C.O.N.A. of South Pinellas County

A last nip of Winter......we hope.

Jan 18, 2005

CONA Board Meeting
Wednesday, January 19th at:
The SUNSHINE CENTER, 330 5th St. N.

Doors open at 6:00 p.m.; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m.


PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE
By Karl Nurse

When I was 11 years old and a boy scout, my dad was the scout master. He would not allow the troop to leave camp until it was better than we found it. It was a simple lesson, but one that fits our jobs as neighborhood leaders. As neighborhood leaders, we simply are trying to make our community a better place than we found it.

One of the results of serving as CONA President, is that I am asked to serve a numerous committees which include elected office holders. At the end of a meeting recently, a local elected official, not from St. Petersburg, mentioned to me that her city had discussed the possibility of a CONA like group to help organize neighborhood associations. She said they were afraid of what that would mean. I replied that neighborhood groups simply organize to speak up for the needs of the neighborhood and she should not be afraid of that. It is not the intention of neighborhood associations to spend our time opposing things.

However, sometimes that job is thrust upon us. The January meeting is a chance to lay out our agenda for to improve St. Petersburg. Please come and share your perspective. Just to get the ball rounding, here are some possibilities:

1) Undergrounding utilities. How do we get the ball rolling?

2) Community Policing, police staffing levels, crime reduction needs,

3) Code enforcement. Can we implement the improvements started in 2004?

4) Housing issues. The City has started an affordable housing committee and asked me to represent CONA. The pressures to provide affordable housing and improving neighborhoods press against each other.

5) Homelessness. The city/county government have a homelessness task force and asked me to serve
as CONA's representative. I have argued that food kitchens without mental, alcohol and drug treatment hurts the surrounding neighborhoods. Help needs to break the cycle, not continue it.

6) "Green cities" programs. Many cities in the country have voted to be "green" cities and lay out a series of moves to improve the environment such as: recycling, green/efficient public building, efficient city vehicle fleets, solar pool and water heating, etc.

7) Implement the new zoning code and find a way to break the cycle of variances. We have spent five years talking about a zoning code that re-enforces neighborhoods and leads toward a people rather than automobile oriented community. The hardest part will be to end the habit lowering standards by granting variance continuously. A good code should not require variances, except in rare situations.

Please come with your priorities. Together, we can help set St. Petersburg's priorities and leave this a better place than we found it. Thanks for the lesson, Dad.


PARTNERSHIP NOTES
Neighborhood Partnership Office
Susan P. Ajoc, AICP, Director
Neighborhood Partnership Program
City of St. Petersburg
P.O. Box 2842 St. Petersburg, FL 33731-2842
Phone: (727) 892-5141 Fax: (727) 893-5323
Email: Susan.Ajoc@stpete.org

Please update the City?’s Neighborhood Partnership mailing list. This list is used by all City Departments to contact your neighborhood. It is also posted on the City website
If your association has a new President, please contact: Sharon Cimarik at 892-5141 or sharon.cimarik@stpete.org

Neighborhood Partnership Grant Applications FY 06

The FY 2006 Neighborhood Partnership Grant applications will be available by mid-February. A copy of the application will be mailed to the association president and a version will also be available on the city's website.


LDR RE-WRITE: Considerations for the makeup of the Boards and Commissions
By Tim Baker
President, Downtown Neighborhood Association

The City of St. Petersburg currently has four separate boards or commissions that are involved in the planning and development review process - the City Council, the Planning Commission, the Board of Adjustment and the Environmental Development Commission. It is probably safe to say that nobody is completely happy with this setup.

In some ways, the existing process can be confusing. For example, on redevelopment projects, some applications for zoning variances go the Board of Adjustment, while others go to the Environmental Development Commission. Then, decisions of these boards can be appealed, but in different ways. EDC appeals go to City Council; BOA appeals to Circuit Court. The result is that it is fairly easy and inexpensive to appeal an EDC decision; much more difficult and costly to appeal a BOA decision. This doesn't make much sense.

Another problem has been with how different duties are parceled out to these different agencies. Generally speaking, the EDC takes a narrow focus, zeroing in on the details of a site plan, for example. The Planning Commission, on the other hand, is usually concerned with a broader vision, taking on such jobs as reviewing new zoning ordinances that will affect entire neighborhoods or the city as a whole.

But, the EDC also handles street and alley closings, which might better be handled by the Planning Commission. The problem is that when the EDC considers closing a street or an alley, it hardly bothers at all to consider the effect of its action on an entire neighborhood. Instead, it maintains its narrow focus on an individual site plan. The Planning Commission is more used to dealing with that broader view, and would be better equipped to understand the larger implications of street and alley closings.

From a neighborhood association perspective, it frequently seems as if none of the city boards actually follows the rules that are contained in our various ordinances. The EDC, for example, is supposed to allow variances only when a developer can show a specific hardship that would be caused by having to follow all the rules. Yet, this board frequently approves variances where no hardship is even claimed. Instead, the board members seem to vote based on their gut feelings as to whether a project will be good for the city. On street and alley closings, the EDC is similarly weak on following the rules, which are quite specific as to when any public right of way can be privatized (vacated, in the legal jargon).

Developers, too, have their problems with the current setup. One of these problems is that it isn't really clear as to how fully developed a project plans should be before being submitted for review before the EDC. It costs a lot of money to produce detailed plans, which developers understandably don't want to spend without basic approvals in hand. But, if they don't have enough detail in their plans, the EDC may be reluctant to approve. The result? A lot of the so-called plans that are presented to the EDC are little more than quick and dirty concept sketches, not necessarily representative of what will actually get built. An example of this would be the Vinoy Place condominiums. The plans approved by the EDC had two towers atop a parking-garage base. The actual project ended up with four towers. The changes were approved by city staff, without further review by the EDC.

Yet another problem is with the makeup of these boards and commissions. Most of the members of the appointed boards are required to come from specific sectors of the economy. For example, there is a spot on the EDC for a builder, another for an architect. The purpose of this is to insure that each board has the necessary expertise to make good decisions. But, it also means that almost all of the board members have economic and personal ties to the development industry. The boards, then, are predisposed to vote in favor of development projects, be they good, bad or ugly.

So, it certainly does make sense that the city revamp this setup when it adopts new Land Development Regulations, as is being proposed by Bob Jeffrey, the city's manager of urban design. But, do his specific proposals fix what needs to be fixed, while leaving alone what should be left alone? A lot more tweaking and a lot more public discussion is needed before that question can be answered.

What I think the neighborhoods should look for are a couple of things:

- The public needs to have a vital role in reviewing redevelopment plans, so any short-changing of that should be resisted.

- We need to have both short-range and long-range planning, and a means by which the two remain connected, so that our short-range decisions aren't messing up the long-term plans.

- It needs to be clear that the boards and commissions making day-to-day decisions exist to administer specific ordinances and rules, and that the job of a voting member is not to act on gut feelings about what is "good" for the community. Deciding what's good for the community is a job for the community itself, through whatever agencies are set up to look at long-range planning.

- It needs to be made clear to the development community that the rules and ordinances will be enforced, and that variances can be granted only for genuine hardships.


PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE MAKE UP OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
By Steve Plice

Bob Jeffery has put some beginning ideas in writing concerning proposed changes to our Boards and Commissions. Most likely there will be changes to these ideas, but here is what we have so far:

The Board of Adjustment would be replaced by a hearing officer, reviewing specific applications like variances, dock approvals and lot line adjustments.

The Environmental Development Commission would be renamed as the Development Review Commission. It?’s duties and authorities would remain essentially the sames as they are now.

The Planning Commission would be renamed and changed substantially. It would no longer have Local Planning Agency responsibility. Instead, it would be charged with building community consensus and developing recommendations for City Council. The commission would be named the Planning and Visioning Commission.

City Council would assume the Local Planning Agency responsibilities currently held by the Planning Commission (NOTE: This will probably change). Public Hearings concerning issues such as land use changes and comprehensive plan changes would be held by City Council.

A new Historic Preservation Committee would be created


MINI-STORAGE FACILITY ON MLK STREET APPROVED BY CITY COUNCILini-
By Steve Plice
In an unusual move, City Council overturned the Planning Commission refusal to re-zone the Rutland Property on MLK Street. CONA had opposed this action on the basis that the re-zoning is ?“spot zoning?”.

A story appeared in the January 9th Neighborhood Times concerning the City Council action. The following letter to the editor may or may not be printed by the Times.

To the Editor:

RE: Storage business can stay
By Carrie Johnson
Jan 9, 2005

Two Council Members, Virginia Littrel and Richard Kriseman, voted for good urban planning. The remaining six Council Members voted to overturn the Planning Commission and dispense special favors to one property owner. Because they were overturning the Planning Agency's refusal to "spot zone" a single parcel, a super majority of six votes was necessary.

The "spot zoning" of the Rutland property at 898 30th Ave N. provides a financial windfall for one individual while raising difficult questions concerning the integrity and fundamental fairness of our zoning laws. In this case, special favors won out over good planning.

"Spot zoning" is jargon used by Land Development Planners to describe the illegitimate practice of dispensing special privileges, in the form of development rights, to one property owner but not to the surrounding properties. Because of arbitrary and inherently unfair consequences, local and State comprehensive planning laws prohibit "spot zoning".

The zoning change for the Rutland property is a clear and blatant example of "spot zoning". There are no similarly zoned parcels within blocks, and none of the nearby properties are allowed the size and intensity of activities now permitted on the Rutland site. The financial advantages enjoyed by a property owner blessed with a "spot zoning" privileges from City Council are obvious. By favoring one property over it's neighboring parcels, the City has created both the appearance and reality of unfair treatment.

Few property owners have the political connections necessary to resolve code violations by having the law changed to make their activities legal. That is exactly what happened, however, in this case. Instead of insisting that Rutland comply with the laws that everyone else must follow, the City "spot zoned" his property so that he would be exempt from the rules applicable to all of his neighbors.

When land-use decisions are made on the basis of how well the applicant is connected to City Hall we all lose. The legitimacy of our planning process is destroyed and our ability to manage the future growth of the city is curtailed.

This is not the first, and probably will not be the last, example of well connected property owners receiving special privileges and financial benefits from City Hall.


TOM KILLIAN APPOINTED CHAIR OF THE CONA MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE

Karl Nurse has appointed Tom Killian, President of Jungle Terrace, to chair the Membership Committee.

Tom will work with Libby Steele to collect membership dues and he will meet with Neighborhood Associations and encourage them to join CONA

Tom will also be working to secure more advertising for the CONA newsletter.


2005 CONA MEMBERSHIP

2005 CONA Membership fees are now due. Please complete the form below and mail it to CONA, or bring it to the next meeting.

We will be using these forms to update our mailing list so be sure to include phone numbers and email addresses. Please include the names and addresses of people to whom we should be sending the CONA Newsletter.


CONA BOARD OF DIRECTOR?’S MEETING MINUTES
The Sunshine Multi-Service Center December 15, 2004

President Karl Nurse opened our meeting at 7 P.M.
?˜ Following distribution of descriptive brochures, Karl announced CONA involvement in a new city wide project to cope with the problems of the homeless, with the goal of alleviating the causes rather than ameliorating the symptoms. He told us that a grant of $100,000. has been awarded for this project with the anticipation of additional funding of similar proportions. We were reminded that other cities have evolved some very effective solutions for dealing with this problem. Over 100 local churches will make announcements of this new program this weekend. The Project Leaders are former Mayor David Fischer and Beth Eschenfelder of the Social Action Funding Committee. There will be e-mailed announcements of this project sent to all neighborhood association leaders.
?˜ The President formally announced that our incumbent CONA Officers have all been reelected by acclimation.
?˜ We also heard that CONA has been asked to participate in project studying the issue of ?“Affordable Housing in our community. In a similar vein we were told that the city is developing a ten-year plan for addressing the needs of our homeless citizens.
?˜ Karl Nurse confirmed that copies of our CONA resolution regarding the need for underground utilities have been sent to each of our area representatives in the Florida Legislature. He went on to add that CONA will endeavor to meet individually with each of these elected representatives to clarify our conception of the urgency of this issue and to solicit their support for legislation to implement that program. We will also be collaborating with several other area communities to research and promote this program.
?˜ The President then opened our meeting for reports of progress from our member neighborhood leaders.
>President Penny Flaherty spoke of their achievements at Broadwaters Civic Association.
>Jeff Danner spoke of many successful programs in Historic Kenwood.
>In the absence of their President, Bobbie O?’Malley told us of the grant
funds won for the $75,000 grant funds won by the Snell Isle Property Owners Association.
>She also told us, as our Representative of the Albert Whitted Airport Advisory Committee of their very popular promotions of Santa Clause arriving by helicopter, and their spaghetti dinners. She also confirmed that approval has granted to rebuild the old air traffic control panel.
>Tim Baker, speaking for the new Downtown Neighborhood Association recounted how the former University Park neighborhood had merged with his North Downtown Association.
>Our Treasurer Libby Steele, spoke for the newly elected President of the Lakewood Terrace Association. They are grateful for increasing property values as large new homes are being built in their neighborhood.
>Newly reelected Stephanie Pitts told us of struggles and victories by her Crescent Heights Neighborhood Association.
>Current projects and recent successes in Greater Woodlawn were described by President Maureen ?“Mo?” Eppley.
>Karl Nurse told of some of the successful social programs in his Old Southeast neighborhood that draw better attendance than their quarterly business meetings.
>President Phil Whysong, of North Kenwood, reported on the success of several joint projects with other neighborhoods and with the area hospital that included some substantial grants awards.
>Tom Killian, described the several successful social programs and grant awards that have enhanced the quality of life in his Jungle Terrace Neighborhood.
>The new President of Disston Heights, Carol Griffiths spoke proudly several grants won for neighborhood projects and of their growing monthly newsletter.
>Jerry Mussman spoke of progress Americana Cove that features a completely rebuilt entry to our community. He reported that Billy Walker, our Community Police Officer, is currently out of service following an injury doing an arrest.
?˜ Karl Nurse, who also serves on the PSTA Board with Councilman John Bryant, reported on County transportation progress that included extending the ?“Looper?” service hours and retaining the 25?¢ fee. We also learned of new buses and a major upgrade of the Central Avenue Corridor.
?˜ Karl also confirmed that plans are proceeding for a Candidates Forum jointly sponsored by CONA, The Chamber of Commerce, and the League of Women Voters.
?˜ Vice Mayor Mike Dove told us of some major federal funding that will support an extensive enlargement of our city Bikes and Pedestrian Paths Program.
>He also proudly spoke of adding 7 new playgrounds this year with 4 or 5 more coming next year.
>We heard that retiring Policeman, Tom Edwards, has been hired as an Assistant Director in the Codes Compliance Assistance Department to enhance their efficiency.
?˜ Beth Eschenfelder, coordinating the new Homeless Project, rose to solicit volunteer workers for this program including flyers and a newsletter. She also urged our member neighborhoods to schedule Beth as a speaker at coming monthly meetings.
?˜ Cathy Wilson, (Greater Woodlawn), gave an update on the zoning struggles with a mini-storage facility in their neighborhood.
?˜ On the same theme, Stephanie Pitts explained that her neighborhood will support City Council plans to retain the ?“Special Exception?” clause in the codes ordinances because this provides for neighborhood challenges to proposed variances that would otherwise not be available to the neighborhoods if proposed codes revisions are accepted.

Our meeting adjourned at 8:05 P.M.

Respectfully submitted-
Conrad Weiser, Secretary