For too long, Pinellas County government ignored the Greater Ridgecrest area of mid Pinellas County, allowing conditions to persist there that did not promote a decent quality of life for its residents. In the last few years, county officials have spent considerable time and money trying to address those past failures.
So it is difficult to understand why Pinellas County commissioners recently approved a project that could threaten the progress made in Greater Ridgecrest - and did so unanimously, against the strong advice of their own staff experts.
Terra Excavating Co. has for many years owned an 18.43-acre landfill on 134th Avenue between Pine Street and 125th St. SW, just north of Ulmerton Road. The property initially was a source of dirt the company needed in its excavation work, and later a dumping ground for construction debris.
The property is an eyesore, covered with tall weeds and littered with debris. And it isn't hidden away in some industrial area. It is in the middle of a residential neighborhood. On the north, south and west sides there are single-family homes - modest homes, mostly tidy and well-maintained. Bordering the property on the east is the 32-acre Rainbow Village low-income housing complex owned by the Pinellas County Housing Authority.
Terra Excavating now hopes to sell the landfill property to an interested party who wants to build apartments. There are many challenges associated with building homes on top of a landfill - challenges that loom especially large when the landfill has been in private hands and has not received careful scrutiny through the years.
But a more immediate problem is the number of units the developer wants to build. The developer's attorney, Tim Johnson, came to the County Commission on July 13 to ask for zoning and land use changes that would allow 7.5 units per acre rather than the current 5, plus he wanted a 50 percent density bonus.
The changes would open the door to construction of 207 apartments on the 18 acres. That is more than 11 units per acre - an exceptionally high density, especially considering that the single-family neighborhoods around the property are developed at 3 to 5 units per acre.
A concept plan submitted by the developer shows the property literally packed with triplexes, duplexes and apartment buildings.
Johnson argued that his client is entitled to that boost in density because he plans for some portion of the project - between 20 and 100 percent - to be affordable housing, which is desperately needed in Pinellas.
The county planning staff disagreed. They recommended the commission deny the requests, saying more than 11 units per acre was incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood and therefore in violation of the compatibility requirements of the county's comprehensive plan. They also were concerned that the project, if approved, would set a precedent for higher densities throughout the greater Ridgecrest area.
County staff members also were uncomfortable about putting a high-density affordable housing project next door to a big public housing complex. The combination of the two could lead to a huge concentration of low-income residents. One of the county's housing officials told commissioners that the trend in Pinellas - indeed, throughout the country - is to scatter affordable housing units in and around higher income housing, both to avoid concentrations of low-income housing and the problems that sometimes accompany it, and to create a higher quality of life for those who must live in affordable housing.
Commissioners unanimously approved the changes anyway, even though they don't yet know how much affordable housing the project will provide, when it will be built, what it will look like or whether it will be welcomed by area residents. One staff member suggested they delay their decision until they knew more. Commissioners ignored that advice, too.
Perhaps they bought Johnson's specious argument that the absence of any opponents at the meeting proved the project's compatibility with the neighborhood. The lack of opponents may have had more to do with the time of the meeting - mid-morning, when most of the area residents would be at work - or the fact that many of the neighbors live in Largo, not the unincorporated area. Regardless of why no one spoke in opposition, that is not the measure of compatibility spelled out in the county's comp plan.
It shouldn't matter whether a project's neighbors make a little money or a lot, or whether they show up to object or stay home. Commissioners ought to use good planning principles and common sense in their decisions anyway.
Pinellas County does need more affordable housing to meet the needs of a growing population of people who can't pay market prices, but commissioners should review and regulate those projects as carefully as they would any high-end project in an upper-crust neighborhood.
