|
 |
| Search |
|
|
Observer Classifieds
Place a Classified Ad
Send a Letter to
the Editor
Send a Press Release
Staff Directory
Archives / Search 2003
Community Links
|
|
Top Stories
By MELODY JAMESON
mj@observernews.net
Wimauma - Is a proposed mobile home project on the southeast side of Wimauma Lake a waterfront development?
It’s a key question for current lakefront residents united in opposition to a pending rezoning petition by Fred Pippin which, if approved, would allow him to expand by nearly two times the size of his existing, adjacent mobile home community they describe as “rent to own.” The answer could rest on a survey now expected from the developer’s representatives.
Pippin, represented in his petition by Darrel Copeland and D&E Engineering in Ruskin, wants rezoning of 6.9 acres at the southeast corner of the community’s namesake lake from ASC-1 to RES-4 with a mobile home overlay. Such a change would permit increase of the residential density now generally existing around the lake from one permanent single family dwelling per acre to four units per acre and of an impermanent mobile home nature.
In October, following a land use hearing, The Planning Commission recommended approval of Pippin’s request over outspoken community protest which, today, includes complaint about the “mocking” treatment they experienced in the course of the hearing.
However, in the normal course of such events the rezoning matter went to Hillsborough’s Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) for the final go-ahead. And, commissioners, hearing in early December from a consultant on behalf of the neighboring residents about the waterfront location, then remanded the petition to professional planning staff for further evaluation and consideration.
The survey “to determine historically and currently if this property is considered water front” was requested on December 15, Krista Kelly, a planning commission executive planner , said this week. If the proposal is shown to be a waterfront project, it will be subject to a land use policy governing residential densities in such locations. This policy limits development on “naturally occurring open water bodies” to a “level comparable and compatible with other development parcels and lots” fronting on the lake. The policy goes on to state that “comparable and compatible development” will be determined by at least 51 percent of the adjacent land area developed in a similar fashion.
For residents such as Dean and Wanda Broughton, this means limiting densities on any newly developed parcels fronting the lake to the present level. And, people living around the lake today are on at least one acre to 1.5 acre homesites, Wanda Broughton said this week.
Broughton, among the 20 or so opponents of the Pippin petition who appeared for the October hearing and then returned to Tampa for the December BOCC session, sees the mobile home expansion proposal as inconsistent with its surroundings on several points.
The development would not be consistent with the now-approved Wimauma Village Plan which resulted from 18 months of effort and compromise by local residents and land owners, she noted. This community plan, one of a kind in Hillsborough County and an award winner in the world of planning, calls for encouraging diversity, Broughton asserted. “Our mission statement makes it clear we like our cultural differences,” she said.
However, expanding a settlement of trailers made available on a “rent to own” basis does not meet that objective nor reflect diversity, she added. The first development of 14 mobile homes Pippin established lacks such basic infrastructure as organized streets passable in all weather conditions, she noted.
Then, there’s the distinction apparently being made between acreage adjacent to the lake that Broughtons own and the proposed Pippin project. In 2006, they purchased about 21 acres between their home and the current trailer settlement which never can be and is not intended to be developed due to its location and conformation, she said. Yet, about seven acres of the same type of land is being considered for more mobile homes, perhaps as many as 24 more, she added. There’s nothing consistent in such a distinction, she suggested.
And, there’s that objectionable October hearing of which Broughton has a video tape. Following presentations by the Wimauma contingent opposing the Pippin petition, Broughton said, a prominent land use attorney appeared to present her client’s rezoning matter. She opened her remarks by laughingly pointing out to the hearing panel she had not brought with her a roomful of opponents, Broughton said. The panel of planners responded with more laughter, Broughton added. “They were mocking us,” she said this week, “we invest our time, energy, money to go to Tampa to present our position as we have every right to do and they mocked us.”
As irritating as this treatment was to the opposition contingent, they remain focused on the central issues, Broughton indicated. The potential increase in traffic, noise and lake impacts are the important considerations, she added. Lake shore residents are “100 percent opposed; there’s no one in favor” she said, noting that 160 Wimauma citizens signed the opposition’s petition.
The survey to clarify whether the project is a waterfront development would have to be received early in the week of January 10, 2010, planners indicated, in order to be considered during the next scheduled hearing date on January 19, 2010.
© 2009 Melody Jameson
What follows is a public comments section. This is not from the Observer News staff - it comes from other people and contains their opinions and theirs alone. The Observer News does not control the material that follows. We do, however, reserve the right to remove objectionable material at our discretion. By that we mean that we will edit or delete any content that we deem is inappropriate. By posting your comments, you are stating that you agree to these terms.
Click here to report a comment.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
© Copyright 2008 by The
Observer
News Publications and M&M Printing Company, Inc.
Top of Page
|
|
|
Top Stories
Latest Headlines
|
|
