►
From YouTube: Tampa City Council PM 08292019 part 2
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
C
D
A
C
D
E
D
C
Thank
You
mr.
crew,
all
in
favor
any
opposed
been
a
long
day.
Thank
you
as
always:
Jim,
okay,
I
wanted
to
6
and
7
or
Euclidean
I
wanted
to
specially
move
number
six
to
our
first
one
of
Muhammad
and
nasi,
because
they
are
here
with
a
young
young,
very
young
man
who
is
a
kindergartener
and
he
has
school
tomorrow.
So
I
wanted
to
move
that
up
any
objection
from
counsel,
okay,
let's
go
ahead
and
move
with
number
six
anybody!
Here's
number
six.
C
F
G
G
G
This
is
the
adoptive
future
land
use
map.
The
subject
site
is
in
a
residential,
20
future
land
use.
Category
residential
20
allows
for
low
to
medium
density,
residential,
including
single-family,
detached
residential
units
and
townhomes
you'll
see
here.
The
residential
Tony
is
shown
in
green,
it's
surrounded
by
residential
10,
which
is
shown
in
this
light.
Tan
color
and
then
you'll
see
this
blue
color
is
public.
Semi
public
uses.
G
Planning
Commission
staff
has
reviewed
the
application
if
found
no
adverse
impacts.
The
surrounding
neighborhood.
The
requests
would
allow
for
compatible
infill
development
with
an
area
within
an
area
that
has
plan
for
development
development
up
to
20,
drawing
units
per
acre.
The
requests
further
as
many
of
the
policies
in
the
Comprehensive
Plan
as
it
relates
to
housing
the
city's
population.
The
Tampa
comprehensive
plan
encourages
the
development
and
retention
of
a
diversity
of
housing
types
to
meet
the
needs
of
Tampa's
president
future
populations.
F
F
Here
is
an
aerial
photograph
as
well
as
a
zoning
map.
The
subject
property
is
in
red
I'm
here
his
take
on
Street
at
dads
ends
into
the
summit.
Expressway
here
is
Ferdinand
in
this
area.
There's
a
mix
of
our
m16s,
the
majority
of
the
property
we've
done
arm
16
with
individual
houses,
zoned
rs.50
throughout
this
neighborhood
and
the
entire
property
is
5000
square
feet.
It's
currently
occupied
by
a
duplex
or
a
semi
detached
single-family
dwelling
constructed
at
1972.
F
Under
the
current
zoning
district
arm,
16
somebody
types
drilling
it
is
it
considered
non-conforming
because
it
doesn't
meet
the
current
density.
If
this
property
in
order
to
be
approved
for
rezoning
to
RM
18,
then
it
would
be
considered
a
conforming
density,
conforming
structure,
the
way
the
code
reads
that
non-conforming
structure
cannot
be
added
on.
You
can
just
do
general
maintenance
and
repair,
so
the
property
owners
under
the
current
zoning
could
not
do,
can
only
do
normal
maintenance
on
the
roof,
a
normal
maintenance
and
repair
on
this
duplex.
F
They
can't
expand
it
in
order
to
expand
it
and
do
significant
improvements
to
the
site.
They
would
have
to
do
the
arm,
18
zoning
or
they
would
have
to
convert
the
property
into
a
single-family
house.
I
will
go
up
and
down
the
street
to
show
the
development
pattern
interesting.
We,
the
zoo,
there's
a
mix
of
residential
housing
types
on
the
street
to
the
media,
east
of
the
subject,
property
or
two
duplex
buildings,
then,
on
the
other
side,
now
we're
going
to
the
west
is
a
single-family
house,
another
large
single-family
house.
F
This
is
another
single-family
house
directly
across
from
the
Civic
property
single-family
house
and
then
getting
closer
to
the
soman
Expressway
a
duplex
and
on
the
very
corner,
another
duplex
there's
no
side
plan
to
review
the
applicant
is
requesting
just
to
go
to
the
straight-arm
18
zoning
district.
Also,
there
are
no
waivers
to
be
requested
if
this
project
were
to
be
approved
for
the
rmat
and
the
maximum
number
of
dwelling
units
that
could
be
developed
would
be
to
given
the
5,000
square
foot
size
of
the
law.
F
C
H
C
H
H
H
You
know
financial
gain
added.
This
past
was
basically.
This
is
for
personal
use.
Currently,
my
niece
she's
right
here
with
the
young
son
lives
at
one
of
the
unit.
She
has
three
children
and
the
corn.
The
square
footage
for
the
unit
is
five
hundred
square
foot,
so
it's
very
tight
unit
and
we
would
like
to
enhance
this
property.
H
We
would
like
to
include
this
property
by
adding
some
square
footage
to
the
existing
escort
footage
and,
as
a
staff
mentioned
under
the
current
non-conforming,
we
are
not
able
to
add
any
square
footage
to
the
existing
SQL
footage.
So,
given
that
again
our
hand
is
type,
we
respectfully
request
this
rezoning
to
be
approved,
to
be
able
to
add
some
square
footage,
enhance
the
property.
H
Basically
add
some
value
to
the
property
because
is
almost
50
years
old.
The
structure
is
added
date,
is
era
code
and
requires
substantial
improvement,
bring
it
up
to
date,
and
in
order
to
do
that,
we
need
some
a
square
footage.
We
definitely
need
some
square
footage
to
add,
because
500
is
not
sufficient
for
for
our
use
and
it's
existing
duplex
and
again
we
moved
to
the
neighborhood
32
years
ago
we
valued
this
neighborhood
you're
part
of
this
neighborhood.
We
truly
appreciate
this
neighborhood
and
again
we
want
to
add
value.
H
We
want
to
bring
more
value
to
this
neighborhood,
but
by
just
improving
this
property,
we
are
very
sensitive
to
the
neighborhood.
We
understand
again
our
neighbors
concern,
but
again
throughout
32
years
again
we
truly
enjoy
our
children.
Attending
a
school
is
one
of
the
greatest
neighborhood
in
South
Tampa,
but
we
would
like
to
add
and
bring
more
value
to
this
property
by
enhancing
it
and
developing
it
and
improving
it.
Such
a
condition,
as
is
again,
is
very
difficult
again
to
keep
the
property
up
to
date.
H
You
know
obtaining
some
insurance
policy
and
the
property
is
very
difficult
because
require
again
substantial
improvement
for
the
building
code,
bringing
it
up
to
date.
So
we
respectfully
ask
for
this
request
to
be
approved,
to
be
able
to
do
the
require
improvement
beneath
and
expanding
some
a
square
foot.
It
could
be
existing
building.
C
H
H
I
I
H
I
H
F
A
F
Samaniego,
yes,
as
I
stated
in
my
presentation,
under
the
current
zoning
district,
the
two
dwelling
units
are
considered
non-conforming
per
the
code.
You
can
only
do
general
maintenance
and
repair.
You
cannot
do
any
expansion
of
square
footage,
so
they
have
to
the
to
500
square
foot.
Dwelling
units
have
to
stay
to
500
square
foot
dwelling
units,
so
it's
either
expand
to
add
on
to
the
existing
building
or
to
demolish
it
and
build
two
other
dwelling
units
in
whatever
manner
that
they
choose
to
requires
a
rezoning.
C
I
F
I
F
F
J
D
C
K
Good
evening
City
Council
I'm
Kim
de
Kamp's,
president
of
the
Palma
Ceia
Neighborhood
Association
I'm
here
tonight,
asking
that
you
deny
the
rezoning
request
are
easy.
19
51,
our
streets
are
narrow.
Our
roads
are
overcrowded,
our
schools
are
overcrowded.
We
do
not
need
to
increase
our
density
within
our
neighborhood.
It
is
difficult
for
trash
trucks
to
get
down
our
streets,
because
multifamily
units
tend
to
take
up
more
parking
on
the
street
than
in
a
driveway.
K
The
Palma
Ceia
neighborhood
has
seen
tremendous
growth
over
the
last
couple
of
years.
Our
prior
board
members
spot
hard
and
worked
with
the
city
a
tampa
to
not
allow
a
multi-family
unions
to
be
built
within
our
neighborhood.
All
duplicate
duplexes
that
are
existing
in
our
neighborhood,
are
legally
non-conforming
and
have
been
grandfathered
in.
Therefore,
if
one
of
these
duplexes
is
torn
down,
you
are
not
allowed
to
build
the
duplex.
You
have
to
build
a
single
family
unit.
There
is
nothing
to
say
that
tonight.
K
K
I'll
also
include
a
letter
from
the
Neighborhood
Association
asking
you
to
deny
this
rezoning
in
closing
I,
respectfully
request
that
you
deny
this
rezoning
based
on
competent
and
substantial
evidence,
furnished
and
the
following
land
use
policy.
Nine
point:
five
point:
eight
provides
to
maintain
the
character
of
single-family
residential
areas,
land
use
policy.
Nine
point:
five
point:
four
provides
to
maintain
the
current
density
and
character
of
existing
family.
Yes,.
C
B
Okay
good
evening,
I'm
Robert
boss,
I
live
at
three
one.
One,
seven
in
granada
street
and
I
have
been
sworn
in
members
of
City
Council,
my
wife,
Kim
and
I
are
requesting
that
she's
an
I.
The
petition,
RZ
1951
rezoning
for
the
property
at
3206
west
akan
street.
The
zoning
is
currently
RM
16,
together
with
RS
50
zoning
and
is
shown
on
the
attached
zoning
map.
It's
a
very
consistent
residential
area.
There
are
duplexes
in
place:
they're,
non-conforming,
they're,
small.
B
Kim
and
I
are
among
those
long
term
residents
since
1985
that
remember
the
upheaval
that
was
going
on
back
then
that
was
maybe
three
booms
ago.
Many
of
the
single-family
homes
were
being
torn
down
to
make
way
for
new
townhouses
duplexes
surprise.
Here
we
are
again
in
another
boom
period
and
we're
trying
to
keep
a
hold
on
ever
increasing
traffic
parking
issues,
flooding
tree
removal
and
loss
of
the
character
of
our
neighborhood.
The
subject
lot
is
fifty
five
hundred
five
thousand
square
feet
same
as
most
of
the
Lots
in
this
area.
B
The
property
was
grandfathered
in
during
that
comprehensive
plan
revision.
When
many
of
our
neighbors
voted
to
downs
downs
on
their
property
to
rs.50,
+,
RM
16,
the
intent
of
the
time
was
to
respect
and
grandfather
in
the
rights
of
those
duplex
owners.
The
apartment
owners
that
diversity
thousand,
that
is
in
our
neighborhood,
but
not
to
take
advantage
of
that
later,
as
we
understood,
grandfathering,
allowed
those
owners
to
keep
the
right
the
right
to
keep
what
they
had.
In
this
case,
a
small
duplex.
B
You
can
make
cosmetic
improvements,
landscape
improvements,
interior
improvements
within
the
existing
square
footage.
You
can
expand
it,
however,
the
understandings
that
the
comprehensive
plan
also
protected
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood
owners,
who
could
not
create
further
injury
or
plan
variances
when
and
if
they
wanted
to
change
these
non-conforming
buildings
by
enlarging
or
tearing
down
a
rebuilding
as
currently
zoned.
The
5,500
watt
lot
will
only
allow
a
new
single-family
dwelling
structure.
Rm
16
intentionally
does
not
allow
two
dwelling
units
on
the
existing
5,000
square
foot,
RM
18.
Let
allow
those
two
units
on
a
non-conforming
lot.
B
Surely
you
can
see
how
this
rezoning,
there's
no
other
arm
18
would
open
the
door
to
a
terrible
domino
effect
to
any
other
developer.
Wanted
to
do
this
and
you've
got
a
precedent
now,
and
we
don't
have
that
president.
So
we
are
asking
that
there's
no
hardship
here,
there's
no.
This
is
kind
of
just
because
we
asked
you
to
deny
this
reason.
C
J
My
name
is
Shari
Parsons
I,
actually
own
the
duplex
next
to
his
pet
3204,
take
on
I've
owned
it
since
2001.
This
street
is
very
narrow.
The
traffic
is
incredible
down
there.
There's
no
parking
I
have
tenants
in
my
duplex,
and
there
is
a
lady
on
the
end
down
on
the
right
or
on
the
left,
and
she
has
a
maid
service
out
of
there.
So
every
day,
all
of
her
maids
show
up
and
they
park
along
the
whole
street,
and
you
can't
get
in
and
out.
J
My
lawn
guy
will
call
me
and
say:
I
can't
mow
the
lawn
today,
because
I
can't
get
my
trailer
down
there,
because
he's
not
gonna
be
able
to
turn
around
the
unit.
The
tenants
have
a
hard
time
even
putting
their
trash
cans
out,
because
there's
no
room
for
the
trash
cans
and
parking
on
the
street.
Literally,
we
have
three
spots
on
the
duplex
in
one
spot
in
the
street
which
they
fight
for
everybody
else.
You
have
a
5
minute
parking
sign,
but
now
those
aren't
valid
anymore.
J
So,
if
you
are
to
change
the
zoning,
you
are
going
to
increase
the
traffic
down
there
tremendously.
It's
a
dead
end,
there's
nowhere
to
go
but
to
turn
around
and
you
have
to
turn
around
in
each
other's
driveway.
It's
a
nightmare,
so
you
know
I
respectfully,
ask
you
to
deny
this
rezoning
and
I
have
the
building
right
next
door.
Mine
was
revamped
back
in
2001
when
I
bought
it.
He
could
do
the
same
thing.
J
He
could
make
the
outside
look
a
little
nicer,
I
mean
right
now,
he's
got
one
tenant
parking
their
car
in
the
back
of
the
duplex
and
one
in
the
front.
So
you
can
already
see
parking
is
a
problem.
You
want
to
add
two
more
structures
to
it:
you're
gonna,
add
four
more
cars
or
whatever
he's
planning
to
do
and
I
know
he's
planning
on
turning
in
tearing
it
down,
because
he
approached
me
years
ago
to
go
in
with
him
and
tear
mine
down,
build
some
townhomes
and
I
told
him.
I
wasn't
interested
in
doing
it.
J
So
you
know
I've
owned
the
place
since
2001,
and
it's
just
can't
handle
any
more
traffic
down
that
street.
It
is
so
narrow
and
your
lady
was
there
today
taking
photos
when
I
was
there.
Taking
my
own
photos
but
I
was
told,
I
couldn't
bring
them
in,
because
I
didn't
have
a
chance
to
a
crinum.
So
I
left
my
iPad
in
the
car.
J
L
J
C
D
M
Hello,
my
name
is
Jack
Rodriguez
11:32,
18
West's
and
wine.
Street
couple
blocks
over
from
the
subject
property
we've
been
here
before
and
and
talked
about
the
five
thousand
square
foot
Lots
and
the
legal
non-conforming
duplexes
apartment
buildings
in
the
neighborhood.
There's,
there's
plenty
of
our
m16
and
Rs
50.
As
you
can
see
on
the
map,
there's
no
RM
18
on
that
map.
M
The
new
zoning
made
all
the
apartments
duplexes
townhouses
and
the
neighborhood
legal
non-conforming.
The
subject
duplex
was
built
prior
to
chapter
27
and
is
legal
non-conforming
based
on
current
zoning.
The
duplex
cannot
be
enlarged.
It
can,
however,
be
torn
down
and
replaced
with
a
single-family
attached
house
and
the
Planning
Commission
in
the
times
I've
been
down
here.
You
know
they're
they're,
working
with
with
a
with
sort
of
an
old
plan.
M
M
There
hasn't
been
a
duplex
built
in
that
neighborhood
in
over
30
years,
and
there
hasn't
been
a
rezoning
for
anything
and
in
20
years
the
requested
spot
zoning,
which
is-
and
you
can
see
it
here
in
the
middle
of
the
residential
area,
the
process
of
singling
out
a
small
parcel
of
land
for
use
land
for
a
use
classification
totally
different
from
that
of
the
surrounding
area
for
the
benefit
of
the
owner
of
such
property
and
to
the
detriment
of
the
other
owners.
That's
a
definition.
That's
provided
in
anderson,
american
law
of
zoning.
M
Now
this
is
the
most
important
part
you
denied
a
rezoning,
3301
san
won
back
in
2016.
We
were
here
based
on
city
code,
ordinance,
section
27,
156.
A
council
denies
said
petition
based
on
the
rule
that
if
something
is
grandfathered
in
and
you
had
a
structure
there
on
five
thousand
square
feet,
it
remain
there
as
long
as
nothing
happens
to
it,
but
once
something
happens
to
it
yet
or
you
want
to
redo
it,
you
have
to
have
5500
square
feet
and
that
does
not
meet
the
requirement
of
the
petition
later
late.
M
Earlier
this
year,
rezoning
3302,
West,
San
Juan,
they
council
denies
said
petition,
based
on
its
inconsistency,
with
a
development
pattern
of
the
neighborhood
and
clear
intent
of
the
council
when
it
rezone
the
neighborhood
in
1989
to
basically
restrict
it
to
single-family
development
further
under
land
use
policy.
Two
point
one
point:
two:
that
limited
land
resources
be
used
more
efficiently
and
pursue
the
development
pattern.
That
is
more
economically
sound.
Further
that
this
development
pattern
is
not
more
economically
sound
to
encourage
the
type
of
infill
development.
M
That
is
part
of
the
development
pattern
in
this
particular
neighborhood
and
further
under
the
use
of
a
land
use
objective,
nine
point:
three:
the
compatible
development
and
redevelopment
sustained,
stable
neighborhoods
and
ensure
the
social
and
economic
health
of
the
city
and
this
land
use
designation
does
not
meet
that
standard.
Two
weeks
ago,
I
was
here
on
that
same
property.
M
You
all
resumed
that
property
RS
50
recognized
their
developer,
recognized
he
couldn't
build
the
duplexes,
so
he
came
in
and
asked
for
an
artist,
50
and
y'all
granted
it,
and
that
was
that
was
a
good
zoning
and
then,
finally,
are
the
1891
24
council
denied
to
say
Perdition
based
on
land
use
policy.
Nine
point
three
point:
eight:
that
it
is
the
intent
of
the
city
that
new
residential
development
projects
shall
minimally
disruptive
to
adjacent
areas
further
under
land
use
policy.
M
Nine
point:
three
point:
five,
the
location
of
single-family
attached
units
shall
be
limited
to
the
periphery
of
the
established
single-family
detached
neighborhood.
This
is
in
the
middle
of
the
neighborhood,
not
on
the
periphery.
The
rezoning
hearing
is
a
quasi-judicial
hearing
interpreter
approved
that
petition.
You
must
find
competent
and
substantial
evidence.
I
submit
to
you,
the
current
petition
should
be
denied,
based
on
all
of
the
above
competent
and
substantial
evidence,
provided
here
in
you
all
have
spoken
in
the
past,
and
it's
the
it's
your
job
to
follow
through
on.
L
A
question
for
legal:
he
brought
up
the
issue
of
grandfathering
and
in
that,
if
something
is
grandfathered
that
it
can't
be
changed
after
that,
can
you
give
I'm
sorry
I'm
the
newbie
question,
but
is
there?
Is
there
some
legal?
Is
that
competent,
substantial
information
or
evidence,
and
is
there
any
legal
opinion
regarding
that.
N
So
grandfathering
is
it's
a
term
that
we
struggle
with
is
as
land
use
lawyers
because
it's
it's
often
thrown
around.
It's
not
actually
the
right
terminology.
For
this
particular
instance.
The
discussion
that
you
heard
earlier
from
Miss
Samaniego
regarding
the
nonconformity
status.
That
is
how
we
handle
you
know
what
would
be
considered
grandfathering
under
our
zoning
code.
N
So
the
zoning
code
provides
that
if
something
existed
before
the
rules
went
into
place,
then
we
don't
enforce
those
new
rules
against
them
unless
and
until
they
make
major
renovations
or
they
make
some
sort
of
major
change
to
what
they're
doing
with
the
property
or
they
cease
that
nonconformity
and
then
they
can't
get
it
back.
So
the
non-conforming
structure
in
our
code
is
how
we
handle
those
types
of
situations.
So
I
would
say
for
your
purposes
for
your
consideration
tonight.
N
C
O
There
is
an
alternative
for
a
an
extended
family,
residence
I
think
which
is
a
special
use,
at
least
in
our
s50
zoning
district,
I'm,
not
sure
if
it's
allowed
in
our
in
our
m16
I
understand
it
has
to
be
owner
occupied
property.
It
has
to
be
a
member
of
the
family.
So
I'm
not
sure
if
this
is
homestead
property
and
it's
owned
by
one
of
the
brothers
and
they
occupy
it,
but
it's
definitely
an
alternative
for
them.
O
O
The
gentlemen
before
you
know,
spoke
about
you
know,
what's
right
for
the
city,
but
I
think
they
also
need
to
consider
what's
right
for
the
family,
so
I
think
if
this
is
a
feasible
alternative
to
an
extended
family
residence
that
would
be
an
alternative
that
they
could
do
I
assume
with
the
existing
zoning,
assuming
that's
homestead
property.
Thank
you.
O
P
H
We
want
to
add
to
a
square
footage
to
the
existing
structure,
as
the
staff
explained
the
minute
we
touch
this,
we
don't
have
on
there
our
m16,
the
sufficient
square
footage
to
put
the
foot
to
put
the
duplex
back
in
place.
The
minute
we
touch
it.
We
are
allowed
to
tear
it
down,
you
know
and
replace
it
with
a
single
family
home.
A
H
Been
paying
taxes
past
20
years,
based
on
the
duplex
based
on
the
multi-unit?
Okay,
the
property,
appraiser
and
tax
collector
assess
the
property
based
on
two
units.
Now
we've
been
grandfathered
in
because
the
zoning
has
changed
throughout
the
years.
Basically
they're
asking
us
to
give
us
or
what
we
have
and
reduce
it
down
to
less
than
what
we
have.
H
You
know
the
neighbors
that
are
asking
us
to
tear
it
down
and
build
like
one
single
dwelling
unit
for
past
50
years,
I
mean
this
has
been
duplex
since
1971
they
built
it
has
been
conforming,
but
the
code
has
changed.
The
zoning
has
changed.
The
city
changed
it.
Okay,
mid
80s,
early
eighties,
but
again
it
still
is
our
m16s
city's
gonna.
L
Just
a
question
for
legal:
is
there
a
sorry
to
make
you
jump
up
again?
Is
there
a
stop
me
if
I
should
ask
this,
but
it,
but
is
there
a
third
alternative
here?
I
think
it
sounds
like
the
concern
of
the
community
is
that
is
that
this
would
be
converted
into
a
new
duplex
and
that
the
duplex
rights
would
somehow
break
break
through
if,
if
this
went
through
is
there
is
there
some
other
way
to
resolve
the
neighbors
concerns.
N
Not
through
this
rezoning,
we
can't
place
conditions
on
Euclidian
rezoning,
so
the
route
that
they
have
chosen
to
do
a
Euclidean
rezoning
is
would
not
be
an
avenue
to
place
those
limitations
upon
it
and
just
as
a
a
quick
reminder,
because
there's
been
a
lot
of
debate
about
what
the
appropriate
standards
are
for.
You
know
you
heard
a
lot
of
information
from
everyone
tonight.
The
standard
for
rezoning
is
the
applicant,
bears
the
burden
of
proof
to
show
that
what
they
are
asking
for
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
A
I
I
Halfway
through
it
says
the
act
of
applicants
proposing
Rowdy
yada
yada
RMA
team
to
allow
for
the
development
of
two
townhomes.
That
goes
on
to
speak
to
two
townhomes
elsewhere.
In
that
paragraph,
and
then
the
applicant
says
no
I
just
want
to
expand
the
existing,
so
there's
a
little
bit
of
conflict
there,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
it
doesn't
matter
because
he's
not
doing
a
PD
he's
asking
for
a
change
in
the
Euclidean
zone
from
our
m16
I'm
18.
I
So,
in
my
opinion,
my
humble
opinion,
what
we
have
to
do
is
evaluate
sort
of
the
the
maximum
development
potential
that
he
could
do,
regardless
of
what
he
says
he's
going
to
do
here
today,
regardless
of
what
the
Planning
Commission
says,
he's
gonna
do,
regardless
of
what
the
neighborhood
testified
says,
he's
gonna.
Do
it
doesn't
matter
because,
once
the
Euclidean
is
granted,
he
can
max
out
and
do
whatever
that
are
m18
allows.
So
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
to
clarify
that
and
then
I'll
we'll
hear
the
rest
of
this
and
like
get
moving
on
it.
H
As
I
stated
earlier,
this
is
a
hardship
request
and
currently
we
have
a
duplex
and
we
owned
this
property.
For
the
last
20
years,
we've
been
in
neighborhood
for
last
32
years.
We
value
our
neighborhood.
We
are
not
planning
to
move
out
of
the
neighborhood
anytime
soon
and
again,
we
would
like
to
enhance.
We
would
like
to
improve
this
property
again
to
make
the
best
use
out
of
them
under
the
current
condition.
H
We
have
a
limited-use
as
far
as
the
square
footage
and
as
I
said,
the
building
is
not
up
to
date,
doesn't
meet
the
floor,
the
building
code,
the
standard,
okay
and
is
hard
to
obtain.
You
know,
policy
on
the
building
needs
substantial
improvement
and
again
this
is
just
the
request
for
the
personal
use
and
we
don't
want
to
get
any
financial
gain
out
of
this.
We
don't
want
to
develop
two
townhomes.
We
talked
to
this
stuff,
and
this
is
the
staff
recommendation
could
should
be
spout
and
again
for
confidence
of
the
council.
H
If
you
want
us
to
go
through
the
PD
route,
we'd
be
happy
again
to
change
the
application
come
back
in
here.
You
know
so
we
consulted
with
the
stuff,
they
said
change
it
from
autumn.
Sixteen
to
automating
zoning
that
would
allow
you
to
basically
keep
your
current
status,
not
go
less
than
what
you
have
and,
as
I
said,
we've
been
paying
proper
tax
for
last
20
years
on
this
property
based
on
the
duplex
based
on
the
multi
unions
and
neighbors
are
complaining,
but
the
traffic
is
a
dead-end
street.
H
You
got
four
or
five
more
other
duplexes
industry
and
if
somebody's
running
business
off
of
residential
property
again
I,
don't
know
how
we're
you
know
responsible
for
that
is
the
code
enforcement
issue.
Is
it
City
issue
to
have
to
deal
with
running?
You
know,
businesses
out
of
the
property
and
again
Cornett
is
a
two-unit.
You
may
have
two
cars
per
unit,
so
we
are
not
asking
for
more
than
more
dense
and
what
it
what
it
is.
Okay,
regardless
I
mean,
does
not
get
granted
tonight.
H
You're
gonna
have
a
duplex,
you
know
in
there
we're
gonna
have
the
amount
of
core
or
the
number
of
the
court
you
will
have
in
there.
So
we
are
not
asking
again
for
higher
than
what
we
have.
We
are
not
impacting
the
residents
we
are
asking
for
modification.
We
are
asking
for
upgrading
what
we
have,
because
under
the
current
non-conforming,
we
can't
do
anything
about
his
profit
and
we
have
again
as
the
owner
we
have
I
think
ownership
some
rights.
You
know
this
is
respectfully
a
request
on
the
hardship
cases.
L
N
There
are
a
few
different
options.
He
could
modify
his
request,
in
which
case
he
would
have
to
go
back.
We
notice
and
change
that
request.
Go
through
DRC
do
all
the
things
he
would
need
to
do.
So
that's
an
option,
that's
an
avenue,
and
that
would
get
him
back
here
in
three
months,
probably
something
along
those
lines.
If
he's
denied
tonight,
then
there
there's
no,
if
you
would
just
need
to
restart
a
new
PD
application,
and
so
that
would
have
to
go
through
that
process
of
you
know
a
few
months,
but
yeah.
A
C
L
Sir
I'm
I'll
start
a
motion
and
if
you
all
agree
you
can
add
to
it,
I
would
I
would
I
would
move
that.
We
deny
our
easy
1951
due
to
the
failure
of
the
petitioner
to
meet
its
burden
of
proof
to
provide
competent,
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
that
the
rezoning
is
consistent
with
the
Comprehensive
Plan
and
the
city
code,
and
specifically,
that
it's
inconsistent
with
the
surrounding
neighborhood
and
and
some
of
the
other
evidence.
We
were
presented
that
I
can't
remember
right
this
man,
sir.
D
I
Support
the
motion
based
upon
the
Complutense,
with
its
abstention
evidence
that
I
heard
as
related
to
school
traffic
and
regular
traffic
and
and
parking
issues
on
a
very
narrow
street
and
the
neighbors
who
live
there.
Many
years
in
the
immediate
vicinity
of
all
testified
to
those
problems
already
without
increasing
the
density.
I
C
I
By
one
of
other
thing
before
you
vote
yes,
sir,
he
mentioned
a
hardship
and
our
legal
counsels
never
indicated
that
a
hardship
is
a
factor.
It
might
be
an
emotional
factor
for
us,
but
but
our
legal
counsel
would
say
that
hardship
might
be
an
issue
on
variances.
This
isn't
a
variance.
This
is
a
rezoning,
so
hardships
not
relevant.
Okay,.
C
D
G
Danny
Collins
with
the
Planning
Commission
staff,
have
been
sworn
in
for
this
case.
We're
moving
into
central
Tampa
planning
district.
The
subject
site
is
within
the
East
Tampa
urban
village.
The
closest
transit
stop
is
adjacent
adjacent
to
the
subject
site
on
East
17th
Avenue.
The
closest
recreation
facility
is
on
cascade
and
Park,
which
is
located.
One
block
to
the
northwest
of
the
subject
site
and
the
subject
site
is
not
in
an
evacuation
zone.
G
G
This
is
the
adopted
future
land
use.
Map
subject:
site
is
classified
commercial,
mixed
use,
35
a
showed
in
the
light
pink
color,
it's
kind
of
in
the
center
and
then,
if
you
kind
of
go
out,
you'll
see
the
CMU
35.
This
green
color
is
the
residential
10
or
the
residential
20,
and
then
there's
white
and
colors
of
us
with
residential
10
and
then
this
light.
Blue
color
is
public,
semi-public.
G
Planning
Commission
staff
has
reviewed
the
applicants,
requests
upon
the
proposed
zoning
comparable
and
could
paddle
it's
the
existing
uses
in
the
area.
The
site
is
surrounded
by
a
mix
of
light
commercial
and
light
industrial
uses.
A
mix
mix
of
single-family
and
multi-family
residential
exists
to
the
east
north
east
of
the
subject
site.
The
request
would
facilitate
redevelopment
of
an
underutilized
and
vacant
lot
in
the
East
Tampa
urban
village
and
would
not
adversely
impact
existing
residences.
Based
on
those
considerations.
Finding
Commission
staff
finds
the
request
consistent
with
the
Tampa
Comprehensive
Plan.
F
Mary
San
Diego
plan
to
design
and
develop
coordination
again.
This
property
is
currently
is
on.
Earth
was
at
50
and
they're
requesting
you
go
to
commercial
general
Jenni
just
indicated
it's
in
a
community
commercial
35
land
use
category,
which
is
promoting
increasing
development
to
the
commercial
general
level.
It's
currently
a
vacant
piece
of
property.
F
F
F
This
is
directly
to
the
ease,
their
commercial
properties
that
finished
out
the
block
to
single-family
houses
and
again,
the
eastern
side
of
the
historic
Art
Factory
across
17th
is
a
commercial
use,
as
well
as
a
large
wholesome,
are
critical
in
17th.
This
is
a
Kalitta
euclidian
rezoning,
so
any
allowable
use
within
the
cg
would
be
able
to
be
developed
pending
they
to
preach
approval
of
all
zoning
requirements
for
its
building
consideration.
F
F
K
O
Good
evening
my
name
is
Alan
Dobbs
with
Florida
design,
studio,
5502,
North,
Cherokee,
Avenue
I
have
been
sworn.
How
much
time
do
I
have
for
the
presentation,
I'm
sort
of
kidding,
because
this
is
gonna
be
very
quick.
I
just
have
one
very
short
statement.
The
purpose
of
this
rezoning
is
to
allow
redevelopment
of
an
underutilized
property,
but
also
allow
adjacent
properties
to
the
north,
which
are
underutilized,
one
of
which
includes
the
perfecto
Garcia
cigar
factory.
O
C
Okay,
thank
you
very
much.
Does
anybody
hear
from
the
public
to
comment
on
item
number
seven?
If
so,
please
come
forward
and
we
speak
three
minutes
at
a
time
second,
by
Councilman
Goodes,
all
in
favor,
any
opposed
councilman.
Think
Felder.
Do
you
mind,
sir?
Taking
item
number?
Seven?
I'm,
sorry,
did
you
have
a
question.
A
P
C
P
B
E
Evening,
council,
luminosity
planning,
design
and
development
coordination
I
know
number
three
is
application:
a
B
to
1917
located
at
1700
or
Palm
point
Drive.
The
applicant
is
Mark
Bentley.
The
current
zoning
on
the
on
the
site
was
PDA
with
the
future
land
use
of
CC
35
development
review
and
compliance
staff
has
reviewed
the
application
and
finds
it
inconsistent
with
applicable
city
of
Tampa
planning
and
development
regulations.
Should
you
approve
it
tonight?
Minor
Corrections
to
the
site
ban
would
be
needed
before
second
reading.
E
The
property
currently
hasn't
approved
alcohol
beverage
sales,
ordinance,
2009,
67
file,
vo9
57
for
a
small
venue,
beer
and
wine
consumption
on
premises
and
in
sealed
containers
for
consumption
off
premises.
The
existing
a/v
sales
area
has
a
total
of
4309
square
feet
with
2371
square
feet,
indoor
and
1930
square
feet
outdoor.
Also,
the
existing
ad
sales
ordinance
hours
operation
are
consistent
with
chapter
14.
This
petition
that
is
before
you
tonight,
is
requesting
a
special
use
approval
to
allow
the
sale
of
alcoholic
beverages
for
a
restaurant,
your
wine
and
liquor
consumption
on
premises.
E
Only
the
total
ad
sales
area
for
the
proposed
petition
is
four
thousand
three
hundred
and
eighty
four
square
feet,
which
contains
two
thousand
two
hundred
twenty
two
two
square
feet:
indoor
area,
first
floor,
500
square
feet,
indoor
area,
second,
floor
and
1632
square
feet.
Outdoor
the
proposed
use
on
the
property
is
a
restaurant,
and
this
petition
was
not
considered
a
change
of
use
and
the
parking
requirement
requirement
for
the
entire
strip
center
is
107
spaces,
which
was
previously
approved.
The
ordinance
2018
51
file,
a
B
to
17
24.
E
The
property
is
along
a
mixed-use
corridor
village,
and
the
distant
separation
requirement
is
250
feet
from
other
from
residential
uses
and
250
feet
from
other
alcohol
selling
establishments.
The
site
plan
states,
the
sales
area
area
shall
not
be
located
in
a
parking
loading
area
or
space
and
that
all
permits
issued
after
April
1st
2011
shall
be
kept
on
site.
A
copy
of
adopted,
ordinance
and
associated
site
plan
for
the
alcohol
beverage
sales
permit.
The
hours
operation
for
this
petitioner
listed
on
the
site
plan
as
consistent
with
chapter
14
as
may
be
amended.
E
General
requirements
of
code
and
staff
bindings
found
that
planning
design
and
development
coordination
did
find
it
inconsistent.
That's
due
to
the
reduction
in
the
required
distance
separation
from
other
ad
sales
establishments.
Again
minor
Corrections
to
the
site
plan
would
be
needed.
The
minor
correction
and
I'll
show
you
on
a
graphic.
Is
the
AV
sales
area
on
the
site
and
floor
plan
need
to
accurately
reflect
the
AV
sales
area
on
the
the
sketch
that
was
certified?
E
The
waiver
comes
from
section
27
132
and
that's
to
reduce
the
required
distance
separation
from
other
ad
sales
establishments
from
250
feet
to
0
feet
along
mixed-use
corridor
villages.
Again
the
250
feet
for
residential
uses
and
250
feet
for
alcoholic
AV
sales
establishments
is
required.
There
were
no
residential
uses
within
that
area
and
the
alcohol
establishment
that
did
trigger
this
waiver
comes
from
one
17:01
to
Palm
Point
Drive,
which
is
the
same
strip
center.
It's
zoned
PDA,
it's
the
Kois,
AO
endless
hibachi
and
sushi
eatery.
E
They
hold
a
for
Co
P
and
the
way
it's
measured.
Is
it
be
at
0
feet
because
it's
on
the
same
property,
general,
Planning
and
transit
findings
found
the
property
is
located
in
a
mixed-use
corridor,
village
and
code
criteria
for
City
Council
reference
and
consideration
come
from
section
27
43?
That's
the
definitions
where
it
defines
the
beer
wine
liquor
consumption
on
premise
only
as
well
as
the
restaurant
use.
Other
areas
for
council
to
consider
is
section
27,
129,
general
standards
and
section
27.
132
regulations
governing
individual
special
uses.
E
The
map
shows
the
zoning
on
the
property,
as
well
as
an
aerial
view,
and
what
I
did.
This
is
just
a
vicinity
map.
This
is
not
by
scale
and
the
AG
sketch
would
actually
locks
in
the
how
qahal
beverage
sales
area,
but
just
for
you
to
identify
the
area
in
the
strip
center
I
kind
of
highlighted
here
with
my
red
pen,
the
overall
property
is
the
the
red
dashed
boundaries
and,
as
you
can
see,
around
the
property
is
all
PDA,
including
across
the
street.
E
Top
photo
shows
the
front
of
the
establishment.
It's
the
ciccio's.
This
is
the
outdoor
area
that
is
right
next
to
wall,
to
connected
to
the
indoor
area,
top
photo
shows
the
rear
view
of
the
outside
area.
You
see
the
fence
go
around
it
and
then
the
tables
set
up.
This
is
the
picture
behind
the
strip
Center
something
a
little
different
from
the
previous
alcohol
was
this.
This
cooler
is
included
in
this
AV
sketch.
That's
why
some
of
the
a
B
square
footages
might
be
a
little
bit
different
from
the
existing
ad
sales
ordinance.
E
E
Bottom
photo
is
a
southern
I'm,
sorry
South,
East,
Tampa,
Palms
Boulevard
and
then
there's
south
across
Tampa
Palms
Boulevard,
the
site
plan
that
was
submitted
with
the
staff
report
and
for
staff.
The
review
was
there
and
provided
hard
copies.
The
corrections
between
first
and
second
reading
that
I
stated
was
to
the
hall
sale
sales
area.
That's
shown
graphically
on
the
site
plan.
I
highlighted
the
a/v
sketch
from
the
application
packet
I
would
just
like
it
to
more
reflect
baby
sketch
and
also
TPD.
Had
no
objections
to
this
request.
P
E
The
way
it
works
with
TPD
calls
for
service,
and
it's
not
inaccurate,
but
what
happens
is
I'm
trying
to
find
that
very
well
if
anything
is
happening
outside
on
that
road
TPD
has
to
mark
it
as
that
address.
So
you'll
find
this
in
a
lot
of
establishments
that
maybe
on
a
busy
road.
If
someone
got
pulled
over
there,
they're
gonna
start
a
report
for
that
address,
necessarily
not
for
the
specific
address
the
TPD
officer,
I,
believe
that
investigates
us.
He
would
have
shown
if
there
was
actually
anyone.
I
know.
C
D
L
Good
evening,
mr.
chairman
members
of
council,
my
name
is
Mark
Bentley
401,
East,
Jackson,
Street,
Tampa,
330,
602
and
I
have
been
sworn
I
represent
the
Chi
Chi
Oh
Restaurant
Group
in
connection
with
some
modifications
to
their
existing
wet
zoning
in
the
shopping
center
out
in
Tampa.
Palms
they've
been
there
approximately
nine
years
at
this
point
in
time
that
the
two
Co
P
laws
package,
sales,
beer
and
wine.
L
There
have
been
no
incidents
related
to
the
establishment
that
we're
aware
of
in
the
nine
years
and
councilman
gutes.
That
issue
about
the
address
is
its
I
know:
you're
you're
a
policeman,
but
they
what
the
police
do
is
they
tag
any
incident
to
the
closest
address,
whether
it's
open
or
not?
So
that's
the
way
that
works
so
that
you
have
this
new
restaurant
concept
and
in
recently,
Council
approved
one
on
deal
may
every
next
across
the
street
from
LA
Fitness.
It's
this
Cali
restaurant.
L
So
the
modifications
being
sought
here
tonight
are
in
connection
with
this
new
concept
by
Chi
Chi.
Oh,
and
specifically,
the
changes
are
as
follows:
from
a
small
venue
to
a
restaurant
and
by
definition
under
the
city
code,
a
restaurant
is
the
principal
use
of
the
property,
is
a
preparation,
sale
of
food
and
there's
a
reporting
requirement
of
annual
reporting
requirement
in
terms
of
percentages.
L
They're
increasing
the
indoor
area
530
square
feet
at
a
second
floor,
they're
decreasing
the
outdoor
area
by
300
square
feet,
they're,
adding
liquor
as
a
component
they're,
eliminating
the
ability
to
have
package
sales
and
they'll
maintain
the
same
hours
of
operation
that
they
have,
which
are
pursuant
to
chapter
14
and
also
point
out
to
council.
There
are
three
other
restaurants
in
the
center
and
all
of
them
are
for
COP
and
all
their
hours
of
operation
are
pursuant
to
chapter
14,
the
waiver
from
the
other
ABS,
as
Ryan
indicated
in
the
staff
report.
L
We
need
a
waiver
because
the
way
the
city
applies
its
zoning
code,
the
interpretation
is
that,
even
if
it's
in
the
same
shopping
center,
it
could
be
eight
hundred
feet
away
and
exceed
the
separation
requirement.
Is
that
if
it's
on
the
same
folio
our
parcel?
The
city
considers
it
to
be
zero,
so
the
sushi
place,
that's
zero
could
have
been
five
hundred
feet
away,
but
that's
just
the
way
the
city
interprets
it.
In
any
event,
the
sushi
is
for
COP
hours
of
operations
are
pursuant
to
chapter
fourteen,
so
that
pretty
much
covers
it.
C
This
in
no
way
in
forms
or
defines
my
vote
obviously
been
to
that
restaurant
a
number
of
times,
I
live
over
in
hunters,
green
and
they're,
always
good
folks
over
there
who
are
good
community
partners,
a
lot
of
issues
and
generally
are
very
responsible
people
from
my
own
personal
opinion
that
has
no
basis
on
my
vote.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Okay.
Anybody
here
from
the
public
here
to
comment
on
item
number
three.
H
Q
D
E
Q
Consideration
and
ordinance
approving
a
special
use
permit
us
to
for
alcoholic
beverage
sales,
restaurant
consumption
on
premises
only
in
making
lawful
the
sale
of
beverages,
regardless
of
our
coholic
content,
beer,
wine
and
liquor
on
that
certain
lot
or
attractive
land
located
at
one
seven:
zero,
zero.
Four
palm
Point
Drive
Tampa
Florida,
has
more
particularly
described
in
Section
three,
providing
that
all
ordinances
or
parts
of
ordinances
in
conflict
are
repealed.
Repealing
ordinance,
number
2009's,
sixty
seven,
providing
an
effective
date
and
including
the
revision
sheet
and
I
see
going
by
the
staff
report.
Q
C
E
Manasi
planning,
design
and
development
coordination
item
number
five
is
the
application,
a
B
to
1919,
located
at
fifty
to
forty
four
and
fifty
to
forty
six
North
Florida
Avenue,
the
applicant
is
David,
the
agent
for
the
application
is
David
V
singer
and
the
current
zoning
on
the
property
is
SH,
see
G&S
HCI,
the
future
land
uses
CC
35
the
develop
the
I'm.
Sorry,
the
development
review
and
compliance
staff
has
reviewed
the
application
and
finds
it
inconsistent
with
applicable
city
of
Tampa
planning
and
development
regulations.
E
Minor
Corrections
to
the
site
plan
are
needed
between
first
and
second
reading.
Should
you
approve
this
petition
tonight?
The
petition
before
you
is
requesting
a
special
use
approval
to
allow
the
sale
of
alcoholic
beverages
for
a
small
venue,
beer,
wine
and
liquor
package
sales
off-premises
consumption.
Only
the
petition
is
not
considered
a
change
of
use
and
the
uses
of
retail
sales
established
under
building
permit
BLD
17-0
four
five
one
three
eight
to
the
required
parking
for
all
the
uses.
A
hundred
ten
spaces.
E
At
fifty
to
forty
six
North
Florida
Avenue,
the
property
is
within
the
Seminole
Heights
urban
village
and
the
distant
separate
separation
requirement
is
two
hundred
fifty
feet
from
other
ad
sales
establishments.
The
site
plan
states.
The
hours
operation
will
be
consistent
with
chapter
fourteen
and
the
sales
area
shall
not
be
located
within
a
parking
loading
area
or
space.
Also,
the
site
plan
states
the
permit
all
permits
issued
after
April
1st
2011
shall
be
kept
on
site,
a
copy
of
the
adopted,
ordinance
and
associated
site
plan
for
the
alcoholic
beverage
sales
permit.
E
General
requirements
of
code
and
staff
findings
found
it
inconsistent.
Do
the
due
to
the
distant
separation
requirement
and
it's
the
reduction
in
the
required
distance
separation
to
other
ad
sales
establishments?
That
waiver
comes
from
section
27
132
and
it
reads
as
to
reduce
the
required
distance
separation
to
avy
sales
establishments
from
250
feet
to
85
feet.
The
closest
a/b
sales
establishment
is
the
red
star
rock
bar
at
5210
North
Florida
Avenue,
it's
zone,
sh
CI
and
s
HCG.
It
holds
a
for
Co
P
and
it's
F
285
feet.
E
General
planning
and
transit
findings
found
that
heart
route,
1
typically
runs
weekdays
from
405
a.m.
to
12:00,
43
a.m.
and
weekends
from
6
a.m.
to
10:48
p.m.
again.
The
property
is
located
in
the
Seminole
Heights
urban
village
code
criteria
for
City
Council
reference
and
consideration
come
from
section,
27
43
and
that's
the
definitions.
I've
included
the
definition
for
a
small
venue,
which
is
a
commercial
establishment
with
less
than
299
person
occupancy,
which
sells
alcoholic
beverages
only
and
then
also
the
definition
for
retail
sales
and
the
AV
classification.
Again.
This
is
for
package
sales.
E
Here's
the
aerial
and
zoning
map,
as
you
can
see,
the
entire
parcel
again
is
outlined
in
red
and
I.
Try
to
visually
depict
the
cutouts
for
these
type
of
strip
centers
again.
The
ad
sketch
is
what
its
gonna
hold
alcohol
to
the
property
area.
As
you
can
see,
the
zoning
is
sh
CG,
as
I
said,
an
sh
TI
to
the
south,
including
the
property,
the
petition
in
front
of
you
tonight
the
top
photo
is
the
subject,
the
subject
site
the
front,
that's
facing
more
of
a
Northwest
and
that's
the
bottom
pictures
facing
Southwest.
E
E
This
is
the
rear
inside
the
parking
garage
and
then
across
the
directly
across
the
street.
Florida
Avenue
top
picture
shows
the
closest
from
alcohol
sales
establishment,
the
red
star
rock
bar
to
the
property,
and
this
is
north
across
Gibbons
Avenue.
The
site
plan
was
submitted
and
you
have
a
hard
copy
in
front
of
you,
as
well
as
I've,
provided
a
graphic
depiction
of
some
minor
corrections
to
the
site
plan.
That
I
would
require
between
first
and
second
reading.
Should
you
approve
this
petition?
R
Good
evening
Council
David
singer
for
the
applicant,
along
with
my
colleague,
Matt
Newton,
we're
at
101
East
Kennedy
Boulevard
here
in
Tampa
I
know
it's
been
a
long
day.
I
will
try
and
keep
this
brief.
I
am
here
to
answer
your
questions
at
the
end
as
staff
indicated,
while
we're
here
to
permit
the
a
be
use.
This
is
also
about
bringing
grocery
store
to
commercial
intensive
corridor
in
Seminole
Heights.
R
They
have
expanded
with
another
location
in
Channelside,
soon
they're,
looking
to
add
a
location
at
the
new
West,
Shore
marina
district,
with
your
approval
in
Seminole
Heights.
With
this
application,
duckweed
is
requesting
to
open
a
3642
square
foot
grocery
store
only
555
square
feet
of
which
will
be
utilized
for
a
liquor
component.
R
R
This
is
primarily
a
commercial
corridor
with
residential
uses
situated
a
block
behind
a
number
of
growing
and
successful
commercial
uses.
Here
you
can
see
the
location
is
within
the
CC
35
stretch
of
the
future
land
use
map
noted
in
the
red
color.
This
is
an
intense
future
land
use
category
in
our
comp
plan
that
allows
for
intensive
and
general
commercial
use
on
the
zoning
map
you
can
see.
This
is
squarely
within
the
Seminole
Heights
commercial,
intensive
district,
the
most
dense
commercial
designation
in
this
part
of
the
city.
R
This
corridor
is
in
a
commercial
district
noted
for
its
many
new,
culinary
contributions
to
the
city
and
the
community,
along
with
city
staff,
has
been
making
strides
to
make
this
a
more
walkable
and
connected
corridor.
This
application
and
further
is
not
objective.
This
is
a
side
view
of
what
the
building
looks
like
today.
The
staff
pointed
out
the
only
waiver
the
applicant
is
requesting
is
to
operate
duckweed
in
relative,
close
proximity
to
another,
a
be
use
that
uses
the
red
star
Rothbart,
which
is
actually
one
of
the
smallest
bars
in
the
city
of
Tampa.
R
According
to
the
property
appraiser,
that
use
contains
only
1300
square
feet
of
heated
area
and
for
comparison
say
for
those
of
you
that
are
familiar
with
tiny
tap
in
South
Tampa
that
that's
only
ninety
square
feet.
Small
keep
in
mind
this
liquor
component
at
duckweed
is
only
555
square
feet.
Why
am
I
telling
me
this?
Why
is
that
important?
The
proximity
of
duckweed
to
this
existing
use
is
not
going
to
lead
to
an
unintended
consequence
of
creating
a
nightclub
district.
That
was
the
original
purpose
of
the
distance
separation
in
the
coda.
R
R
R
Also,
it's
smart
planning,
integrating
ground-level
grocery
store
uses
in
small-scale,
vertical
mixed-use
developments
is
precisely
what
planners
envisioned
for
the
successful
future
of
walkable
communities.
On
this
slide,
I
highlighted
expert
excerpts
from
a
peer-reviewed
article
in
the
Journal
of
urban
that
is
titled
beyond
bodegas,
affordable,
groceries
through
an
innovative
store
format.
The
article
advocates
the
utilization
of
small-scale
vertically
integrated
mixed-use
developments
with
ground-floor
grocery
uses,
because
they
contribute
to
the
neighborhood
character
to
food
security
and
economic
stability.
Grocery
stores
in
their
neighborhoods
have
a
positive
and
a
symbiotic
relationship.
R
These
grocery
stores
strengthen
neighborhoods
the
fact
that
liquor
is
included
with
this
grocery
stores
inventory
shouldn't
muddy
the
waters.
Here
there
is
no
reason
the
neighborhood
should
be
able
to
walk
a
few
steps
for
fresh
produce,
but
have
to
drive
bike,
get
on
a
bus
or
take
a
scooter
if
they
want
to
purchase
liquor.
We
can't
celebrate
the
use
on
one
hand
and
disrupt
its
business
model,
which
is
consistent
with
both
the
future
land
use
and
the
zoning.
R
On
the
other
hand,
I
want
to
touch
on
a
few
features
of
this
building
itself,
which
has
already
been
approved
and
constructed,
and
people
are
already
moving
in.
There
is
robust
buffering
and
screening
between
the
building
and
its
neighbors
to
the
west,
a
10-foot
landscape
buffer
and
a
13
foot
setback
separate
these
uses
and
note
that
the
code
requires
no
setback.
Here's
a
photograph
of
the
existing
screening,
which
is
only
going
to
grow
over
time.
The
building
has
a
vehicular
access
from
both
giddons
and
Florida.
R
Duck
weed
has
been
actively
communicating
with
the
Neighborhood
Association,
as
shown
here
with
a
post
from
the
South
Seminole
Heights
civic
associations.
Facebook
page
comments
from
the
community
have
been
largely
positive,
there's
a
good
buzz,
a
good
vibe
in
the
community
about
the
addition
of
duck
Williams
to
Seminole
Heights.
In
conclusion,
this
is
good
planning.
This
is
consistent
with
chapter
27,
section
129.
It's
can
assistant
with
comprehensive
plan.
It's
consistent
with
the
zoning.
There
is
a
need
for
grocery
in
the
growing
community
of
Seminole
Heights.
We
respectfully
request
your
approval
and
I'm
here,
dancing.
Q
P
P
You
have
another
growth,
Dollar
Tree,
so
up
I
guess
my
concern
is
I'm.
Looking
at
this
new
development
and
it's
going
to
have
a
package
store
in
it.
So
when
I
think
about
alcohol,
I,
look
at
the
area
in
you
have
southeast
and
whites
South,
so
the
lights,
the
river
and
the
yeah.
We
considered
the
tribal
because
now
we're
looking
at
a
package
store
there.
Yes,
sir,
and
that's
my
concern
with
a
alcoholic
Club.
P
P
R
R
We
would
suggest
that
in
this
particular
area,
and
if
you
look
at
this
slide,
that
is
up
there
now,
which
I
think
is
the
one
you're
referring
to
I
mean
it's
several
blocks
away,
if
not
more
from
both
the
save-a-lot
from
Gita's,
you
have
an
entire
neighborhood
in
proximity
here
with
no
lockable
access
to
a
grocery
store
again
in
a
very
commercially
intensive
future
land-use
pattern
and
zoning
district.
So
if
the
question
is,
you
know,
is
there
a
market
for
it?
I
believe
the
answer
is
yes
and
duckweed
would
like
the
opportunity
to
show
that.
P
R
Let
me
let
me
let
me
say
that
it's
part
of
the
reason
I
put
up
the
communication
between
the
Neighborhood
Association
and
its
residents
and
and
duck
weeds
communication
with
the
neighborhood.
Was
there
were
several
pre
significant
concerns
that
the
Neighborhood
Association
had
expressed.
One
of
them
was
that
there
was
going
to
be
a
walk-up
window
to
this
establishment
that
that
is
certainly
not
the
case.
R
That's
not
how
this
development
is
set
up
and
part
of
the
benefit
and
challenge
that
our
state
has
imposed
on
us.
Is
the
whiskey
and
weed
ease
provision
in
state
law,
which
says
you
can't
have
liquor
sales
and
food
sales
under
the
same
roof,
and
so
they
have
to
be
separately
walled.
That's
why
you
don't
see
Publix
selling
liquor.
They
have
to
have
that
separate
liquor
store
next
door.
That
applies
the
duckweed
as
well,
if
this
could
all
be
under
one
roof.
Certainly.
P
Because
you
know,
I
have
a
lot
of
challenges
with
a
lot
of
small
motels
in,
and
you
know
what
those
small
tales
on
Hillsborough,
Road,
Avenue
and
Nebraska.
Now
we
have
a
small
package
stool
right
there,
because
public
doesn't
have
a
package
to
it.
The
one
on
the
brass,
that's
right,
so
that
that's
why
we
looking
at
my
mind,
isn't
going
to
bring
on
a
crime
type
atmosphere
and
that's
my
concern
right
now.
R
Iii
hear
your
concern
and
I
understand
I
believe
we're
where
we're
headed
here
I
would
say
a
couple
things
one.
We
can't
look
at
this
as
just
today.
We
have
to
look
at
this
several
years
out.
Duckweed
intends
to
be
a
part
of
the
community
for
many
years
to
come.
Is
that
particular
corridor
again
commercially
intensive
corridor
going
to
remain
the
same
type
of
character
that
it
is
today
and
I
will
say
to
you
definitively.
The
answer
is
no
and
the
reason
I
know
that
is
because
duckweed
is
wants
to
come
here.
R
That
should
be
sufficient
evidence
to
show
that
the
change
in
character
of
this
corridor.
Second
I
would
point
you
to
section
14
part:
150,
dot,
1.6
of
our
land
development
code,
consumption
of
alcoholic
beverages
on
premises
within
500,
feet
of
property,
zoned
for
off-premises
consumption
is
prohibited
and
punishable
by
prison.
Time.
I
think
it's
fair
to
say
that
we're
gonna
ask
our
fine
officers
to
enforce
the
law
and
duckweed
expects
people
to
comply
with
the
law.
It's
already
on
the
books.
There's
protection
there.
A
N
A
E
Ryan
monastic
design
and
development
coordination
I
just
wanted
to
add
that
the
uses
are
established
through
that
building
permit
and
it
was
for
office,
retail
and
then
the
residential
living.
So
in
order
for
them
to
add
something
like
a
restaurant,
they'd
have
to
go
through
a
change
of
use
and
go
through
a
permitting
process,
as
well
just
for
councils.
A
C
C
C
C
Vote.
Thank
you,
sir
okay.
If
anyone
is
here
to
publicly
comment
on
item
number
five,
please
come
forward.
You
have
go
ahead,
sir.
You
have
three
minutes
each
person,
and
just
so
we
have
a
good
number
of
the
folks
who
are
going
to
come
here
and
speak
is
Wells's
planning
on
speaking
of
so.
Please
raise
your
hand
if
you're
gonna
do
so
one,
okay,
just
one
other
person
and
feel
free.
Please
go
ahead,
say
yes,.
D
S
S
You
I
also
want
to
put
out
a
disclaimer
that
I
am
on
the
board
of
South
Seminole
Heights
I'm
a
board
member
of
that
organization.
I
am
NOT
here
speaking
for
that
organization,
I'm
speaking
for
myself
and
neighbors
that
live
right
in
the
vicinity
of
duck
where
the
duckweed
will
be
and
where
the
liquor
store
would
be.
So
let
me
be
very
clear:
I
am
not
speaking
for
the
Association.
S
My
point
here
tonight
is
to
give
you
a
couple
of
things.
One
was
that,
and
the
second
thing
is
to
point
out
some
of
the
issues
that
my
neighbors,
mostly
about
20
homes
within
the
vicinity
and
some
in
the
deeper
into
the
neighborhood
have
with
this
liquor
store
understand.
We
are
not
I
repeat,
not
opposed
to
duckweed
I
shop
at
duck.
We'd
have
you
like
the
duck
we
stuff?
We
will
be
a
good
thing.
S
What
we
are
opposed
to
is
a
liquor,
store
and
I'm
going
to
try
to
clarify
to
you
some
of
the
reasons
why
we
don't
want
that
some
people
on
Facebook
and
there's
a
lot
of
people
that
support
this
whole
thing,
especially
because
there's
a
duck
weed
and
it's
popular
and
it's
good,
but
they
compared
it
to
the
duck
weed.
That's
in
Channelside,
we
claim
that
we
have
a
different
kind
of
situation
where
we
live
on
that
corner
with
what
councilman
loser
was
saying:
we've
got
different
kind
of
situation
there.
S
Different
kind
of
demographics
crime
is
an
issue
where
we
live.
I
live
directly
behind
this
building
and
behind
that
part
in
the
ROG,
so
I
see
it
all
the
time.
I
live
on
West,
Giddins,
108,
West,
kids
I
would
say
that
postulate
that
the
liquor
store.
Induct
me
downtown
and
I
know
people
that
have
been
to
it.
They
still
sell
miniatures.
That's
what
Booker
stores
make
a
lot
of
money:
small
bottles,
they
make
a
lot
of
money
on
that
there's
a
lot
of
increase
in
price.
S
So
you
know
a
liquor
store
and
people
say
there'll,
be
a
high-end
liquor
store
to
us.
A
liquor
store
is
a
liquor
store,
is
a
liquor
store
if
I'm
selling,
popsicles
and
somebody
comes
in-
wants
a
popsicle
I'm
going
to
sell
them
a
popsicle,
especially
one
where
this
is
going
to
be
located
with
its
own
separate
entrance
right
there
on
that
corner.
So
you
know
are
mentioned
the
hotel
around
there.
We
live
beyond
Giddens,
we
are
directly
behind
and
this
liquor
store
will
be
directly
across
from
the
Circle
K
at
Hillsboro
and
Florida
Avenue
I.
S
Don't
know
if
you've
ever
been
to
that
Circle
K,
but
it
is
somewhat
scary
people
from
the
Dutch
hotel
frequent
it
they
frequent
our
street.
We
have
people
living
under
the
bridge
down.
It's
Hillsboro,
the
bridge
that
that
Hillsborough
River
at
the
end
of
Giddens,
the
people
that
transverse
our
street
typically
tend
to
be
not
our
neighbors,
although
they
do
and
they
walk
their
dogs
and
that's
great,
but
we
also
have
a
mix
of
vagrancy,
transients,
homeless
and
Dutch
motel
people.
S
It's
a
hot
spot
for
the
cops.
Are
there
all
the
time
they
come
on
our
streets?
So
we
do
have
that
element
trash
things
like
that
there's.
This
is
a
picture
directly
across
from
the
corner
where
the
liquor
store
is
going
to
be.
That
is
a
photo
taken
a
few
days
ago.
This
is
what
we
live
with
all
the
time.
The
heart
bust
line
is
right
here
and
it's
we've
talked
to
Circle
K
I
personally
have
talked
to
the
manager
Regional
Managers.
They
do
not
do
anything
about
it.
S
S
Traffic
vehicle
traffic
on
our
streets,
let
me
give
you
a
photo
of
what
didn't
looks
like
I
saw
a
bunch
of
nice
photos
in
the
staff
report,
but
I
don't
think
you
saw
these
kinds
of
photos.
This
is
what
the
Gibbons
looks
like
going
towards
Florida
Avenue
the
developers
put
in
a
small
sidewalk
here
and
is
occupied
every
night
by
a
number
of
cars
and
we're
not
sure
why,
but
they
are
not
allowed
to
park
in
the
garage
the
only
people
allowed
to
park
in
the
garage
the
people
who
live
there.
S
We
have
confirmed
this
by
speaking
to
residents
that
live
there
and
their
friends
come
to
visit
them
their
parking
on
our
yards,
their
parking
on
the
other
side
of
the
street,
where
it
is
illegal
to
park.
I
had
no
parking
signs
put
up
there
on
the
north
side
of
business
years
ago,
and
they
still
don't
it
doesn't
matter.
If
you
say
something
to
them,
that
I
will
be
out
in
a
minute
and
they
go
in
cars.
Are
there
the
next
day?
So
we
have
an
issue.
We
have
cars
that
are
parking
out
here.
S
S
We
think
it'll
only
be
exacerbated
with
the
opening
of
what
we'd
and
we
know
and
again
we
word.
Favors
ducks
means
that
something
has
to
be
done
about
the
parking
situation,
because
they're
coming
down
Giddings,
if
the
red
star
has
something
going
on
they
park
all
the
way
down
across
Highlands
down
towards
the
river
on
both
sides
of
the
street.
It's
not
just
our
area
of
giddons,
so
there's
some
real
issues
going
on
there
with
that.
Dedenne's
is
not
even
classified
as
a
street
I
found
out
years
ago.
S
According
to
city,
it's
a
single
lane
pathway,
there's
no
room,
as
you
can
see
from
that.
These
pictures
here
for
two
vehicles
to
pass
each
other
without
without
trouble.
I've
talked
to
TPD
I
have
talked
to
Tampa,
Fire
and
Rescue.
They
both
recommended
that
we
speak
with
you
all
Tampa
Fire
Rescue
says
that
I
mean
the
TPD
says,
there's
obviously
an
issue
here.
S
We
need
to
do
something
about
the
towing
thing
and
why
people
can't
park
their
site
I
assume,
eventually
they
will
be,
but
the
residents
say
they
don't
even
have
a
space
for
visitors
in
that
parking
garage.
There's
been
a
rumor
that
the
people
want
to
charge
people
to
park
there.
So
therefore
they're
not
doing
that
they're
staying
outside.
S
T
We've
we've
had
a
fight
off
some
things
going
in
our
Park,
the
rowing
team
dog
park
and
now
all
of
a
sudden
duck
weeds
going
in
I
had
no
problem
with
duck.
Weed
I
went
there
yesterday
for
the
first
time,
never
shopped.
There
I
think
it's
a
great
great
addition:
the
fact
that
you're
gonna
put
an
alcohol
alcohol
in
that
neighborhood.
We
just
talked
about
earlier.
That
is
our
trifecta.
T
There
I
go
into
I
call
it
circle,
not
okay,
because
every
time
I
go
there,
I
feel
I
got
to
go
home
and
take
a
bath
I
hate
going
into
that
Circle
K.
You
got
Dutch
motel
there.
You
got
another
sleazy
hotel
down
the
street,
and
now
you're
gonna
put
a
package
store
there
and
they
say
it's
gonna
be
upscale.
I,
don't
know
that
there's
gonna
be
a
Facebook
page
for
homeless
people
to
know
hey,
it's
an
upscale
place,
don't
go
there.
T
They're
gonna,
they're
gonna
gravitate
there
I've
seen
it
I'm,
just
telling
you
I,
know:
I
know
what
it's
like.
I
see
it
I've
gone
to
the
I've
gone
to
this
artillery
right
at
the
street.
You
guys
Tillery
on
bird.
Alright,
there's
that
there's
a
lot
of
homeless
people
living
around
there
go
online
and
look
at
when
they
bring
a
liquor
store
into
a
neighborhood.
It
doesn't
bring
the
neighborhood
up.
Unfortunately,
sometimes
it
brings
the
neighborhood
down,
especially
in
the
area
that
we're
in
on
Florida
and
and
Hillsborough
heard.
T
The
petitioners
say
you
know
someone
shouldn't
have
to
travel
after
they
go
grocery
shopping
for
a
liquor,
store.
Well,
I,
don't
know
about
you
guys,
but
Publix
is
doing
really
well
in
Nebraska
and
there
isn't
a
package
store
and
collated
the
Publix
and
they're
always
busy,
sometimes
hard
to
get
in
there.
I
love
shopping
there.
It's
a
great
store
right
up
the
street.
It's
not
far
from
there.
We
have
a
lot
of
places
and
there's
tons
of
liquor
stores
around
as
well.
T
It's
not
that
far
to
go
to
Alpine
or
you'd
go
wherever
you
need
to
go.
I,
don't
know,
I
don't
drink,
but
after
tonight
waiting
so
long
I
might
need
a
drink
but
I,
but
I'm
asking
you
several
heights.
It's
really
growing
and
I
feel
like
right
now
with
duck.
We
going
in
and
adding
the
liquor
store
that
we're
being
taken
advantage
of
and
I'm
here
tonight
to
act
to
implore
you
to.
Please
deny
the
alcohol
version
of
it
that
the
grocery
store
is
fine,
I.
T
R
Just
want
to
make
a
few
points
to
close
counsel
David
singer
for
the
applicant.
If
crime
is
a
concern,
if
crime
is
on
your
mind,
it
was
certainly
expressed
by
some
of
the
members
who
spoke
with
the
public.
I
would
point
you
to
the
last
page
of
your
staff
report.
T
PD
has
looked
at
this.
They
have
no
issues.
If
T
PD
had
issues,
they
would
have
expressed
them
in
the
staff
report.
There
are
none.
R
Litter
was
a
concern
that
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
zoning
of
this.
That
has
nothing
to
do
with
granting
alcohol
beverage
license.
Parking
parking
was
addressed
as
a
concern.
The
customers
of
duckweed
are
able
to
park
into
the
garage
again
you
heard
mr.
Manasseh
say:
there's
no
parking
we
ever
requested
here.
If
people
are
gonna
come
shop
here,
they
can
pull
right
into
the
garage
and
they
can
park.
R
The
last
thing
I
want
to
address
and
and
I
went
back
and
forth
other
whether
I
was
going
to
talk
about
this
or
not
I
feel
like
I
have
to
get
into
the
record,
because
it's
been
brought
up.
I
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
homelessness
and
I
hope
you
briefed
the
fear
and
the
stereotypes
around
homelessness
and
alcoholism
has
no
place
in
the
consideration
by
this
council
of
this
application.
It
is
outside
the
purview
of
the
code.
It
is
outside
the
purview
of
your
jurisdiction
tonight
and
I'm
telling
you
it
is.
R
It
is
difficult
to
keep
composed
when
there
are
the
prevalence
of
myths
and
stereotypes
surrounding
this
issue
from
the
National
Law
Center
on
homelessness
and
poverty.
The
top
four
contributors
to
homelessness
in
America,
the
lack
of
affordable
housing,
unemployment,
poverty,
low
wages,
the
fifth
one
up
there
that
should
be
up
there
is
lack
of
mental
health
facilities.
R
Alcohol
is
not
on
that
list
and
it's
not
on
that
list
for
a
reason,
because
it's
a
myth
and
it's
a
stereotype
and
you
shouldn't
consider
it
when
you're,
considering
an
alcohol
beverage
application,
the
Tampa
Hills
for
a
homeless
initiative
lists
on
their
website.
They
have
a
whole
section
of
myths
about
homelessness
and
one
of
them
is
most
homeless.
People
are
addicted
to
drugs
and
alcohol.
It
is
outside
the
bounds
to
consider
alcoholism
and
homelessness.
R
When
you're,
considering
an
alcohol
beverage
application
from
a
zoning
perspective,
it
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
It
is
consistent
with
the
urban
village
designation
in
the
zoning
code.
Competent
and
substantial
evidence
has
been
presented
to
you
that
it's
consistent
with
the
comp
plan
in
the
zoning
code,
competent
and
substantial
evidence
has
not
been
presented
to
you
that
this
should
not
be
approved.
R
The
applicant
has
met
its
burden
and
nothing
that
is
presented
by
the
neighbourhood
can
be
considered
competent
or
substantial
evidence
to
deny
this
application
and
I
apologize
for
getting
on
my
soapbox
about
the
homelessness
issue.
But
it
is
a
it
is
a
personal
point
of
contention
and
I
would
ask
the
considered
supplication
whole
everything
that
we
discussed
tonight.
Staffs
recommendation
the
fact
that
they're,
the
only
waiver
that
is
being
requested
is
a
distance
waiver
485
feet
to
a
small
bar
and
mr.
R
P
Mr.
singer,
thank
you
for
your
comments
and
that
they're
well
taken,
but
sometimes
I
tell
people
experiences
are
their
best
teachers
and
I
can
drive
down
Lake
Avenue
and
go
to
23rd.
Street
and
I
can
see
a
package
store.
I
can
go
to
29th
and
make
and
I
control
that
zone
with
his
own
five,
and
when
I
was
get
the
work
at
five
o'clock
in
the
morning.
P
Everybody
would
be
hanging
out
for
the
package
store
or
I
could
go
word
zone
to
my
final
day
as
a
police
officer
and
I
can
look
at
the
circle-k
dice,
motel
and
I
saw
the
TPD
report
and
I
was
I,
was
really
stunned
and
see
zero
calls
for
services
for
that
location.
Well,
that's
a
new
location
that
building
so
it
wouldn't
have
any
calls.
But
I
can
tell
you,
as
a
person
work
that
area
like
two
years.
D
Sir,
if
I
can
mr.
Schilling
I
apologize
for
interrupting
you,
mr.
goose,
but
I
just
want
to
remind
you
and
remind
the
rest
of
the
council
that
your
decision
has
to
be
based
on
competence,
substantial
evidence
in
the
record
and
not
from
personal
experience,
and
to
please
not
testify
the
fact
that
you
were
aware
of
independently
you've
heard
testimony
tonight.
You've
heard
the
petitioner
make
his
case.
D
P
D
L
Question
for
legal
I'm!
Sorry,
if
this
is
another
newbie
question,
but
most
of
the
time
sorry
we're
looking
at
zoning
issues
as
differently
we're
looking
at
owning
issues,
we
look
at.
Is
it
consistent
with
this
surrounding
area?
This
almost
sounds
like
an
upgrade
to
some
of
the
not
to
the
neighborhood,
but
to
the
to
the
some
of
the
businesses.
L
Some
of
the
some
of
the
evidence,
the
neighbors
gate
was
about
and
I
won't
name
them,
but
other
establishments
that
sound
like
are
not
following
the
rules
and
have
code
issues
which
maybe
we
should
try
to
address
separately,
to
try
to
help
the
neighborhood,
because
this
sounds
like
there
are
some
difficult
challenges
and
issues
they're
facing.
But
my
question
to
you
is:
are
we
allowed
to
consider
code
violations
by
other
nearby
establishments
as
confident
substantial
evidence
in
this
case?
No.
N
C
Thank
you.
Anyone
else,
just
for
my
perspective
and
I
think
the
only
waiver
I
see
here
is
the
85
feet
for
alcohol.
I
think
that,
regardless
of
what
our
speaker
myself,
regardless
of
what
my
personal
sentiments
may
be
on
the
issues
involving
alcohol
etc,
regardless
of
whether
I
agree
with
mr.
a
singer
or
anybody
else
or
not
on
that
issue,
I,
don't
really
think
that's
something!
That's
going
to
be
relevant
to
the
legal
issues
here.
I
think
that
if
we
use
issues
that
are
outside
of
our
scope,
we're
gonna
open
up
the
city
for
exposure.
C
If
you
will
on
this
issue,
regardless
of
whatever
our
personal
sentiments
may
be,
I,
don't
want
to
say
that
our
hands
are
tied.
I
think
that's
a
little
too
far,
but
I
think
our
hands
are
tied
from
considering
things
that
we
shouldn't
consider
and
I
think
we
have
to
be
very
wary
of
that.
So
just
my
opinion,
councilman
did
you
want
to
say
something,
sir
I.
I
I
We
need
to
be
careful
about
our
own
testimony,
but
with
that
said,
I
think
that
we
can
be
a
little
critical
in
regard
to
the
criminal
report,
because
we
all
know,
as
a
matter
of
fact,
judicial
notice.
Mr.
chairman,
that
that's
a
brand-new
building
and
that
address
is
a
brand
new
building.
I
have
no
idea
what
was
there
before,
but.
I
A
Under
direction
of
our
counsel,
I'm,
looking
at
27
129
and
the
five
criteria
there,
the
usual
ensure
public
health
safety
in
general
welfare.
If
located,
where
proposed
and
developed
and
operated
according
to
the
plan,
is
submitted,
I'm,
not
sure
about
that
one.
The
use
is
compatible
with
contiguous
and
surrounding
properties
or
the
use
is
public
necessity.
I'm.
Just
looking
at
these
things
and
I
just
I'm,
throwing
that
out
there.
L
Now
just
a
question
for
legal,
also
again
a
newbie
question,
but
they
the
same
question
about
looking
at
code
issues
for
surrounding
properties.
There
is
no,
as
my
colleagues
have
said,
there's
there's
no
legal
record
for
this
to
this
establishment,
but
if
there
are
other
legal
violations
or
police
reports
from
other
surrounding
properties,
is
that
competent,
substantial
evidence
in
this
case
I.
N
I
would
not
say
there
can
never
be
a
case,
but
I'm
not
sure
what
the
relevancy
would
be
in
this
particular
situation,
that
another
property
owner
has
done.
Something
that
may
not
be
correct
certainly
would
have
no
bearing
on
a
property
owner
coming
in
that
has
every
intent
to
comply
with
the
law
and
in
these
proceedings
you
have
to
assume
that
the
property
owner
will
comply
with
the
law,
so
I'm
not
sure
what
the
relevancy
would
be
to
tie
it
to
one
of
the
factors
in
27
129.
On
this
set
of
facts.
Oh.
L
R
Minutes,
Thank
You
mr.
I'm,
not
sure,
there's
much
more
to
say,
I,
mean
I.
Think
we've
demonstrated
a
pretty
clear
case
that
this
is
consistent
with
the
zoning
code
and
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
consistent
with
129.
You
know,
I've
been
doing
this
a
long
time
not
in
front
of
this
particular
group,
but
but
in
front
of
your
predecessors
and
some
of
you
who
have
been
on
this
council.
R
It
is
very,
very
rare,
very
rare,
if
ever
that
we
talk
about
demographics
of
an
area
when
we
talk
about
zoning,
a
navy
establishment
that
that
I
would
caution
this
council
against
saying
it's
appropriate,
perhaps
in
one
part
of
the
city
and
not
appropriate
in
another
part
of
the
city,
when
the
future
land
use
is
identical
and
when
the
zoning
is
identical.
We're
here
in
the
urban
village,
there's
one
waiver
separating
you
from
already
existing
AV
use.
You
look
at
that
corridor.
There's
80
uses
all
up
and
down
that
core.
R
C
Anything
further
from
Council
I,
again
reiterate
my
remarks,
we're
in
for
whatever
counts.
In
my
opinion,
relying
on
issues
that
are
outside
of
the
scope,
I
think
will
lead
us
to
a
I'll.
Just
put
it
diplomatically
a
dangerous
path
and
may
have
a
motion
to
close
can't.
We
have
motion
to
close,
but
councilman
Miranda.
A
second
by
Councilman
is
calcio
all
in
favor.
Any
opposed.
C
A
A
C
R
C
D
C
I
C
D
D
I
D
R
R
D
R
N
By
way
of
suggestion,
because
the
neighborhood
has
left-
and
they
are
not
able
to
be
here
and
participate
if
another
hearing
was
to
be
set,
it
would
need
to
be
Reno
'test,
but
rather
than
denying
and
potentially
going
through
another
procedure,
council
could
entertain
a
noticed.
Continuance
I
just
throw
that
out.
There
is
an
additional
potential
option.
D
D
N
N
However,
what
I
would
suggest
is
that
at
this
point
you
would
simply
remove
it
from
your
agenda
and
the
applicant
would
then
have
to
notice
and
they
could
perhaps
clarify
the
purpose
of
the
reno
tiss.
That
was
my
suggestion.
I
also
hear
and
understand
mr.
Shelby's
concerns
I
think
those
are
both
potential
avenues
that
you
could
use.
I
like
I,
said:
I
simply
supplied
it
as
a
potential
suggestion
to
try
and
make
sure
that
everyone
was
clear
what
happened.
C
N
D
Yes,
well,
yeah:
what
would
you
what
you'd
be
let
what
you'd
be
left
with,
ultimately
is
you'd
be
left
with
thinking
it
through.
You
had
a
motion
to
affirm
that
was
denied
because
it
failed
to
get
more
votes.
If
you
have
a
motion
to
deny
that
was
denied
before,
because
it
failed
to
get
four
votes,
then
the
only
rational
motion
left
that
would
be
appropriate
would
be
a
motion
to
continue
so
your.
So,
if
somebody
were
to
change
them,
then
then
it
would
come
back
to
the
next
regular
meeting.
D
No
wouldn't
have
to
come
back
and
couldn't
not
because
it's
not
a
tie.
It
would
just
be
a
motion
that
failed.
So
therefore,
the
only
motion
left
on
the
table
would
be
for
somebody
to
announce
why
they're
changing
their
vote
on
the
basis
of
confident,
substantial
evidence
and
therefore
again
or
to
vote
to
continue.
This
is
much
more
confusing
than
ultimately,
it
should
be
so
counsel.
D
What
I'm
going
to
ask
is
based
on
what
miss
Mora
says:
I
do
agree
with
her
analysis
and
and
I
would
let
it
be
counsels
pleasure
on
how
council
wishes
to
proceed.
So
basically,
whatever
council
wishes
to
do
in
this
case,
if
it
wishes
to
continue,
you
have
to
reopen
the
hearing
for
the
purposes
of
continuing
and
continue
and
having
the
notice
trained
to
be
able
to
bring
it
back
or
do
you
remove
what
you
say
you
remove
it
from
the
agenda
where
there
it
wouldn't
be
refiling
or
or
you
just
if.
I
Have
a
technical
question
for
for
staff
either
this
more
exciting
staff.
One
of
the
other
I
appreciate
mr.
singers
gesture.
Well
compromise
is
always
a
good
thing
and
finding
a
middle
ground,
that's
great
I'm,
trying
to
figure
out
without
opening
and
without
asking
mr.
singers
I
don't
want
to
go
there.
I'm
asking
you
to
what
what
other
options
are
there
that
the
it's?
It's
not
like?
You
don't
have
just
beer
and
wine
anymore.
Do
you
well
liquor.
E
N
I
Site
plan,
alright,
with
that
said,
it
sounds
like
there
is
a
few
options
that
mr.
singer
might
be
able
to
go
present
to
the
neighborhood
I'm
comfortable,
with
reopening
solely
for
the
purpose
of
continuing
continuing
unnoticed,
a
Reno
de
steering
and
I
apologize,
the
neighborhood
for
the
inconvenience.
C
D
R
Mr.
Shelby
David
singer
petitioner
I,
have
no
objection
to
the
process.
I
can
tap
on
as
to
the
proper
nests
of
the
council's
action.
I
would
leave
that
to
you,
but
I
will
say
as
I
stand
here.
I
would
certainly
not
be
disappointed
if
the
council's
prerogative
is
to
continue
for
the
purpose
of
compromise
in
the
initiation.
Well,.
A
Mr.
singer,
to
all
fairness
to
the
community:
yes,
how
far
are
you
planning
on
noticing
out?
Are
you
30
days,
60
days,
90
days?
What
do
you
feel
would
be
appropriate
going
back
to
the
community
and
saying
we
hear
some
things
we
might
want
to
change?
We
want
your
input.
30
days,
60
days,
90
days,
Kristin.
N
Moore,
a
legal
department:
we
will
be
working
with
him
because
we
want
to
give
him
time
if
he
is
able
to
work
something
out
with
the
neighbors.
Then
he
would
need
to
submit
a
new
site
plan
with
enough
time
before
the
hearing,
so
we're
looking
at
a
time
frame
out,
but
we
will
figure
that
out
with
him
offline
from
City
Council,
since
it
has
to
be
noticed,
you
don't
have
to
determine
the
date
at
this
point.
Thank.