BRADENTON – Public Works director Ron Schulhofer stood in the commission chambers last Tuesday and explained why a resident was so upset.
They tried to contact a woman who lives near the intersection of Erie Road and 69th Street East, he said, but apparently they didn't try hard enough, and she showed up at the County Commission meeting, upset that the latest plan would take away part of her driveway.
”I have four kids,“ she said. ”You want to put a road in front of my door?“
Schulhofer said they'd try to do better in the future, but in the long, long, long history of this intersections and its plans, doing better hasn't done much to assuage people's or commissioners' concerns.
In the ”Tab Book“ for the meeting, it was noted: ”It has been difficult for staff to develop a relevant conceptual roadway network plan for this area. Due to the owner of the large tract of land known as Blossom Groves changing development plans several times and the indecision of the School Board as to whether its parcel is to be a school site, a maintenance facility or a combination thereof, this is still an area in transition.“
”So he won't be able to build what he's planning on. You'll be taking two or three buildings away, correct?“ Commissioner Carol Whitmore said of the new plan presented last Tuesday.
”Yes,“ Schulhofer replied.
He already has something approved. ”So if we do this road, he's going to be losing how much?“ Whitmore asked.
”About two acres of the six,“ Schulhofer said.
Rounding back to roundabouts
The solution is a roundabout, said County Commissioner Joe McClash, noting that he didn't like the new alternate.
”I'm not ready to sign off on your new alternate. I'd like to go back to challenging with the roundabout like Commissioner Getman suggested,“ he said. ”I still think it's a perfect location for a roundabout.
”The roundabout design is something that should work in that area.“
But Commissioner Donna Hayes begged to differ.
”I do not ever remember a vote being taken regarding roundabouts,“ she said.
The thing to do is move forward, Hayes said, and stop costing the landowner and the taxpayers' money.
”This issue has been bounced around for six years, I understand. To send this back again would cost this gentleman a great deal of money,“ she said.
He wanted to build a residence for his daughter, Hayes noted, but then ”we decided to change the route around.“
Then he wanted to build something commercial and has spent over $100,000 on consultant fees.
”If we send this back to staff again, we are costing ourselves and this gentleman money. It's just unfair to treat someone like this,“ she said. ”It comes to be a fairness issue. We've got to make a decision, move forward with it, not waste taxpayers' money anymore and not waste Mr. McIlwaine's money anymore.“
Upset about taking land
For Whitmore, the big issue was taking someone's land.
”I've never really supported taking people's property,“ she said. ”Why can't we all just accept, instead of spending all this money, why don't we just leave the road like it is? What's the problem? There are places where you know you're not going to have an easy shot and just leave it.“
Why not put in a ”dangerous curve“ sign or a stop sign, she asked.
McClash said something had to be done.
”There is a purpose in doing this, Commissioner Whitmore, because it is a dangerous intersection,“ he said.
To Hayes, McClash accused her of wasting taxpayers' money.
”It's kind of frustrating sometimes Commissioner Hayes, listening to you talk about taxpayers' money when actually what you're talking about is wasting more taxpayer dollars. The original estimate didn't take into account the cost of buying the whole piece of property,“ he said.
Long term, there could have been a shopping center there and tax revenue.
”I hate to look at this one more time,“ he added, noting that the roundabout solution doesn't take anybody's property and doesn't disturb his property.
”You're costing this county lots and lots of money,“ he said to Hayes.
The vote to approve was 5-2, with McClash and Whitmore dissenting, but that didn't end the discussion.
An upset citizen
Brown told the woman that she had to talk to Schulhofer.
Russ Tilton, representing the Stancils and the McIlwaines, said they wanted more stipulations and relief.
”Given the direction of the commission, we would like the opportunity to bring those forward,“ he said.
Brown said that would have to be worked on, and County Attorney Tedd Williams said the motion was to negotiate the purchase of the right of way, so there's room to negotiate the stipulations.
Brown said the discussion about the intersection had been going on for so long, but it's the length of time that's been spent on this.
But McClash said that the changes caused the length of the time frame.
”We've tried to have buy-in and accommodate the property owners. All of a sudden, a month ago, we get this dumped on us that we they have to redesign this thing, and now you're taking away a shopping center, and you're affecting a lady that was never affected before,“ he said. ”It's just not the right way to be sensitive to the community's concerns. There's no rush to do this action today. Better, like we've done in the past, to reach out to the community and try to come to a compromise.
”Nobody walked out of here today that's a property owner that's really happy.“
For Whitmore, the best action might have been nothing, she said.
”At one point, the property owners were happy and now none of them are. We've affected all these people's property, and if it's really that big of a deal to really save the money, I would have just not done anything,“ she said. ”All over the county there's places like that.“
Comments
No comments on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.