Letters to the Editors
Clearwater is too eager for projects
© St. Petersburg Times,
Re: City may put south beach deal on hold, story, June 5.
I am a strong advocate for the growth and development of Clearwater and Clearwater Beach. Along with other residents, I also hope to see the revival of our city as the residents in areas of Tampa and St. Petersburg have experienced.
Unfortunately, city officials are under such immense public pressure and scrutiny as a result of past falterings of city projects, it seems lately that any development is good development. Adding parking garages to Clearwater Beach not only fails to solve the congestion problem but also destroys priceless waterfront real estate. With development projects such as this, we might one day be knocking down such structures to get the beach back. Instead, let's develop a plan in conjunction with the building of the new bridge to move beachgoers from a parking garage downtown to the beach in a convenient, economical and efficient manner.
The implementation of a transportation system would pave the way for more important, value-adding developments for city officials to concentrate their efforts upon. The construction of new restaurants, bars, shops, hotels, condos or even a boardwalk would surely stimulate the excitement of both the residents of Clearwater and the many visitors we welcome every year.
The opportunities to add revenue-generating components to our beach area are endless. Let us not prematurely jump to conclusions in an attempt to remedy Clearwater's development problems without thoroughly assessing the impact these decisions may have upon the future of our great city.
Clearwater development does not benefit residents
I've seen Clearwater change from a nice city to an overdeveloped, mismanaged city. It needs some damage control.
Sarasota's St. Armand's Circle, for instance, is a nice place, because of its restrictions on development. It has maintained its charm, and the businesses there are thriving.
Largo is another example of a well-managed government that is thinking ahead. It has expanded its parks, planted a lot of trees and supports and works in conjunction with Pinellas County and the Botanical Gardens. The city of Clearwater, on the other hand, has been cutting down trees and putting up condos to pay greedy developers, overpopulate the city and destroy the environment.
Why should I have to end up paying higher taxes in order for someone else to make a huge profit? As a resident, how do I benefit from a thing like that, which I will not have the right to partake in?
Existing library should be renovated, not destroyed
I do not think the proposed main library, based on the artist's drawing, belongs in Clearwater. Why not renovate our present library and add on for additional space, keeping the same architecture lines and probably saving about $10-million in the process?
New homes should have water-saving methods
There are ways to save and conserve our fresh water. If the folks who make the rules for new construction would force contractors to:
Install hot water recirculating piping for all hot water systems in new construction. This would insure hot water was instantly at the faucet. Think how many times we turn on the faucet and allow gallons of pure, fresh water to go down the drain while waiting for hot water.
In areas where reclaimed water is available, have a separate piping system in all new construction to allow toilets to use the reclaimed water to flush.
These two ideas are from a lay person. I'm sure there are many more ways to save our precious water. Let's not wait to do something until the day we turn on the faucet and it's dry.
© 2006 • All Rights Reserved • Tampa Bay Times
490 First Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 727-893-8111
From the Times
North Pinellas desks