Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Popularity of project doesn't alter process

Re: New chapter in Wal-Mart saga should have hearing, editorial, Sept. 28.

In fairness to the staff and elected officials of Tarpon Springs and for a better understanding of the development review process in Tarpon Springs, I think some comments about your editorial involving the minor change in the Wal-Mart site plan are in order.

The last statement in your editorial is as follows: "On a project this controversial, the city should make sure there is a public airing of the changes and opportunity for people to comment." I think your editorial writer is very wrong to conclude that whether or not a development is controversial should change the method of development review within the city.

Whether city staff likes or dislikes a particular developer or whether certain members of the public like or dislike a certain developer should not modify the development review process based on a city employee's opinion - or a local newspaper's opinion - as to whether or not a project is "controversial." What standards would you apply to determine whether or not something is controversial? Would it be because two people expressed a concern about a project or would it take 20 people to express a concern?

The determination of whether a site plan can be changed by using the minor revision process found in Section 210.05 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Tarpon Springs is accomplished by a review of the specific standards set out in that section of the Development Code.

The standards that the city staff must apply to determine whether a site plan revision represents a major modification are as follows: (1) an increase in density (2) any increase in floor area exceeding 500 square feet (3) any change in land use (4) any change in project phasing (5) any change which would require an amendment to approval conditions (6) structural alterations significantly affecting the basic size and form of the buildings (7) any reduction in the amount of open space of more than 5 percent or any substantial change in the location or characteristics of open space (8) any increase in traffic generation by more than 10 percent (9) any change in structure height (10) any change in the number of vehicular access points.

The city staff sat down with me as city attorney and reviewed the proposed changes in the Wal-Mart site plan. The changes were made in order to avoid the intrusion of a road into a wetland.

We reviewed each of these standards with the engineer for the project and concluded that none of the proposed changes met the standards of the ordinance that would require a major modification review. There was no increase in density. There was a decrease in floor area. There was no change in land use. There was no change in project phasing. There was no change that would require an amendment to approval conditions. The structural alterations brought about by the elimination by the tire and lube center and the pharmacy kiosk were very insignificant, representing less than a 1 percent decrease in the size of the building. Contrary to the assertion in the editorial, the liquor store was removed before the site plan was approved. There was no reduction in the amount of open space or in the location of characteristics of that open space. There was no increase in traffic generation. There was no change in structure height. There was no change in the number of vehicular access points.

I would further bring to your attention that relocation of the interior road affects no one outside the property's boundaries and protects the wetlands.

The code was carefully and consistently applied to the changes in the site plan and it was determined by the staff with my input that these changes did not constitute a major modification. This was a fair and unbiased review of the standards against the specific changes in the site plan. The ultimate staff decision was a proper one.

Your editorial suggests that the city should require an unprecedented method of review because the land owner/developer is unpopular with certain people and that the city should deviate from its adopted Development Code because of this fact.

I hope that your editorial writer would agree with me that a government's development review process should be evenhanded and neutral in the decisionmaking process. Cities do not change the rules because of the popularity or unpopularity of the land owner.

Your editorial suggests that each developer should have a review process that is determined by whether or not it is "controversial" rather then by the adopted development codes. Your conclusion suggests that the city should have a policy of "politicizing" the application of its ordinances and that those ordinances could be applied differently to every person who comes before it.

Popularity is not an appropriate standard. I hope you understand that the city of Tarpon Springs does its very best to be fair to everyone. We don't personalize the development review process. The city believes that the concept of equal protection of the law is a rule that should apply equitably in our Development Code review process and that this standard applies to everyone.

Thank you for considering my thoughts on this matter.

John Hubbard, Tarpon Springs city attorney

It's time to improve school choice plan

Re: No easy path to school choice, story, Sept. 19.

I am appalled that the Pinellas County School Board can say, after three full years of this "controlled choice" program, that they "have no clear idea how those schools or the system might change."

The choice program was spelled out when it was deployed, with race ratios disappearing after 2007. While it has been fraught with problems, no one can claim ignorance of the issues or what was coming!

The Choice Task Force should have been formed in 2003, well ahead of this known change, to allow for plenty of time to address the issues. Parents and educators alike were all painfully aware of how school choice would impact our county.

As for the comment about the School Board needing to understand "what people really mean when they push for 'neighborhood schools,' " they either aren't listening or don't like what they are hearing.

As a parent of elementary school-aged children, I have experienced it firsthand, and have not been pleased with the results. I am not alone when I tell you that I could have predicted for the School Board what might happen, and I could also tell you what the results of your survey were going to be: Parents want to send their children to a school that is a) close to home and b) hopefully comprises children who also live in the same geographic area. This is what fosters a greater sense of community and increased parental involvement in schools.

Parents care more that their children are getting the highest quality of education possible than the fact that their schools are ethnically diverse - important as that might be in the long run. The demographics in Pinellas County have changed very little in more than 30 years. You cannot force this kind of change via the school system.

We are busing more children than ever, with ridiculous school start times for some elementary schools, the middle and high schools, to accommodate the need for 50 percent more bus routes. These buses are driving around at less than 50 percent capacity on many routes.

Many parents have resigned themselves to driving their children to and from school because of the long bus routes. This leads to increased traffic on the roads and at the school. The county receives reduced funding from the state because that funding uses a formula that incorporates how efficient our bus routes are.

While I can appreciate that there are no finite answers that will please every constituent, we must come up with a plan that addresses the issues quickly. The School Board must learn to act faster than has been the case. The board has had four years to study this problem; it's time to start providing answers. Our children deserve better than this.

Frances Keefe, Tarpon Springs

Officials need to ask two basic questions

Re: Safety Harbor reconsiders new leader, story, Sept. 28.

I would be a little disturbed if I still lived in Safety Harbor. It seems that in most interviews, two basic questions should be asked: 1) Have you ever initiated litigation? 2) Have you ever been a party to litigation?

It appears the city commissioners did not ask these questions - and the mayor is an attorney.

Robert K. Reader, Clearwater

YOUR VOICE COUNTS

We invite readers to write letters for publication. To send a letter from your computer, go to www.sptimes.com/letters. If you prefer, you may instead fax your letter to us at (727) 445-4119, or mail it to Letter to the Editor, St. Petersburg Times, 710 Court St., Clearwater, FL 33756.

Letters should be brief and must include the writer's name, city of residence, mailing address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be printed.

[Last modified October 5, 2006, 07:47:26]