Greater Ridgecrest residents argue that a second low-income project near their homes will drive down property values. The site is now a scrapyard.
By LORRI HELFAND
Published September 14, 2004
LARGO - Few residents are fans of the construction scrapyard in the middle of their neighborhood. The weed-laden property is home to mounds of dirt, demolition rubble and heavy-duty equipment.
But more than 250 residents who live near the Greater Ridgecrest site say they also don't want an affordable housing project to take its place, either.
They signed a petition opposing a land-use change that would allow a large-scale affordable housing development on the corner of 134th Avenue and Pine Street and submitted it to local and state officials.
Rainbow Village, a 32-acre, low-income housing complex, is already located across the street, and many are worried another affordable housing project will concentrate hundreds of low-income residents in one place, bringing down property values.
"We realize everybody needs a place to stay," said Marva Perry, 54, one of the residents spearheading the petition drive. "We're supporting one in the neighborhood already. Why should we have two?"
In July, despite opposition from the county staff, county commissioners unanimously gave preliminary approval to zoning and land-use changes that could allow a 207-unit development at the 18.43-acre property owned by Terra Excavating.
"I'm not thrilled with it at all," said Tabitha Griffin, 30, who lives around the corner from the site. "It affects our property values negatively."
Nick Kotaiche, vice president of Terra Excavating, insisted the project will elevate the community.
"Their property values are down because they're right next to a junkyard," he said.
Terra Excavating, a site development company, has owned the land for more than 30 years and had used the property as a construction landfill.
The company, based at the site, changed hands four years ago and now uses the land primarily for equipment storage, Kotaiche said.
"If they oppose us that much, we'll just stay there," Kotaiche said.
Tim Johnson, who represents Terra Excavating, told commissioners his client could not rule out a development for renters.
But Kotaiche said he has no intention of turning the site into another Rainbow Village, where residents pay rent based on income level. His company is negotiating with three parties that want to build homes people can buy, not rent, and it plans to work with the county to make sure the homes are tasteful and attractive, he said.
"Why don't they wait to see the concept before they judge it? It's better than what they have today," he said.
A concept plan submitted by one developer shows the property filled with triplexes, duplexes and apartment buildings.
County commissioners approved the land-use changes on the condition that at least 20 percent of the units meet affordable housing criteria. If the developer doesn't follow through, the density would revert to its previous density allowing 92 units.
To be eligible for affordable housing, families would have to earn less than 80 percent of the area's median income for households of their size. For example, the maximum eligible income for a family of four is $40,400 a year.
Paul Cassel, the county's director of development review services, told commissioners the number of units requested was out of character with the adjacent neighborhoods. Besides Rainbow Village, most of the neighborhoods have been developed at 4 or 5 units per acre. Terra Excavating asked for 7.5 units, plus a 50 percent bonus for affordable housing, which is more than 11 units per acre.
Johnson told commissioners that it's possible all the units would be classified as affordable. That further concerned nearby residents.
A few board members, including Commissioner Karen Seel, approved the changes reluctantly. She urged Terra Excavating to work with neighbors and to consider a mixed-use development, which blends homes with retail, offices and other services.
Before commissioners make their final decision, the changes need to be reviewed by the Pinellas Planning Council and the Florida Department of Community Affairs.
Commissioner Bob Stewart was enthusiastic about the idea of an affordable housing complex replacing the eyesore site but said the board would take public opinion into account.
"The concerns they raise, whether they be legitimate or an unknown fear factor, will have to be weighed very heavily by us," Stewart said.
No one showed up at the July meeting to oppose the changes. Property owners who live within 200 feet of the site were notified about the hearing, but people in the surrounding neighborhoods said they had no idea about the project. Both Griffin and Perry, who live about 500 feet away, found out about the project when they saw the meeting on TV.
"We felt like the people in the neighborhood were not properly notified of what they were trying to do. That's why (the company) got the commissioners to agree to that so easily," Perry said.
In April, county commissioners approved a land-use change that converted the site from a mostly rural designation to a residential one that could accommodate single-family homes.
Griffin said she heard about that change and felt blindsided when she saw the modest plan had blossomed into a massive project.
Not every neighbor opposes the project. Terri Allen, 32, said she supports it because she knows what it's like to struggle to make ends meet.
"I'm a single parent. For me, low income is the way to go," she said.
Others said they're trying to decide between the lesser of two evils.
"I'd rather not see (the project) there, but I'd rather not see what I see now," Katherine Barry, 57, said.
The Pinellas Planning Council meeting is scheduled for 9 a.m. Wednesday in the fifth floor Board Assembly Room of the Pinellas County Courthouse, 315 Court St., Clearwater. The public hearing for this issue and others will begin at 9:30 a.m.
