Consultants, Consultants and More Consultants
(This is the last in a four-part blog posting on spending by your local IRB government. Be sure to scroll down and read Parts I, II & III, if you haven’t already!)
IRB might well be on the verge of financial meltdown. The consultants, by contrast, look to be doing quite well.
Yet another consultant feeding at the IRB trough is urban planning consultant and Associate Professor Theodore Trent Green, R.A. Green’s group, from the School of Architecture & Community Design at the University of South Florida, was hired to develop an overall plan to guide future development of Gulf Boulevard and the Business Triangle. The project was funded partially by Action 2000 and partially with our IRB tax dollars.
Unlike Burton’s well-prepared utility rate study, the USF Study reeks of sloppy work and way-off-the-mark preliminary conclusions. That’s unless you’re in favor of taller buildings with virtually no Gulf Boulevard setbacks and a huge parking garage. (Top photo is an actual drawing from the preliminary presentation!)
The cancellation clause in this contract should have been exercised the first time this group taped white sheets of paper with magic marker writing up on the walls of City Hall. ($55,000 sure doesn’t go as far as it use to!) But, instead of deep-sixing the study and putting the savings back to a severely anemic bottom line, the commission sent Professor Green back to the drawing board.
(This is the last in a four-part blog posting on spending by your local IRB government. Be sure to scroll down and read Parts I, II & III, if you haven’t already!)
IRB might well be on the verge of financial meltdown. The consultants, by contrast, look to be doing quite well.
Yet another consultant feeding at the IRB trough is urban planning consultant and Associate Professor Theodore Trent Green, R.A. Green’s group, from the School of Architecture & Community Design at the University of South Florida, was hired to develop an overall plan to guide future development of Gulf Boulevard and the Business Triangle. The project was funded partially by Action 2000 and partially with our IRB tax dollars.
Unlike Burton’s well-prepared utility rate study, the USF Study reeks of sloppy work and way-off-the-mark preliminary conclusions. That’s unless you’re in favor of taller buildings with virtually no Gulf Boulevard setbacks and a huge parking garage. (Top photo is an actual drawing from the preliminary presentation!)
The cancellation clause in this contract should have been exercised the first time this group taped white sheets of paper with magic marker writing up on the walls of City Hall. ($55,000 sure doesn’t go as far as it use to!) But, instead of deep-sixing the study and putting the savings back to a severely anemic bottom line, the commission sent Professor Green back to the drawing board.
Some residents are baffled by how the initially disastrous plan could have resulted from information gleaned from citizen interviews, public workshops, etc. Who the hell in this town would have told these consultants: “Make the buildings taller, turn Chic-a-Si Park into a large parking garage and oh…by the way…we don’t need no stinking setbacks on Gulf Boulevard?” Could big developers be driving the bus on this study as many surmised all along?
The fact that the commission (fortunately!) didn’t buy into Professor Green’s initial recommendations speaks volumes about the wastefulness of this expenditure. Is Green developing a plan of what IRB “wants to be” or a plan setting the most prudent developmental direction for the City? If it’s what we aspire to be as a community, shouldn’t WE have been able to set the direction ourselves? Would just some re-tooling of our building codes have done the trick without the need for an outside expenditure?
Throwing good money at a consultant you don’t plan to listen to doesn’t seem all that prudent. If the research thus far truly supports the preliminary plan presented some weeks back, shouldn’t that be THE FINAL ANSWER? When it’s all said and done, there won’t be many IRB taxpayers too happy about having funded a piece of “research” that merely justifies letting big developers finally have their way in IRB?
Even if USF’s plan turns out to be the absolute panacea. What businesses and property owners in IRB do you know who can currently afford to implement his recommendations? How far outdated will the $55,000 plan be by the time the move it forward?
Let’s face it, “a plan” usually does mean change. One can assume that Green and his group aren’t being paid this kind of money for someone to draw IRB just as it is. But, when it comes right down to brass tacks, do residents in IRB really want change? If “change” means risking the loss of the small-town charm envied by every other beach community from Sand Key to Pass-a-Grille, there probably won’t be many takers.
Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB
(Note: If you'd like to comment on this posting, simply click on the "Comments" link at the bottom of the article and follow the prompts. You may comment anonymously if you'd like. Or, you can always e-mail your comments to irbeheard@cmdinc.net and we'll post them for you!)
2 comments:
This is yet another attempt by Ralph Montgomery and his Action 2000 machine to control our wonderful town as evident in his letter to the Bee this past week. His defending of this abomination is loud and clear. He has shown his colors with his letter. I know Ralph all too well, and he is cracking. In his opening he states,
“I was astounded in reading the letter (Aug. 14 Bee) submitted by Don House, regarding the planning study for Indian Rocks Beach which is now in progress.” Astounded, I believe because someone took notice to this disaster and spoke up. He goes on to say,
“The intended objective of the study, from the onset, has been to respond to the overwhelming long standing stated opinions of citizens of IRB who have urged that we enhance and preserve our small town image. It has been recognized by those who have witnessed encroachments on that precious image over the past several years that gaping holes in our current means of regulation need to be plugged before it is too late. Perhaps those who have come to IRB recently have no realization of that fact. A pledge to resist “Bigness” has been the consensus here for the past decade.” One can only wonder what study he is looking at? Everyone I’ve spoken to, as well as everything I’ve read and seen has told me this is about turning IRB into Indian Shores or Sand Key. Maybe he was referring to a different study?
I couldn’t help but laugh at the following,
“A properly prepared master plan responds to the goals and objectives of the client. The purposes of any preliminary presentation are to invite responses, and to explore ideas. These preliminary ideas are intended to yield positive responses.” He is only kidding himself. I believe what he really wanted to say was, “My master plan responds to my goals and my objectives as presented by Action 2000. The purpose of this presentation is to set the stage of what I want and things to come. Keep your opinions to yourself.”
This next sentience is an outright lie.
“Reading the writer’s comments, it appears that he has decided to stretch the truth a bit to gain the reader’s support. The writer’s references to “clandestine approach” are totally unwarranted and offensive to anyone who has seen the positive changes which have taken place though the selfless dedication of hundreds of IRB citizens who feel that volunteer efforts can make a difference.” Don’s comments and concerns were correct, and I doubt that anyone in Action 2000, who truly loves this town, would support this plan.
Wake up IRB, please do not let us fall prey to Ralph and his machine.
Signed,
X-A2K (and knows what really going on)
Did anybody notice the Times article last Sunday? They published data that showed property values/sales data in IRB weathered the real estate recession better that any other beach community. Yep, property values in the other beach communities went down more than IRB's values. Why?
Because these other communities have been chasing developer dreams instead of the family oriented beach community community philosophy that IRB followed since passage of the super majority requirement to approve density and height increases.
Sorry Ocunzi, 4 votes was not enough. Ak2 and its developer cronies have managed to populate the Commission with 4 and one half votes in favor of parking garages, zero setbacks on Gulf Blvd. and elswhere, bigger buildings, etc. Ak2's membership should purge its leadership and go back to landscaping only.
If any part of this a2k/usf study gets approved the developers will make more money and the rest of will suffer because our property values won't rise as fast and as high as they would have had we maintained our family oriented beach community values. Thanks to Jimmy for bringing us that goal.
Post a Comment