Antique Wood Water Pipe Found In Burns Square

wood pipe on top of new water line being installed

The constructions workers uncovered an antique wood water pipe this past week in Burns Square while installing new storm water and water lines.  The piece is about 2 feet long by 5 inches square with a 2 1/2 inch drilled out water line.  Contrast between this and the new water lines being installed today, one can see how progress and technology has changed in such a short period of time...one's lifetime.

CITY COMMISSION MEETING 6/16/08 BSQ PRESIDENT COMMENTS ON IMPROVEMENTS TO PEDESTRIAN CROSSING AT ORANGE & PINEAPPLE

I sit here today very frustrated by a process that purported to build consensus but  in actuality produced only a "least-common-denominator" solution to a complex urban design problem.  We in BSQ hold as truth that we in Sarasota shoot for something higher than the "least common denominator."

It has been well over a year since BSQ first presented the roundabout project to the city commission but somehow we continue to hear there was not enough time to achieve a real solution. 
 
Here is where our "least common denominator" thinkng has left us: 
 
We have eliminated the synergy with the County to save the City hundreds of thousands of dollars and the BSQ businesses the inconvenience of multiple construction projects, eliminated needed crosswalks, removed access for thousands of customers a day, eliminated additional parking opportunities, did not reduced traffic speeds, lost the opportunity to make the pedestrian a priority over the vehicle, maintained all the dangerous car crash conflict areas, eliminated reduction of our carbon footprint, have not reduced unneeded traffic lanes and took away opportunities for additional greenspace.  
 
Yes, you preserved the left hand turn out of Oak Street so the handful of residents who travel that way do not have to go around a block, but this choice was at the expense of the thousands of downtown customers a day who now have no access. 
 
 
This design preserves an intersection that whether it is or is not the most beautiful it can be is subjective; let alone, how the city has quantified that is questionable at best. 
 
 
The design before you is a design that the Burns Square Property Owners Association has been requesting since our 2005 charrette, which was prior to 2007 study which resulted in the roundabout recommendation and all of the benefits that came with it.    
 
Therefore, if this is all we can get out of this thing the commission tagged "process", our original 2005 design, then we hope you vote for these improvements before you today as well as immediately fund the Alderman roundabout for construction during the County Storm Water project. 

Denise Kowal, President

Burns Square Property Owners

BURNS SQUARE RESIDENTS ALLIANCE FORMED

A group of residents in BSQ formed the Burns Square Residents Alliance because too often the voice of the over 80 residents is being lost.  Additional encouragement came from the city commission for BSQ to follow the St. Armand's LMR (landowner, merchant, resident).  BSQ now has a PMR, which is the Property Owners, Merchants and Residents Associations.

BSQ PRESIDENT COMMENTS ON SLAPP AND CITIZEN INPUT

I personally found the article very informative about SLAPP.

 As far as the Plaza Hotel and the developer, we in Burns Square continue to work WITH the developer to get the best possible project we can mentor in a positive way.  If the developer is proposing a project that is within the right THE CITY COMMISSION dictated in our codes, then what about his proposal makes him a ‘sob developer’ or has ‘developers greed’?  As they say, “don’t shoot the messenger”.

 I have great respect for the citizens concerned and nobody is saying they do not have a right to speak up; in fact it was never discouraged but honored.  As president of the Burns Square Property Owners Association, I spent time speaking with most of them and attended a condominium meeting on the subject as guest speaker.  But they choose to go in a different direction, hire a lawyer and stop open dialogue for constructive change. 

The hand was open but they have nobody to blame but them for the conflict that is now created by their actions…hopefully they will accept the open hand again and constructive debate can restart.

Denise Kowal, President, BSQ Property Owners

Critic Sued By Plaza Hotel Developer

HERALD TRIBUNE - SARASOTA Lottie Varano organized his neighbors, got an attorney involved and wrote letters to city officials to fight a five-story, 173-room hotel planned for his Burns Square neighborhood.

The developer is firing back with a lawsuit, blaming Varano for spreading misinformation, creating delays and costing his business money.

The lawsuit, filed less than a month before city officials consider the planned Plaza Hotel, has characteristics of a so-called SLAPP lawsuit, a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. Such lawsuits aim to silence dissent and limit public participation in government decisions.

Those suits are discouraged in Florida, one of 26 states to adopt laws to protect people like Varano.

But experts say Florida's law is weak and leaves residents who complain about developments open to legal fees and hassles involved with defending themselves in court.

Varano, who did not think discussing the project with neighbors and city officials would land him in court, now has had to hire an attorney and filed a motion to dismiss the case.

"It's someone who's trying to bully me around and prevent me from asserting my First Amendment rights," Varano said.

Developer Al Hochstadt said he would not have sued if Varano's complaints were credible. He declined to say how much he was seeking in damages, although Varano said Hochstadt told him it was $10 million.

"They've caused a lot of delays, they've cost us a lot of money," Hochstadt said. "These people have a lot of money and have a lot of political pressure."

The project is in line for a fast-track approval under the city's new downtown code: It can be approved by staff and does not need to go before the City Commission.

Seeds of dissent

Hochstadt began buying up land between Palm and Orange avenues more than 20 years ago, and sees his planned hotel as "a little piece of Europe" that will become a destination here.

He wants to break ground and complete the hotel by 2010.

Nearby merchants see the project as a way to boost foot traffic in the Burns Square area.

But residents say the project is too big and will generate too much traffic, clogging two narrow side streets.

On May 12, Varano sent a letter to the city challenging the idea that the project is a hotel, as it will involve the sale of some units under "fractional ownership" similar to a time share.

Varano and his neighbors are also outraged that the hotel could be built without a vote by elected officials.

Hochstadt met with Varano, the president of the Essex House Association, and other residents of condominiums in the area about those concerns on April 9.

In the lawsuit, Hochstadt says that meeting was an ambush orchestrated by Varano. Instead of a few residents, he says he was met by more than 50 people who pushed him for information about the project. Hochstadt says they were fishing for details they could use against him.

Neighbors have since organized a group called Concerned Citizens of Palm Avenue, and have hired attorney Richard Ulrich, who sent a letter to the city saying the hotel suites are more like condominiums.

Hochstadt also sent an e-mail to Ulrich threatening a lawsuit.

A hearing for the Plaza Hotel project is scheduled for Wednesday before the Development Review Committee. If the plan meets all the standards of the city's new downtown code, the board has to approve it.

Hochstadt said he hopes the lawsuit sends a message to Varano and others opposed to his development.

"He's got to be very careful in what he does," Hochstadt said. "People must be responsible for their actions."

Obligations under the law

That approach is problematic because it is not up to a developer to decide what information is credible enough to be presented to decision-makers, said University of Central Florida sociology professor Penelope Canan.

Canan coined the term SLAPP in the 1980s, when she researched suits brought by developers to silence critics, especially environmentalists.

"If the government can't hear from the people it's supposed to represent, then the government can't do its job," Canan said. "It undermines good decision-making."

Florida law allows for a SLAPP lawsuit to be thrown out of court quickly and awards legal fees to the defendant, but it is weak compared to other states such as California.

In Florida, defendants have to convince a judge that the lawsuit is "without merit" and filed only because they used their free speech rights to address the government. If it is deemed a SLAPP suit, then the law allows the defendant to get attorneys fees and possibly damages from the person who filed it.

In California, the burden is on the plaintiffs to establish that they are probably going to win the lawsuit, or the case gets thrown out.

In both states, the battle can become complicated and expensive just to determine whether the lawsuit is a SLAPP lawsuit.

Canan said the average SLAPP lawsuit takes two years to go through the court system.

Threat of a similar lawsuit might make other citizens think twice about speaking up in their neighborhood, she said.

So far, SLAPP suits have been rare in Sarasota County.

Ann Kaplan, president of the Sarasota Council of Neighborhood Associations, or CONA, said her group's opposition has gotten her threatened with a lawsuit, but she has not heard of a SLAPP lawsuit filed in Sarasota County recently.

Sarasota attorney Morgan Bentley said there have been fewer SLAPP lawsuits filed since the state law was adopted.

Every case depends on the details, so it is hard for legislators to pre-empt an entire type of lawsuit, Bentley said.

As it is written, the law tries to balance two fundamental rights: the right to free speech and the right to sue someone for damages, Bentley said.

And the law's provision allowing for defendants to get damages against the person or company that filed the suit can be an effective deterrent, Bentley said.

"You just don't want to step in it," Bentley said.

THE CITY ALLIANCE FORMED

THE CITY ALLIANCE FORMED TO PROMOTE A VIBRANT AND SUSTAINABLE DOWNTOWN

 

SARASOTA, Fla.---- Major downtown Sarasota associations and constituencies representing over 3000 members have joined voices and resources to form The City Alliance. The City Alliance has the common vision of building a vibrant and sustainable downtown Sarasota. At the start of 2008, The City Alliance defined its mission to “Leverage the combined energy and resources of private sector stakeholder associations through collaboration, shared ideas, and group action on targeted initiatives.”

 

The City Alliance is a coalition of four major downtown constituencies:

§       business and civic groups, including cultural and religious institutions

§       commercial property owners

§       residents and their condominium associations

§       The Merchants Alliance of the five major downtown merchants associations.

 

The City Alliance was formed to present a united voice representative of the views and interests of downtown stakeholders in all public dialogue concerning downtown and city affairs. The goal is to work to insure that downtown Sarasota is an attractive and prosperous city center that sustains an attractive and prosperous city. The City Alliance is eager to join in public-private sector collaboration to help Sarasota weather the difficult economic times we face as a community, including the fiscal constraints on local governments.

 

The City Alliance has selected five initiatives for immediate attention:

§       implement the redesign of Fruitville Road from US 301 to US 41 as an attractive gateway to downtown and the bay front

§       establish a downtown improvement district

§       pursue the city’s project to make Tamiami Trail through the downtown corridor pedestrian-friendly for easy access between downtown and the bay front

§       faithfully implement the city’s master plan

§       continue to develop a Downtown Historic District.

 

RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER CLAPP ON LMR

Good Morning Dick:

I wanted to respond to your comments about Burns Square considering a model such as St. Armands LMR.  I feel we are on that path with the recent formation of the Burns Square Residents Alliance.  We now have a PMR for Burns Square (property owners, merchants and residents) and I have faith we will continue to work well together.

I going to reach and say this is not exactly your intended suggestion and possibly feel our PMR should include, well, I am not exactly sure.  I will make the assumption you feel it should include all the surrounding areas to the North, East, South and West.  I disagree to some extent because you are asking us to do something different than St. Armands model but I will address your 'consensus' comments in another email at another time.  Regardless, we would welcome those not in our PMR to the table, just as the LMR does.

As you know St. Armands LMR is just St. Armands, which makes sense because those are the direct stakeholders.  It does not include Lido or Coon Key but I am sure they are listened too but their voice is not a part of the LMR the city so relies upon.

St. Armands circle itself is not a mixed use area either which Burns Square is.  We have had that wonderful mix of residential and commercial since the first building was built.  We are also historically within the dense city boundaries and do not seek to impose beyond our boundaries into our neighboring communities.  We wish to be sustainable by being compact, dense and cozy within our zoning area and rights.  We want improvements that support our rights to be vibrant.

The new president of the residents group, prior to the formation stated the following:

Hi Denise,  As you may know I was just re-elected to the board of Burn’s Court Villa’s Association and will be representing all 23 owners.  My residents are getting more and more concerned with the lack of cooperation from not only the City of Sarasota but also with a select few residents of Laurel Park.  All of our residents moved to Burn’s Court because of the “pedestrian friendly” atmosphere that welcomed our residents to shopping and restaurants.  As time goes by it seems that more and more places are closing down right in our back yard and to make it worse the City and a few Laurel Park residents are standing up to block any progress or future development in our part of town which could lead to a “re-birth” and feed the remaining local merchants.  We all moved to this area so that we could walk to everything- that all becomes a mute point if the local businesses can’t keep their doors open.  Please let me know what we can do to help save the area before it’s too late.  Best regards, Mark Miller

Burns Square is also very far away from the build-out and financial success of St. Armands.  They are successful for a number of reasons.  The main one is the continual storefronts throughout, creating that walking experience so talked about in New Urbanism, something we do not have in Burns Square but strive for.  You seem to think they are improving, I sort of agree and disagree.  The St. Armands I remember was like a Rodeo Drive and not infested with T-shirt and Trinket stores or cheap replicas of art and canned music.  I think John Ringling would be horrified.  Regardless of what is tasteful in one's eye, I do know if they could do it over, they would follow Burns Square model and worked on a Master Plan prior to any improvements they did.  That they regret to this day because improvements were done that were not well thought out, such as the current intersection in front of my building.

Lastly, we are open to a facilitator from the city as you suggested.

Fondly, Denise Kowal, President

Burns Square Property Owners Association

Richard Clapp Wrote May 23, 2008 EXCERPT:

As you know, St Armands has a well functioning association of landowners merchants and residents  (LMR Group).  While each of the separate groups has their own considerations, they have a common vision for St Armands.  They meet regularly (with a city facilitator) and make progress.  One of their sacred principles is that none of the members will make changes without the knowledge and input from the other members.  They realize that they all need to be together for the success of everyone.  They also realize the value of a neutral facilitator to keep the discussion fair and within proper bounds.  This group has worked well over the last 8 years or so.

 

RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER CLAPP ON 'CONSENSUS'

Dear Dick:

We are slowly getting to your other comments in your email of May 23rd.  We offer this conversation on 'consensus' to hopefully improve process for Burns Square (BSQ) and City Hall.  

We in BSQ have been struggling with your (appears Kelly's, LouAnn's and Bob's too) 'consensus' approach for BSQ projects that lead to the city commission denial of the Orange/Pineapple roundabout.  We feel the 'consensus' system is drastically flawed.

The city manager and the majority of the commission relied on the multiple choice design sheet in which a select group of people placed personal preferences and a 'consensus' was drawn as you state, "The roundabout discussion clearly was not agreed to by most of those affected."  

While we feel the Laurel Park (LP) board successfully organized and rallied people to vote for 'no change', and the people on Palm, majority of whom supported the roundabout, filled out sheets requesting 'no change' for friends from LP, we wonder why Hudson Bayou and Main Street were not notified to give input?  They are our neighbors to the South and North.  Since the overwhelming number of people actually travel in (north) and out (south) of downtown instead of sideways (east/west) through BSQ, wouldn't their input be as important?

In addition you state, "The vitality of a city is a function of everyone - residents, businesses, functionality, personal preference, etc." (questionable since our 60+ year sprawl mentality).  If this is the case, then why was every other city neighborhood denied notification?  And why wasn't the DTC interests invited, such as the DTP, DTCA and DSMA?  Also, shouldn't the city include the city core businesses, residents, property owners and civic community that relies on BSQ's success?

The BSQ Property Owners and BSQ Merchants associations publicly worked together through 2007 on a concept that started in 2005 to offer the city an engineering and new urbanist design that supports our city master plan and the needs of BSQ.  Hundreds of BSQ supporters wanted the professionally engineered and planned roundabout but this voice was ignored in this process for the multiple choice design sheet.  Admittedly, there was a select group in BSQ (11 out of hundreds) who filled out forms for friends supporting 'no change' (even though 9 of those supported the roundabout and still do).

So here we are.  This monumental project for one of the city's most important intersection has been reduced to a few people from BSQ, LP and Palm sitting around a table in the engineering conference room trying to get 'consensus' on a dumbed down 'do nothing' design.  BSQ is threatened with no improvements unless we can find 'consensus' with the two LP spokespersons who did not share BSQ values the first time around.  But we are told the commission will agree with this 'consensus' design created by 4, 5 6 or 7 of us instead of the professional thoughtful planning BSQ did with hundreds involved?  

Therefore I ask, is this how our city government is going to continue to make decisions?  Is 'consensus' Kate Lowman and Denise Kowal agreeing?  Or is it two people from LP, Burns and Palm?  Or is it ten people from LP, BSQ and Palm?  Or is the presidents of the associations and which associations?  Is it each individual condo on Palm or the Downtown Condo Association?  Or a few from every neighborhood in the city?  Who and how many of our 50,000 residents exactly makes up 'consensus'?  And if we meet with you on Monday at the city commission meeting with a 'consensus' design, did the city commission really accomplish something great for this city of ours or is it as I stated:  BSQ "needs are continually ignored for political reasons and a few residents who are content on controlling things that are counterproductive for business and the city's vitality"?

Respectfully, Denise Kowal, President

Burns Square Property Owners Association

PS... That LP & Palm neighborhoods were not included or timely included is demonstrably untrue.  It is demonstrably true that they do not include us.  There was adequate time for everyone for the construction of the roundabout but so much time was wasted and still is.

PSS...Also, the BSQ intersection is not LP or Palm ( Hudson or Main) and those neighborhoods do not start until outside BSQ DTC zoning, except Main.  This is no arbitrary turf line drawn by neighborhood associations but a well defined zoning difference with totally different uses.  In addition, our intersection within BSQ boundaries is not encompassed in LP as you state.  BSQ and LP are not one, in fact LP only borders 4 of our 13 or so blocks in BSQ.  

cc:  Burns Square Association (Merchants), Burns Square Residents Alliance, The City Alliance, Downtown Sarasota Merchant Alliance

Richard Clapp wrote May 23, 2008 11:23:37 PM EDT:

The vitality of a city is a function of everyone - residents, businesses, functionality, personal preference, etc.  I do not think it is a fair statement that business "needs are continually ignored for political reasons and a few residents who are content on controlling things that are counterproductive for business and the city's vitality".  There have been several attempts to look at a vision for the area encompassing Laurel Park and Burns Square.  For a number of reasons (history, personalities, etc.) no agreement has ever been found.  Recently the Palm Ave condo people have raised issues with the Plaza Hotel concept.  I think an honest, open, inclusive visioning process could help.  I believe that the residents want to have a lively and functioning Burns Square area but they feel they have been excluded from many of the discussions.  The physical connection of these two areas plays a strong role in both areas quality of life and business success expectations.  Both need to be involved in the discussions and planning.

The roundabout discussion clearly was not agreed to by most of those affected.  Additionally there was little time between when it was proposed and when a decision needed to be made - not enough time to find a solution that most could agree to.

 

I do not believe the city is saying "consensus is more important than safety".  Safety is a factored in the proposed minimal street design changes (as directed by the city commission).