I'm tired of being lied to by the County Commission. Commissioners, how many more decades will it take to get a few crummy traffic lights timed? How many more millions of tax dollars do you think it'll take to fulfill your promise to coordinate the signals - commitments that are now more than a decade old? (See the initial campaign promise "If you pass the Penny for Pinellas we'll time the traffic lights.")
We're paying more than $2 a gallon for gas and in urban areas you use more fuel dealing with intersections than while driving. Our environment is getting more and more polluted by the exhaust fumes. Road rage is on the increase. (Gee, wonder why?)
Yet what do Pinellas County drivers endure daily? Roads with untimed lights - uncoordinated signals that are, more times than not, causing the backups.
Let me cite just a few outrageous examples.
Several weeks ago I drove Seminole Boulevard from downtown Largo to past Bay Pines. Traffic was moderate and I drove the speed limit. I stopped at every light - all of them yellow or red - drove a few blocks and stopped, a few blocks more and hit the brakes again and so on and so on. Alt. U.S. 19 timed? Only if you're from Bizarro.
I've been told that U.S. 19 is mostly timed. Is it, now? Sunday last I drove U.S. 19 from Tarpon Springs to Clearwater. Again, moderate traffic. I'm driving the speed limit but between Tarpon and Clearwater I make it through a whopping four intersections without stopping. Well, claiming four is somewhat of a fudge. Due to my growing outrage, two of the four were more red than yellow, but yellow enough.
In case you're wondering, I caught 80 percent of the intersection lights yellow or red. That would be the intersection lights on the main north and south corridor in the county, a roadway that the County Commission claims is timed.
Commissioners, timing traffic signals is not rocket science! All we're talking about is synchronizing a few lights, nothing more. Yet Pinellas County seems to have a big problem getting this done.
Well, gang, what'll it take? We've given you more than enough money, yet it seems this has produced negative results: roads where we stop at all the lights. Come on, get 'em fixed!
-- Curtis A. Holmes, Largo
Get busy putting parking where it's needed: on south beach
When I think of parking on Clearwater Beach, I immediately think South Beach, not North Beach. Come on, city, wake up and smell the coffee! It's a no-brainer - South Beach is where the parking is needed.
So why does the Clearwater City Council and staff keep backing away from the real issue? Over the years city officials have not had the courage to make a monetary commitment to this monumental need.
Continuing to ignore this will come back to haunt us. Day trippers and out-of-area tourists will say "never again" to a trip to Clearwater Beach, since traffic has nowhere to move. South Beach is the target location for the majority of beachgoers. After all, isn't this what Beach Walk is all about?
Destroying the Mandalay Park green space, which is an open expanse of the gulf and gulf skyline, is a really, really bad idea. If a parking garage is to be built for North Beach, it should be at McKay Field.
And wait a minute, why this talk of a new beach fire station? Has the current one been condemned? Is it inadequate? What's the story? As for the library, with some creative thinking (seemingly in short supply) it could be relocated to space at the Beach Recreation Center.
It sounds to me like there's been some back-door deal with developers Mike Cheezem and David Mack to give them more parking for their Belle Harbor condo development and Sandpearl Resort.
If everyone is dying to put parking on North Beach, relocate the existing McKay playground equipment to Mandalay Park and build the garage over McKay Field.
But then, that's avoiding the real issue again.
-- Paul R. Koenig, Clearwater
Assessments are a big minus for hotel condos
Re: Hotel-to-condo change will be tougher, story, June 3.
One distinct disadvantage of buying a unit in a hotel where the plan is to convert a portion of the rooms into condos would be the huge assessments involved. Frankly speaking, I would not want to live in a building that is partly occupied by vacationers. My reason is damage control, or maybe I should say damage un-control.
Most people view their home as their sanctuary and try to keep damage down to a minimum. Assessments are plentiful enough in condominium living, with keeping a building up to code, replacing old equipment, and necessary repairs so that the condo retains a good market value.
With this in mind, no one wants to live in an environment where people do not share a common interest of preserving the building. Vacationers are usually here for a good time and are not always willing to treat a hotel as though it were their home, especially those with young children. Accidents are bound to happen that sometimes may not be discovered until the hotel guests have gone home. Guess who gets stuck with the bill?
My advice to anyone looking to buy a condo within a hotel is "Buyer beware."
-- JoAnn Lee Frank, Clearwater
[Last modified June 16, 2005, 00:40:20]
