Residents React to Commissioners' Bloomingdale Big-Box Stance

Not good enough, said "Say No to Bloomingdale Big Box" supporters at the Fred B. Karl County Center on May 15, minutes after the Hillsborough County Commissioners voted unanimously to ensure that money is earmarked for traffic improvements made necessary by the proposed mega-development on Bloomingdale Avenue.

Commissioners approved 7-0 a motion put forth by their chairman, Ken Hagan, that developer transportation mitigation funds from the project be dedicated to improvements in the area, and that the commissioners work to address any budget shortfalls, should they arise.

"I want to thank all the citizens for being steadfast in opposing this development and stating your concerns," Hagan said. "As I stated before, we empathize with you. We’re tyring to do everything we legally can to be of assistance. The one area where we really can involves improving the traffic congestion in the area, and that’s why I came forward with the motion here."

It wasn't the news the residents opposing the big-box development were hoping to hear from county commissioners.

"Basically today what the commissioners told us was that they don’t want to be sued because the money that they would lose is tremendous, so therefore they are allowing that loss to be passed on to the residents in the form of loss of property value, danger to our children and dealing with additional nightmares that can’t even begun to be [expressed]," said Moira Shiver, in a Bloomingdale-Riverview Patch video shot after the vote was taken.

Eric Brosch, who works to promote "Say No to Bloomingdal Big Box" events, also spoke on video. The events he has helped advance include the May 14 meeting at The Palms Community Church in Valrico and the May 7 sign-carrying protest on Bloomingdale Avenue.

"One of the other things that we heard today is that because of a self-imposed gag order [the commissioners] can’t talk to us about this issue," Brosch said. "But that is not an effective way to run a government."

Commissioner Victor Crist addressed the issue earlier, in the meeting.

"Statutes restrict us from having contact with the public on land use issues," he said. "This problem was created over 11 years ago. If we tried to deny it, it could put us into a financial legal situation that could be seen as irresponsible."

Residents say the zoning that permits Redstone Properties to develop a 158,800-square-foot big-box retail store, five commercial outparcels and 260 apartments on a 43.5-acre parcel should never have been approved.

Commissioners contend that the approval had been granted before their time on the board, in November 2003. That's when the property was rezoned from an ASC1 designation — permitting agricultural uses or one residence per acre — to a Traditional Neighborhood Distirct with commercial uses, according to assistant county attorney Adam Gormley.

In 2011, the developer, Redstone Properties, returned to the commission for approval of the development's design plans, which Commissioner Murman said she clearly remembered.

"They showed us these cute little pictures and said it was going to look a lot like the Winthrop development down the road," she said. "They never said anything about a big-box store. I feel like maybe we were duped as to the use of the property."

Murman, who said she has property in the area, said she empathized with the residents, a sentiment expressed as well by other county commissioners.

"I heard today they are so sympathetic," said resident Jennifer Blessing, in the Patch Video. But "sympathy doesn’t actually fix the problem," she added. "We have spoken, we will continue to speak and then we will vote."

"I think it’s disgusting that they absolve themselves of any responsibility [and] gave us no hope," said resident Terri Cecchini. "They didn’t pay any attention to the fact that our children will be at risk with this development."

Her husband, Maurice, also expressed his discontent, saying his opposition to the development rested mainly on his concern for its proximity to "the rather large concentration of things that draw youth to it," including Bloomingdale High School, the Bloomingdale Regional Library, Campo Family YMCA and the Bloomingdale Little League fields.

"If they put in the apartment complex [and] the big box you have even more young people in a traffic area that is even now intolerably congested," Maurcie Cecchini said.

He took offense as well with the process, and with the board's suggestion that the residents work with the developer to address concerns. That point was raised by Commissioner Al Higginbotham, who reminded his colleagues that David Singer, the attorney for Redstone Properties, had met with the board last year.

"The pitch he gave" was "maybe not inappropriate, but he certainly has put this  board in an awkward position," Higginbotham said. "I would suggest and encourage the members of the community to contact Mr. Singer and get some more information from him on what the intention is. At this point we don’t even know that the developer will file plans to build, and that time will expire, I believe, in August. But these are good pre-emptive steps and hopefully the board will hear from the developer or Mr. Singer and they’ll reach out to the community and do what’s right."

Commissioners said they need to address the process that today ties their hands in matters such as this, in which they are held accountable for actions taken by previous boards — and especially so as the economy improves and development projects on the shelves heat up again.

“The county commission 10, 11 years ago tied the hands of this particular commission,” Commissioner Les Miller said. He asked that the county attorney look into “something that could possibly be put into place” to address this concern.

He recognized, though, that this has little solace for Bloomingdale residents today.

"I feel the pain that the citizens have," Miller said. "I come from a district that many times the citizens are run over. They’ll come and plea and beg and plea, whether it’s with the county or the cities, and they end up being on the losing end and I feel that frustration.”

Maurice Cecchini said that frustration has spread to Bloomingdale.

"I am sorry to see that the board has locked itself under the process and it cannot exercise leadership," he said. "If you’re the people who wrote the process, or if you’re the people who have the power to set up the process, change it. We reside our trust in the people and not so much in the legal ramifications, the rules and regulations. When the lawyer for the county told [the commissioners] not to go outside of the process and talk to the developer, I realized they didn’t exercise leadership. The board is not willing to actually represent us. They’re going to let the process govern, unfortunately."

Resident Jason Shiver agreed.

"It seems that the people who represent us are more fearful of litigation from a  company than they are in representing the people that voted them in to serve," he said. "I hope that they’re going to reconsider and that they’re going to actually try and reach out to the developer and get the developer to talk to us because we have a lot of concerns and this isn’t going to serve our community."

______________

RELATED COVERAGE:

• Commissioners Say Plans for Bloomingdale Big Box Out of Their Hands

• Residents Flock to Big-Box Meeting at Bloomingdale Church

• Neighbors Rally Against Bloomingdale Big-Box Development

• 'No Bloomingdale Big Box' Event Set for Rush-Hour Traffic (includes reader comments)

• Opposition Preps for Big-Box Development Protest

• Bloomingdale Residents Continue To Fight Big-Box Development(includes link to a petition that as of May 14 has garnered more than 1,050 signatures)
  

• Higginbotham Fields Big-Box Development Question (video and reader comments posted at Brandon Patch)

• Commissioner Answers Big-Box Development Question (video and comments posted at Bloomingdale-Riverview Patch)