Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Your Turn

So-called monstrosity not so monstrous after all

Re: Accepting lesser of two evils, Aug. 4

When I read about this so-called monstrosity last week, I took a turn around Bayshore and was surprised at the hubbub this caused. I could see last week that it was just a large cement box, but there was evidence that trees or bushes would be growing around it.

Yesterday I took another turn, and I had to look twice to even find it. The building (box) was painted dark green, and trees were already being planted. It appears that most of the residents of the Monte Carlo live above this so it should not be that much of an eyesore.

Donna Snyder, Bayshore Gardens

Generator, pump station need new location

Re: Accepting lesser of two evils, Aug. 4

Your article relates all the inconsistencies of the Tampa public officials, i.e. the generator station cannot be moved, but other sites were considered, other sites are being considered, the view of single-family homes was rejected, but the view of 200 residents is acceptable.

The real problem that is being ignored is that before Katrina there was no discussion by the weather bureau of a 20-foot storm surge. Now they are saying this is a real possibility. Until now, the location of the pump station was not considered as relevant. Now it is relevant. A 20-foot surge would not only cover the generator but also the pump. There would be sewage everywhere, and the resulting spread of disease would overwhelm the health facilities, especially when Tampa General Hospital, a prime facility, would be unavailable.

A piecemeal solution is not the answer. However, a start should be made by moving the generator to a higher site. Under the Crosstown, which provides cover, on an elevated platform surrounded by an inexpensive chain-link fence would solve the generator problem. But steps should also be taken immediately to move the pump station to the same location.

Leon Stone, Palma Ceia West

Answer to generator placement is higher ground

Thanks for the informative but incomplete Aug. 4 article on the issues surrounding the pumping station on Bayshore. You bring up many of the important issues. I know that the complaints from Monte Carlo residents are creating a frenzy to find an acceptable compromise that will best serve the needs of the community and the neighborhoods affected.

I do not feel that you, the city officials, or the Monte Carlo residents have fully considered the other neighbors that would be negatively impacted. The 15-foot easement behind the Monte Carlo is in between Monte Carlo property and the Grovewood Condo Association. The backup generator is in flood Zone 1, which means it too would be under water in a strong storm surge. The easement behind the Monte Carlo is in flood Zone 2, again, not an optimal solution in a major storm. Emplacement in this easement would be only 10 to 15 feet from a personal residence but 100 yards from the nearest Monte Carlo residence

Neither is there mention of the 100-decibel noise pollution right next to a residence and the diesel fumes from the generator. Any sounds would be amplified significantly because of the canyon effect and reverberation between the Monte Carlo and adjacent buildings. I know this solution would guarantee a round of volleys from our, and neighboring, condo associations and residence owners behind the Monte Carlo, as well as the Monte Carlo residents who reside on the west side of their building.

What upsets me most is that you allude that it will take the Monte Carlo residents' approval to choose the use of the city easement in addition to cost considerations, regardless of its negative impact on other neighbors and taxpayers. This comes across that the arrogance and complaints of the Monte Carlo residents are what is driving this issue. That is unfair to the Monte Carlo residents, well-meaning folks who want to preserve their wonderful Bayshore views, and to the rest of the neighborhood owners who have been excluded from the process.

There are more issues here than just Bayshore beautification and infringement upon people's health and living space. You mention several: cost, lack of coordination with the community and the need to avoid the accumulation of raw sewage on Bayshore and other neighborhoods during flooding. The other is why city engineers and politicians can't figure out that placing the backup generator in a storm surge area rather than finding much higher ground in a less offensive location to all would have been much more prudent. This is a case where hindsight and the costs of corrective action are indicative of mismanagement and poor stewardship of our tax dollars.

There will be more debate. So the advice to the city fathers is: Take the higher ground and find a solution on higher ground.

Jim Wilson, President of the Grovewood Condo Association, Bayshore Gardens

Why not hide sewer station with a piece of artwork?

Re: Accepting lesser of two evils, Aug. 4

Thank you for keeping me up to date on community affairs. I live on Bayshore Boulevard, too. I consider it to be one of my greatest privileges.

I am adamant about maintaining and further developing the beauty of Bayshore. It is one of the longest continuous sidewalks in the world, it is a symbol of our city and it should be treated with utmost reverence.

This all said, I think I might have a win-win solution to the new sewage generator in front of the Monte Carlo condo building. I propose having an incredible piece of artwork/sculpture hide the generator. Instead of trying to camouflage the ugly generator with green paint and mediocre plants, why not turn it into something to marvel at? Bayshore is already recognized as a "Open Air Art Museum."

Let's just add another piece to the exhibit that will do double duty.

Linda Stonis Besser, Bayshore Beautiful

[Last modified August 10, 2006, 08:26:02]