? >> THAT IS WHAT A WE WANT TO GO TO. WE HAVE TO SEE THE VOLUME OF CARS THAT WE HAVE, BUT THERE WILL BE A TRANSITION PERIOD BUT THAT IS THE GOAL. SO THE GOAL IS TO TRANSITION ONLY TO THIS ONE LOCATION. AND -- BECAUSE WE ARE CONSTANTLY DOWNSIZING HOW MANY CARS THAT WE HAVE. IF FOR SOME REASON WE GO OVER THE AMOUNT OF CARS OR PARKING SPACES THAT WE HAVE, WE WILL HAVE TO TAKE THEM SOMEWHERE. WE DO NOT WANT TO PUT AN EMPLOYEE AT THAT LOCATION. >>LYNN HURTAK: WHAT LOCATION? >> AT THE CROCKETT'S. WE WANT ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES TO BE AT THIS ONE LOCATION. >>LYNN HURTAK: BUT IF WE HAD TO IF WE HAD TO MOVE THEM TO ANOTHER LOCATION, WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A PERSON THERE? >> YEAH, WE WOULD. WE WOULD HAVE TO. AND HAVE SOME SECURE STORAGE ONLY FOR OUR VEHICLES WITH CAMERAS ON TAMPA. AND NOT PHYSICALLY THERE TO MAKE SURE NOBODY IS TAMPERING WITH IT. IF THE CAMERA SHOWS OTHERWISE ULTIMATELY THAT IS ISSUE, THE START IS THE IMPOUND LOT AND ADD FORENSICS. NOW IT SEEMS TO BE FORENSICS WITH MAYBE AN IMPOUND LOT. SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF MONEY TO SPEND ON A FORENSICS MAYBE POSSIBLY IMPOUND LOT. MAYBE YOU ALL NEED A BIGGER SPACE THAT YOU CAN MAKE SURE YOU CAN FIT THE IMPOUND CARS, BECAUSE I AM NOT OKAY THAT WE MIGHT HAVE TO GO AND SPEND $10,000 A MONTH AFTER PUTTING $45 MILLION THIS SHOULD NOT BE -- A TAJ MAHAL OF FORENSICS. WE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY HAVE ROOM TO GROW LIKE ANA CITY CENTER. THAT SPACE HAS SO MUCH ROOM THAT I AM UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE IDEA THIS WILL NOT FIT THE CARS WE HAVE AND NOT THE GROWTH. >> WE HAVE ALREADY DOWNSIZED THE AMOUNT OF CARS WE WOULD IMPOUND. ON AVERAGE IT WAS 400. WE ARE NOT AT THAT. 126. AND WE ARE WORKING TO GET OUT OF THOSE. WE ARE TRYING TO GET OUT OF THE I BELIEVE POUND BUSINESS. BEFORE WHEN I WAS STREET-LEVEL NARCOTICS AND SEIZE A CAR AND HAVE THE CITY ORDINANCE. WE COULD SELL THE CAR AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT KEEP THE PROCEEDS. WE CANNOT DO THAT ANYMORE. THE LAWS HAVE CHANGED. WE ARE OUT OF THE BUSINESS OF DOING THAT. I DON'T WANT TO GET CAUGHT UP ON THE SEMANTICS OF THAT FACILITY BEING CALLED THE "IMLOT." THAT IS WHAT WE CALLED IT, BUT THE EVIDENCE STORAGE AREA AFTER HOURS. THAT IS WHERE WE WENT LIBRARY SUB 1 WHERE WE GO TO GAS OUR CARS UP IN CARVER CITY WE WOULD SAY A NEW FLEET FACILITY AND THAT IS AT HANNA NOW. WE STORED LARGER VEHICLES. BUT WE CAN'T. WE WANT TO BRING THOSE TO A SECURE LOCATION ALONG WITH THE ONES WE ARE TEMPORARY STORING ON TRAINING AND THEY WILL ALL BE THERE. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT IS FINE. THIS TO ME IS NOT ABOUT THAT. CREATING A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN STORE POLICE VEHICLES, BUT, AGAIN, TO ME THIS IS ABOUT THE INBOUND LOT. IF YOU ARE SAYING WE MATE NOT HAVE ROOM. I AM VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS BALLOONING PROJECT AND NOT ACTUALLY BEING ABLE TO HOLD MORE THAN WE NEEDED TO HOLD. SO RIGHT NOW I DO ASK THIS QUESTION FOR MR. MUTTERBACK AND YOU WERE CCED ON THE E-MAIL OF THE SIZE OF EVIDENCE IN THIS STORAGE FACILITY. AND IT SAYS HERE THAT THE EXISTING EVIDENCE STORAGE AT 34th STREET WAS APPROXIMATELY 13,350 SQUARE FEET. AND THE SPACE BEING PROVIDED THAT THE NEW ANNEX IS 12,432. WHICH A LOWER, BUT BECAUSE YOU ARE ABLE TO GO VERTICAL WE WILL ACTUALLY BE EXPANDED. AND THAT I UNDERSTAND, RIGHT. AND I -- I -- >>I KNOW I SPOKE TO COUNCIL ON THAT ON AUGUST 5 THAT BELL HAVE 1 149180 CUBIC SQUARE FOOT BASED ON THE 12-FOOT CEILING. >>LYNN HURTAK: THAT I UNDERSTAND. >> WE WILL HAVE MORE ROOM. THE EXISTING FORENSICS IS 12,000 SQUARE FOOT AND EVIDENCE IS 26. >>LYNN HURTAK: YES, BUT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, CERTAIN THINGS WERE NOT HOUSED HERE. WE WERE HOUSED AT HEADQUARTERS AND THEY STILL ARE. WHAT KINDS OF THINGS HAVE ALREADY BEEN HOUSED AT 411. >> ANYTHING THAT WAS NOT HIGH VALUED NARCOTICS LIKE THE FIREARMS OR SEXUAL BATTERY KITS, THEY ALL GO TO HEADQUARTERS. IF I WERE TO SEIZE SOMEONE'S SUITCASE OR CLOTHING OR ELECTRONICS, SEIZED DOORS, FIREWORKS. ANYTHING LIKE THAT. ALWAYS STAYS AT THE INFOUND LOT. ANYTHING THAT WAS SMALLER -- LARGER THAN A BOX ABOUT 8 X 12 WILL STAY AT 34th STREET. >>LYNN HURTAK: AT POLICE HEADQUARTERS YOU HOLD DRUGS AND GUNS. >> YES. >>LYNN HURTAK: SO THAT IS GOING -- AND THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THAT WAY. AND SO WHAT YOU ARE DOING MOVING POLICE ACTIVITY AT THIS FORENSICS BUILDING. >> YES, WE WILL HAVE SECURE STORAGE THERE. IT WILL BE HOUSED SIMILAR TO LIKE IT IS IN HEADQUARTERS. A SAFE ROOM, A NARCOTICS VAULT, ALL OF THAT, THAT WILL BE A SECURE PART OF THE FACILITY. >>LYNN HURTAK: OKAY. AND SO -- MY -- FOR ME, THIS -- THE QUESTION JUST OVERALL IS, I -- I DON'T KNOW THIS IS THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR 7.6 ACRES JUST BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE WE WILL GET THE IMPOUND LOT THAT WE -- THAT WAS THE IMPETUS OF THIS ENTIRE PROJECT. I AM JUST NOT CONVINCED. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA AND THEN COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: NO, I AM SORRY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: YOU KNOW WE HAVE -- AT LEAST I HAVE CONCERNS HOW THIS SNUCK UP ON US AND HOW THE PRICE WENT UP AGAIN AND THE ESCALATION OF THIS AND SIMILAR TO HANNA AVENUE AND FAIR OAKS, HOW THEY ESCALATED. AND THE RIVERWALK ABOUT. AND WE HEARD ALL KIND OF NEGATIVE FEEDBACK AND CRITICISM ABOUT THAT. NOT -- IT IS NOT -- SO IT IS -- MY POINT IS NOT ABOUT TPD, BUT THE COMPETENCY OF HOW THE PROJECTS ARE MANAGED, BUT FOLKS HAVE REACHED OUT TO ME. AND I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO ALL OF THESE, BUT I AM GOING TO VOTE ANYTHING RELATED TO THIS PROJECT UNLESS THERE IS A REALLY DETAILED PUBLIC DISCUSSION ABOUT THE BUDGET AND HOW IT -- HOW IF HAS BEEN DONE AND HOW THIS WAS PLANNED, BECAUSE I THINK THE PUBLIC DES DESERVES TOTAL TRANSPARENCY ON THIS AND WHAT THE ALTERNATIVES WILL BE. BUT FEEDBACK I GOT FROM PEOPLE WHO CONTACTED ME. THEY THINK THE LOCATION IS NOT THE BEST LOCATION. THE SIZE OF THE LOT. ALSO RISK IN PUTTING -- ALTHOUGH IT IS CONVENIENT -- THERE IS RISK OF PUTTING ALL TYPE OF EVIDENCE IN ONE PLACE. THE -- -- ALSO THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT RENOVATING A BUILDING VERSUS BUILDING A NEW BUILDING. FOR BY THE WAY, $45 MILLION AND WE WILL BONDS IT NOT INCLUDING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE WHICH WE ARE PROBABLY PAYING ON THESE OTHER FACILITIES. IT IS GOING TO BE AT LEAST $40 MILLION IN INTEREST INTEREST. SO IT IS REALLY A $85 MILLION TO $95 MILLION BUILDING. WHAT ELSE? SO MANY THINGS -- I KNOW WE COULDN'T SPEND THIS ON POLICE. WE NEED 00 MORE POLICE OFFICERS. BUT WHAT ELSE CAN WE SPENDS THIS ON IF WE REALLY WENT TO OUR POLICE OFFICERS AND ASKED THEM WHAT THEY NEED MOST. IF WE CAN SPEND $85 MILLION, WHAT WAS THE NEED. IF THIS WAS THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THE MONEY, MAYBE. BUT I AM HEARING IT IS NOT. BUT IF WE ARE GOING TO SPEND THAT MUCH MONEY WHY NOT BUILD A NEW BUILDING THAT IS MORE SECURE. CONCERNS OF IT BEING HURRICANE-PROOF. I THINK THERE IS SOME CONCERNS OF THE SOME OF THE EXISTING BUILDINGS AND THEIR ABILITY TO BE HURRICANE PROOF. CONCERNS. I DON'T KNOW INSIDE DETAILS BUT ALLEGEDLY THE PROJECT MANAGERS AND MANAGERS ARE THE SAME AS ANA AVENUE, THE RIVERWALK AND FAIR OAKS. AND THAT -- THE ALLEGATION IS THAT THE PERSON OR PEOPLE INVOLVED DON'T -- AREN'T TRAINED AS PROJECT MANAGERS. AND SO WHY WOULD WE -- IF WE SEE THE CONNECTION OF HOW FOUR PROJECTS WENT WAY, WAY -- TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OVER BUDGET AND THEY ARE BONDED AND A COMMON LINKS HERE. SEEMS TO BE IN THIS ADMINISTRATION URGENCY TO GET THINGS DONE AND NO ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE MONEY AND TO THE TAXPAYERS. AND THEN -- AND THEN JUST LASTLY, LASTLY AGAIN, I SUPPORTED TPD AND TAMPA FIRE RESCUE -- SUPPORTED THE THINGS THEY HAVE DONE. FROM WHAT I AM HEARING THIS IS NOT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THIS KIND OF FUNDING. AND IN PARTICULAR, THERE IS NOT CONFIDENCE THIS PROJECT IS BEING MANAGED CORRECTLY AND THAT THE MONEY IS BEING USED WISELY. I VOTE KNOW. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ANYBODY ELSE? WE NEED A MOTION TO MOVE ITEMS NUMBER 3 -- COUNCILMAN VIERA'S COMMITTEE. SO WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN VIERA. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: CAN I SAY SOMETHING, IF I MAY. YOU SAY YOU HAVE A $149,180 SQUARE FEET. IS THAT WHAT I HEARD. >> CUBIC FOOT. WE WILL BE ABLE TO STORE VERTICAL, YES. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I AM NOT INTO BUILDING OR CONTRACTING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I NEED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT. WHAT IS THE COST OF SQUARE FOOT TO BUILD A NEW BUILDING NOW? >> I HAVE TO DEFER TO OUR CITY PATTER INS ON THAT. >> YEAH, WE WILL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT WITH -- WITH THE -- >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: IN MY MIND -- I KNOW YOU ALREADY HAVE THE LAND. I HEARD ABOUT BUILDING A NEW BUILDING AND NOT DOING ANYTHING AT ALL. >> WE DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT THERE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I TOOK A GUESS. 350 A SQUARE FOOT BECAUSE A HOUSE IS COSTING THAT JUST ABOUT. THAT NUMBER IS ASTRONOMICAL. I AM NOT GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT IT IS. YOU FIGURE IT OUT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WITH THE LAND AND EVERYTHING? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION AND A SECOND. ROLL CALL VOTE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: YES. >>LUIS VIERA: YES. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: YES. >>BILL CARLSON: NO. >>LYNN HURTAK: NO, BECAUSE I AM NOT GOING TO PUT GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES. >>CLERK: MOTION CARRIED WITH CARLSON AND HURTAK VOTING NO AND CLENDENIN BEING ABSENT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT WAS ITEM 3, ITEM 38 WILL TRANSFER WITH THAT. >>LYNN HURTAK: A WORK ORDER TO PAY THE ARCHITECTS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: IT IS YOUR COMMITTEE? >>LYNN HURTAK: I AM NOT MOVING IT. I AM VOTING AGAINST ANYTHING FOR THIS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: SEE WHO THE ALTERNATE IS -- IT WILL BE CHARLIE. COUNCILMAN MIRANDA FOR ITEM 38, DO YOU WISH TO MOVE THAT SIR? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 38 IS THE -- IS THE -- THE PROBLEM WE HAD STAFF TOGETHER AND IT WAS THE COMPLEMENTARY ONE TO 3. I WILL MOVE 38. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. SECOND FROM COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON. ROLL CALL VOTE ON THAT. THIS SIGH TIM 38. >>GWEN HENDERSON: YES. >>LUIS VIERA: YES. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: YES. >>BILL CARLSON: NO. >>LYNN HURTAK: NO. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: YES. >>CLERK: MOTION CARRIED WITH CARLSON AND HURTAK VOTE NOTHING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: FINAL ITEM OF THE DAY IS 94. BECAUSE IT WAS ASKED -- UNLESS I MISUNDERSTOOD THAT WE HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT FOR 94, WHICH WOULD BE MR. BAIRD WHO GAVE A WRITTEN REPORT. COUNCILMAN CARLSON, DO YOU WANT 49 PRESENT, CORRECT? >>BILL CARLSON: YEAH. I JUST THINK THE PUBLIC IS CONCERNED ABOUT THIS. SO JUST SHORT PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION SO THE PUBLIC CAN SEE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: DO YOU WANT TO KICK IT OFF. >>BILL CARLSON: NO, GO AHEAD. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MR. BAIRD, YOU GAVE A WRITTEN REPORT. >>BRAD BAIRD: BRAD BAIR, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INFRASTRUCTURE. SUBMITTED A MEMO ON THIS. THE SHORT ANSWER IS, WE DO NOT ALLOW PRIME CONTRACTORS ON DESIGN-BUILD PROJECTS TO MARK UP THE SUBCONTRACTORS. WE ON DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACTS, PROCURE USING THE CONSULTANTS COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATIONS ACT REQUIRED BY LAW TO SELECT A DESIGN-BUILD TEAM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT ACT, WHICH WE DO. AND THEN OPPOSED TO AN RFP PROCESS WHICH IS HANDLED BY PURCHASING. WANTED TO MAKE THAT DISTINCTION PART OF THE CC &A. TWO PHASE. DESIGN-BUILD INITIAL SERVICES FOR DESIGN. AND THEN DESIGN-BUILD SERVICES AGREEMENT IN INCLUDES A GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE. SO WITH THAT, I WILL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COUNCILMAN CAR CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: THANK YOU, FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WAITED FOR THIS, BUT I KNOW YOU ARE HERE ALL DAY. THANK YOU FOR WAITING. >>BRAD BAIRD: YOU ARE WELCOME CARLSON CAS WILL'S 'SAY PIE HOE THEMCALLY $100 MILLION AND GENERAL CONTRACTOR GETS 5% AS A MANAGEMENT FEE. IF YOU CAN MARK UP -- LET'S SAY THEY CAN MARK UP THE SUBCONTRACTORS 20%. MY MATH IS PROBABLY NOT RIGHT, ANOTHER $15 MILLION OR 20 MILLION IN THERE. THE ANSWER WE NOW GIVEN THE PUBLIC IS, NO, YOU CAN NOT. >>BRAD BAIRD: WE DO NOT ALLOW THAT. >>BILL CARLSON: I THINK THAT IS GREAT NEWS. BECAUSE -- SO IT WAS WORTH YOU DOING THAT. BUT LET ME JUST ASK YOU ONE QUESTION I DIDN'T SEE IN THE DOCUMENT. HOW YOU ALL VERIFY FOR TRACK THAT. DO YOU AUDIT TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE NOT DOING THAT? >> ANY INVOICE THAT COMES ACROSS. FIRST OF ALL, LET ME BACK UP. WE APPROVED THE SUB CONTRACTS. WE SEE THOSE. AND -- AND, OF COURSE, THE EBO OFFICE ON THE EBO CONTRACTS, WITH CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. EVERY MONTH WITH THE INVOICE, WE VERIFY THAT NO MARK-UP ON SUB CAN CONTRACTS. >>BILL CARLSON: THEY ARE ALSO NOT ALLOWED TO GIVE A FULL FEE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IF YOU SEE A SUBCONTRACTOR GETTING PAID $10 MILLION AND A INVOICE FROM THE SUBCONTRACTOR, THE GENERAL CANNOT GET PAID PART OF THAT. >>BILL CARLSON: PROHIBITED IN THE CONTRACTS. >>BRAD BAIRD: I AM SORRY? >>BILL CARLSON: PROHIBITED IN THE CONTRACT? >>BRAD BAIRD: IT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY IN THE DESIGN-BUILD, BUT WE DON'T ALLOW THAT MARK-UP. >>BILL CARLSON: THANK YOU FOR THE GOOD NEWS. >>BRAD BAIRD: TWO THINGS THAT CONTRACTORS GET IN THE DESIGN-BUILD. ONE IS GENERAL CONDITIONS AND THE OTHER IS THE DESIGN BUILD FEE WHICH IS IN THE 7 TO 9% RANGE. DEPENDING ON THE CONTRACT. THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT THEY GET. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>BRAD BAIRD: THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MADAM CLERK, THAT CONCLUDES THE AGENDA. GO TO NEW BUSINESS. I HAVE QUITE A FEW ITEMS AND PASS IT ON TO COUNCILMAN VIERA. YOU ARE THE IMMEDIATE. .<,NEW LINE>>> P[L]As[L]T[L]O[L]R: CHAIR. >>LUIS VIERA: YES. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MY FIRST MOTION IS -- I WOULD LIKE TO MOTION FOR THE FLORIDA ORCHESTRA TO GIVE A FIVE-MINUTE PRESENTATION AT THE SEPTEMBER 5, 2024 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING TO REPORT ON THE SERVICES THAT IT PROVIDED TO OUR RESIDENTS -- THAT IT PROVIDED TO OUR RESIDENTS IN THE 2023-2024 SEASON. THERE IS SPACE AVAILABLE FOR THAT DAY. >>LUIS VIERA: A MOTION BY CHAIRMAN MANISCALCO. SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. ANY DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSE? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: NEXT, FOR SEPTEMBER 19 -- [GAVEL SOUNDING] -- ALL RIGHT. FOR SEPTEMBER 19, WE HAVE A PRESENTATION TO OFFICER RICHIE MERCADO AND THE TAMPA BAY REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL IS PRESENTING. THIS IS MY MOTION. I WILL EXPLAIN TO YOU. MAKE A MOTION FOR THE MAYOR'S HISPANIC HERITAGE COMMITTEE ALL CITY EMPLOYEES -- MOST OF THEM ALL. TO APPEAR BRIEFLY AT SEPTEMBER 19 REGULAR SESSION TO EXTEND AN INVITATION TO CITY COUNCIL AS THEY DO EVERY YEAR FOR THE MAYOR'S ANNUAL HISPANIC HERITAGE CELEBRATION OCTOBER 1, 2024. HEARD FIRST OF CEREMONIAL. THEY MAY TAKE ONE OR TWO MINUTES. THEY ARE EXTENDING THE INVITATION BY COUNCIL. >>LUIS VIERA: A MOTION BY CHAIRMAN MANISCALCO. SECOND. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CARLSON. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MAKE A MOTION CORRIDOR KRISTEN SALOS TO GIVE A PRESENTATION AT THE MEETING REGARDING THE FOUNDATION WORK WITH THE CHILDREN'S PROJECT AND THE NIGHT TO REMEMBER PROM. >>LUIS VIERA: A MOTION BY CHAIRMAN MANISCALCO. A SECOND. >>GWEN HENDERSON: SECOND. >>LUIS VIERA: SECOND FROM COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALBERT COOK TO THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AS REPRESENTATIVE BECAUSE MY REPRESENTATIVE WILL THIS BUDGET YEAR. T THE END OF - >>LUIS VIERA: A MOTION BY CHAIRMAN MANISCALCO. SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSE? MANISCALCO I WILL BE MEETING WITH T&I NEXT WEEK AND ROLL OUT THE KIOSK TO SIGN IN AT THE NEXT WORKSHOP AUGUST 29. I WILL TEST IT BEFORE LAND. MISS LUCAS WILL BE THERE. MY AIDE AND T&I WILL BE THERE. IF EVERYTHING IS GOOD READY FOR THE WORKSHOP. I KNOW THAT COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK HAS BEEN WORK AGO THIS. SOME OF US CONTACTED BY THE SIERRA CLUB SENDING A LETTER TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION BECAUSE THEY ARE LOOKING AT THE RATES THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED BY TECO. A LETTER WAS SUBMITTED TO US; HOWEVER, IN THINKING -- AND YOU ASK ME IF YOU ARE COMFORTABLE. TELL ME IF YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS IF THERE IS A SECOND. IF WE SEND A LETTER NOT AT THE CITY OF TAMPA OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE THE CITY OF TAMPA IN MY DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM. THEY ARE NOT TAKING THE DECISION. AS A CITY COUNCIL, THE LET WEAR ASK THE COMMISSION TO -- AS THEY CONSIDER THE RATE BY TECO. THE MAYOR WANTS ONE MILL AND THE COUNCIL CAN SAY A THIRD OR HALF OF A MILL. WHATEVER TECO ASKS FOR, IT DOWN UNDER MEAN THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO GET. IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN SENDING A LETTER FROM TAMPA CITY COUNCIL THAT THE COMMISSION TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, INFLATION NUMBERS ARE HIGH, EVEN THE -- TAMPA IS ONE OF THE LOWEST IN THE COUNTRY NOW, HOUSING IS EXPENSIVE, INSURANCE, CARS, EVERYTHING IS EXPENSIVE THAT THEY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THESE FACTORS AS THEY CONSIDER WHATEVER RATE THEY PROPOSE. IT IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IS BEING ASKED BECAUSE WE WORK WITH TECO. WE ARE PARTNERS WITH TECO. I REACH OUT TO THEM FOR TREE TRIMMING. FOR ELECTRICAL ISSUES WHATEVER IT IS ON BEHALF OF CONSTITUENTS. I WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE IF AN INTEREST BY COUNCIL TO PURSUE THAT. >>GWEN HENDERSON: CAN I SAY SOMETHING. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION. IF THERE IS A SECOND FOR DISCUSSION. IT CAN BE SHOT DOWN OR VOTED UP. >>LUIS VIERA: GO AHEAD. IF I MAY, FIRST, COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON AND THEN COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. IF I AM STILL ACTING AS CHAIR. JUST MAKING SURE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MY FIRST THOUGHT WHEN IT CAME TO MY MIND, I THINK WE SHOULD STAY OUT OF IT GIVEN THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSION DID SO MUCH TO KEEP THE MILLAGE OFF THE BALLOT FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD EMPLOYEES. AND ATTEMPTED TO DO SO AFTER A COURT DECIDED IT WAS ON THE BALLOT. A DIFFERENT SITUATION AND IT IS ABOUT MONDAY. AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE NEED TO PROVIDE A LETTER OF SUPPORT AND JUST NOT OUR LANE AND I DON'T THINK IT IS NECESSARY AND I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING IT. >>LUIS VIERA: COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I DON'T KNOW THAT MUCH OF IT AND HOW IT CAME UP BEFORE ME. I KNOW IT IS COMPLICATED BASED ON DIFFERENT FACTORS. IF WE DO SOMETHING AND ASK FOR THEM TO DO SOMETHING, WE OURSELVES HAVE TO DO IT FOR OUR OWN BENEFIT. IF WE ASK THEM TO NOT TO DO, WE SHOULDN'T DO THAT EITHER. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WELL, MR. SHELBY BROUGHT TO ME AS PART OF THE COUNCIL RULES NO RESOLUTIONS SHOULD BE MADE. AND THIS WILL FALL UNDER RESOLUTION THAT IS NOT RELATED TO CITY BUSINESS BUSINESS. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I AGREE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: REQUIRE A -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: WE ARE NOT GOING TO WAIVE THE RULES. WE DIDN'T WAIVE IT FOR YOU? >>LYNN HURTAK: YOU KNOW I AM OF TWO MINDS OF THIS. TECHNICALLY IT ISN'T OURS, BUT IT IS OURS, BECAUSE WE -- WE DO -- I MEAN WE -- WE PAY THE FEE TOO. AND IN THAT REGARD, THE CITY OF TAMPA ALSO PAYS. SO -- I MEAN, I AM HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MOTION TO SEE WHERE IT GOES I BELIEVE IT IS SOMETHING THAT WILL IMPACT THE CITY. >>LUIS VIERA: ANY COMMENTS. I WILL BE SUPPORTING IT. I VOTED AGAINST THAT COUNCIL RULE ON LETTERS AND WHATNOT REGARDING BEING OUTSIDE OF CITY POLICE. NUMBER ONE, TO ME, THIS DOES INVOLVE CITY BUSINESS BECAUSE INVOLVES THE WELFARE OF CITY OF TAMPA RESIDENTS SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING IT. JUST BECAUSE MY REQUEST TO WAIVE RULES DON'T GET GRANTED DOESN'T MEAN I WON'T SUPPORT OTHER PEOPLE'S REQUEST TO WAIVE RULES BECAUSE THAT'S ME. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: YOU NEVER ABUSE IT. >>GWEN HENDERSON: BUT IS IT NECESSARY FOR US TO WRITE A LETTER OF SUPPORT? >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: IT AIN'T GOING TO HURT OR HELP. >>GWEN HENDERSON: WHY ARE WE DOING IT. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: IF WE ASK SOMEBODY NOT TO DO IT WITH THE AMOUNT OR HOW THEY FIGURE IT OUT. WE OURSELVES AT HOME EVEN THOUGH CUSTOMERS OF ELECTRIC COMPANY, WE SHOULD PASS ANYTHING THAT COULD HURT THE PUBLIC DURING THESE TIMES. THAT IS ALL I AM GOING TO SAY. >>LYNN HURTAK: I DON'T DISAGREE AND THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WE CAN WEIGH IN. BECAUSE THIS -- I THINK THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT FROM OTHER RESOLUTIONS IN THAT THEY ARE HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING AND WE AS THE COUNCIL ARE GIVING OUR OPINION TO THAT PUBLIC HEARING. SO. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: IF I MAY AND I AM SORRY TO SAY IT A COUPLE OF TIMES. WE GOT TO LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENT. YOU CAN BUILD ANYTHING YOU WANT. YOU CAN DO ANYTHING YOU WANT. IF YOU DON'T BUILD BUILDINGS WITH SUSTAINABILITY WITH SOLAR AND ALL THAT, YOU WILL BE PAYING MORE FOR ELECTRICITY. MY BILL NEVER RUNS OVER $27 A MONTH. >>LUIS VIERA: IF I MAY, MR. SHELBY SHELBY I JUST HAVE A QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN. I GUESS YOU A AS THE MAN WITH THE GAVEL ARE MINDING A FINDING THAT THIS CONSTITUTES CITY BUSINESS. DOES NOT REQUIRE A WAIVER OF THE RADIO SNULS. >>LUIS VIERA: THE LEGAL INTERPRETATION OF THAT WILL BE WITH YOU. IN MY OPINION, WHAT IS CITY BUSINESS AND WHAT IS NOT IS, FOR EXAMPLE, WE WERE ASKED TODAY TO DO A LETTER REGARDING FDOT. AND THAT MAY NOT DIRECTLY -- THAT ENTAILS THE WELFARE OF THE CITY OF TAMPA RESIDENTS. I THINK THAT IS CITY BUSINESS. SO, YEAH, I I HAVE -- I HAVE MORE MOTH MODERATELY PERMISSIVE INTERPRETATION OF THAT AND THAT IS MY INTERPRETATION. IF YOU WANT TO DISAGREE. >>MARTIN SHELBY: NOT MY PLACE TO DISAGREE. THE CHAIR IS THE ONE THAT MAKES THAT DETERMINATION. IF SOMEBODY DISAGREES THEY HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION AND OVERRULE YOU. I AM SAYING YOU ARE MAKING A FINDING AND THIS IS YOUR PREROGATIVE. >>LUIS VIERA: COUNCIL, MY VIEW OF SEEING THINGS. WE PRESENTLY HAVE A MOTION OF COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO AND SECONDED. >>GWEN HENDERSON: NO ONE SECONDED IT. >>LUIS VIERA: AND COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: YOU KNOW I HAVE DONE THIS BEFORE I HAVE TO ABSTAIN IF YOU VOTE. CONSIDERING THAT, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO COUNT VOTES. >>LUIS VIERA: YES, SIR. SO, YEAH, I KNOW, RIGHT. WE ARE NOT GOING TO -- IT WILL I GUESS NOT PASS, BUT WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. >>GWEN HENDERSON: IT MAY. >>LYNN HURTAK: WE HAVE FIVE OF US. SO EVEN IF THERE IS ONLY FIVE PEOPLE WHO CAN VOTE, A VOTE OF FIVE? >>MARTIN SHELBY: NO FOUR. >>LUIS VIERA: IT WILL FAIL. >>LYNN HURTAK: I DON'T KNOW THAT. >>LUIS VIERA: A MOTION WHICH COUNCILMAN MANISCALCO AND SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. TO WRITE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REGARDING THE PROPOSED TECO HIKE RATES. >>MARTIN SHELBY: EXCUSE ME, THE MOTION TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMM COMMISSION. >>GWEN HENDERSON: TO TECO. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. >>GWEN HENDERSON: NOT THE COUNTY COMMISSION. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: NO, NO. >>GWEN HENDERSON: I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING THE COUNTY COMMISSION. >>LYNN HURTAK: I THOUGHT IT WAS A -- ANALOGOUS TO THE SCHOOL BOARD THAT MAKES SENSE. >>GWEN HENDERSON: OH, OKAY. >>LUIS VIERA: AND NOT -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: YOU KNEW WHAT I MEANT. WHY DIDN'T YOU SAY ANYTHING? YEAH, WHATEVER. >>LUIS VIERA: NOT QUALIFIED A WAIVER OF THE RULES AS I EXEMPTED IT. >>GWEN HENDERSON: I CAN SUPPORT IT. LET'S GET IT OVER WITH. [LAUGHTER] >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: TAKE THE VOTE. >>LUIS VIERA: DO THE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE -- I AM SORRY, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. BEEN A WHILE. ANY OPPOSED? >>CLERK: CLERK MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY WITH CARLSON ABSTAINING AND CLENDENIN BEING ABSENT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR INDULGING. I DON'T TALK THAT LONG. START GO COLOMBO. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: WHAT NOW? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: COLOMBO. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I TOLD THAT YOU. MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU MENTIONED WE HAVE AN EVENT UPCOMING AT THE TAMPA THEATRE FOR HISPANIC WEEK. YOU WANT TO MAKE THE MOTION SINCE YOU ARE A CHAIR. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: I DID. IT PASS. THEY WILL COME TO INVITE US AS WE ALWAYS DO. ANYTHING ELSE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: THAT'S IT. >>LUIS VIERA: COUPLE OF QUICK ONES, IF I MAY. I SENT Y'ALL A MEMO OR SEPTEMBER 5, A MOMENT FOR PEPPIN ACADEMY IN HONOR OF THEIR 25th ANNIVERSARY FOR TAMPA CITY COUNCIL COMMENDATION. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? >>LUIS VIERA: KURT TRELL ON THE BOARD OF TAMPA FIRE FIGHTERS IS RETIRING AND WANT TO GIVE HIM AN OFF-DIET COMMENDATION. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED. >>LUIS VIERA: SENT A MEMO, JANUARY OF NEXT YEAR JANUARY 23, 2024, MOTION FOR PRESENTATION FOR HOLOCAUST REMEMBRANCE DAY 202025. PURSUANT TO A AUGUST 19,2024. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >>LUIS VIERA: I DIDN'T ASK TO -- I WAS AT -- RAQUEL PANCHO MANY OF YOU KNOW OUR A.D.A. COORDINATOR THOMAS ALVANES FOR HER ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DISABILITY COMMUNITIES AND I WANT TO GIVE HER A SHOUT OUT BECAUSE SHE DOES A GREAT JOB IN OUR CITY FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. A WONDERFUL PERSON. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: ABSOLUTELY. CONGRATULATIONS. [APPLAUSE] COUNCILWOMAN HENDERSON. >>GWEN HENDERSON: TWO THINGS. THEY ARE NOT MOTION. ONE THING I WAS TALKING TO HAGAR -- HOW DO YOU SAY YOUR LAST NAME FOR THE RECORD? THANK YOU. HOW DO YOU SAY IT. >> KOPESKI. >>GWEN HENDERSON: I WAS SPEAKING TO HER BECAUSE SHE IS OUR BUDGET ANALYST. AT OUR NEXT BUDGET MEETING I WOULD LIKE FOR HER TO COME BEFORE US AT POT PODIUM AND DISCUSSES THINGS FOR ALL OF US AND I SOME THINGS I WOULD LIKE FOR HER TO BRING TO LIGHT FOR YOU ALL AND I NEW AT THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. SEPTEMBER 3. SHE HAS AGREED. I SPOKEN TO HER. SO SHE CAN JUST SAY SOME THINGS THAT EVEN I AM THINKING ABOUT SO IT CAN EVEN LIGHTEN THE LOAD WHEN WE REALLY GET INTO THE TRENCHES OF THE BUDGET DISCUSSION. >>LYNN HURTAK: WOULD IT BE AN ITEM OR WANT HER TO COME LIKE AFTER THE PRESENTATION? >>GWEN HENDERSON: JUST IN FRONT OF US. >>LYNN HURTAK: THEY USUALLY DO A PRESENTATION. AFTER THE PRESENTATION? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: DO IT AFTER THE PRESENTATION. >>GWEN HENDERSON: DOES IT HAVE TO BE A MOTION. >>LYNN HURTAK: NO JUST TO GIVE OUR WONDERFUL AN IDEA OF WHEN SHE WOULD COME UP. >>GWEN HENDERSON: OKAY. MISS SULING, YOU GOT THAT? >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: WE DON'T NEED A MOTION. >>GWEN HENDERSON: EVERYTHING DOESN'T HAVE TO BE MOTION AROUND HERE. OKAY. THE OTHER THING, IT CONTINUES TO BE BLACK BUSINESS MONTH, AND SO I AM JUST ENCOURAGING THE PUBLIC TO SUPPORT OUR LOCAL SMALL BUSINESSES AROUND THE CITY OF TAMPA. THERE ARE SOME WONDERFUL INSTAGRAM POSTS THAT HIGHLIGHT BLACK BUSINESSES THAT I DIDN'T EVEN THOUGH EXISTED ON INSTAGRAM. THERE IS JUST SO MUCH INFORMATION OUT THERE, SO I ENCOURAGE TO YOU CHECK OUT SOCIAL MEDIA THERE. THERE ARE SOME WONDERFUL SPACES THAT EXIST AND THAT IS JUST ONE OF THE WAYS WE CAN KNOW ABOUT IT. THANK YOU. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. >>LYNN HURTAK: A BIG FESTIVAL. B.I.G. >>GWEN HENDERSON: LAST WEEK. PERRY HARVEY PARK. >>LYNN HURTAK: I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT BECAUSE ONE OF THE ORGANIZERS I MET ON TUESDAY, I BELIEVE. DEFINITELY. FOLKS -- >>GWEN HENDERSON: PERRY HARVEY PARK. HE IS GOING TO KILL ME. I MET HER AT THE JUNETEENTH FESTIVAL. AND SHE DROPPED SOME POSTCARDS OFF AT THE BOOK STORE. THERE IS A FESTIVAL. AND THAT INFORMATION IS -- OH, IT IS ACTUALLY ON OUR CITY WEB SITE, BOTH EVENTS. THANK YOU. >>LYNN HURTAK: THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. I AM EXCITED ABOUT THAT ONE. SO SOME OF THESE ARE -- WELL, ALL OF THESE ARE THINGS I TALKED ABOUT BEFORE. SO -- I MOVE TO INVITE HART -- A HART REPRESENTATIVE TO APPEAR TO THE SEPTEMBER, TO YOU, SPECIALLY CALLED BUDGET MEETING FOR MY PROPOSAL FOR A FARE-FREE PILOT PROGRAM FOR ROUTE 1. >>LUIS VIERA: SECOND. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: MOTION FROM COUNCILWOMAN HURTAK. SECONDED FROM COUNCILMAN VIERA. >>GWEN HENDERSON: CAN YOU REPEAT IT AGAIN? >>LYNN HURTAK: ASKING THE HART REPRESENTATIVE TO COME AT THE SEPTEMBER 3 MEETING TO GIVE A PRESENTATION ON THE PROPOSAL FOR A FARE-FREE PILOT AND I ALREADY SPOKEN TO A REPRESENTATIVE, AND THEY ARE HAPPY TO COME. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: GOOD. A MOTION AND A SECOND. I WAS HAVING COFFEE AT MY USUAL COFFEE SHOP AND BUMPED FROM SOMEBODY THERE. NEVER SEEN THEM BEFORE THERE AND WET A GREAT CONVERSATION OF THAT. AN EXCITING MOTION. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? >>GWEN HENDERSON: I AM GOING TO SAY NAY ON THAT ONE FOR THE RECORD. >>LYNN HURTAK: I MOVE TO REMOVE THE SMART CITY PARKING GUIDANCE 1002525 FROM THE CIP LIST AND REALLOCATE THE $5 MILLION FROM FY '25 TO TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS FOR PAVING SPECIFICALLY STREET RESURFACING 1002350. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION AND A SECOND [CLAPPING] [GAVEL SOUNDING] >>LYNN HURTAK: BASICALLY WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR. >>MARTIN SHELBY: IF YOU CAN STOP -- THE REASON I AM STOPPING AND A MOTION LIKE THAT IS OUT OF ORDER THAT THE TIME. >>LYNN HURTAK: OH, WE HAVE TO DO IT AT THE MEETING? >>MARTIN SHELBY: THAT MOTION HAS TO BE BROUGHT BACK -- >>LYNN HURTAK: I WAS TRYING TO GET THINGS AHEAD OF TIME SO THEY KNEW. >>MARTIN SHELBY: BUT THE TIME TO MAKE THAT MOTION IS AT THE BUDGET HEARING. >>LYNN HURTAK: I DON'T THINK I AM HIDING FROM ANYBODY. SO PROBABLY ALAN'S MOTION TOO. I WILL WITHDRAW IT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: READED PREVIOUS MOTION. >>CLERK: PREVIOUS MOTION PASSED WITH HENDERSON VOTE NOTHING. AND CLENDENIN BEING ABSENT. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT WAS THE HART MOTION. >>LYNN HURTAK: AND THEN COUNCILMAN MIRANDA ALLUDED TO THIS EARLIER. I MOVE TO HAVE CITY COUNCIL PREPARE A RESOLUTION OPPOSE -- I AM SORRY, MR. VIERA -- OPPOSING THE EXPANSION OF 275 FROM HILLSBOROUGH AVENUE TO BEARSS AVENUE. >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I SECOND THAT. I AM NOT AGAINST. WHAT DO YOU LIVE UNDER THE SPRAY. WE NEED TO FIND SOME OTHER FORM OF TRANSPORTATION. IF NOT, IT IS NEVER EVER GOING TO BE SOLVED. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT SAN EXCELLENT RESOLUTION WITH A SECOND. FLAVOR FAVOR. ANY OPPOSED? ANYTHING ELSE? >>GWEN HENDERSON: I AM NOT GOING TO BULLDOZE ANYBODY. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: THAT'S RIGHT. COUNCILMAN CARLSON. >>BILL CARLSON: TWO THINGS REAL FAST. THANK YOU TO COUNCILMAN VIERA FOR BRINGING UP RAQUEL. SHE IS -- SHE IS JUST A SUPERSTAR WHO CHANGES PEOPLE'S LIVES. I WANT TO PERSONALLY THANK HER AS WELL. CON STITCH WHENS IN MY DISTRICT INCREDIBLE THE DIFFERENCE MADE. AND YOU MAY SEE THE PROPOSAL BY THE GOVERNOR TO DEVELOP PART OF STATE PARK TO PUT HOTELS AND GOLF COURSES AND EVERYTHING IN. THERE IS A FROM TEST DISCUSSION ON THAT FOR THE HILLSBOROUGH RIVER STATE PARK THAT-AT JIMMY B. KELLY LIBRARY AT 2 P.M. ON AUGUST 27. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: JIMM JIMMY B. PEELE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: A MOTION -- OH, JUST AN ANNOUNCEMENT. FILLING ELSE. >>BILL CARLSON: THAT'S IT. >>GWEN HENDERSON: NOTION RECEIVE AND FILE. >>GUIDO MANISCALCO: DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND FROM COUNCILMAN MIRANDA. WE ARE ADJOURNED. [GAVEL SOUNDING]