12 Oaks Modifications
The TMA 12 Oaks Advisory Team meets on most Thursdays, at 1:00 p.m. in the conference room at Tara Golf & Country Club. Member observers are welcome to attend.
Frequently Asked Questions
April 6, 2010
Note. If you are already informed about the issue and want to know how you can help, go to the end of this document. Otherwise, please read on:
Why should Tara Preserve and Tara Golf & County Club residents be concerned about requests for changes in the 12 Oaks Plaza area when it is already commercial property?
First of all, the SW corner of SR 70 and Tara Blvd. is NOT currently zoned commercial. As for the commercial parcels within 12 Oaks Plaza, the TMA believes that the current number of approved uses is sufficient and need not be modified. The primary concern is the types of land uses approved and the appearance of the center once the parcels are developed. The primary goal, a well planned, attractive and safe commercial center that offers a variety of shopping choices and services, is in the best interests of both residents and the developer.
Is there any part of the plan that you support?
Yes. Specifically we support the proposal for an assisted living facility. Our residents, families and friends may have need for such a facility. Its proximity to their primary residences would be an asset, enhancing the quality of their lives and the appeal of Tara as a residential location.
Why can't we negotiate a satisfactory solution?
We had a meeting with the developer and his lawyer in December. Lake Lincoln's request to the Manatee County Planning Department was open ended, requesting permission to exchange one residential parcel for commercial zoning, plus adding different commercial uses within the plaza area. Our goal in that meeting was to get clarification of the uses and parcels Lake Lincoln intends to develop. The developer did not clarify much of the information. In February the planner at Lake Lincoln was instructed not to continue to communicate with the TMA. Another meeting with the developer is scheduled for this week
What are the biggest concerns of the residents?
One of the six present requests for modifications would include transferring 19,500 sq. ft. to the SW corner of Tara Boulevard and SR 70. Commercial development on this corner would require curb cuts on both SR 70 and Tara Blvd. Access on SR 70 will likely be a "right in" only, given the configuration and traffic volume of this intersection, requiring all traffic leaving the drug store to exit southbound on Tara Blvd. Cars intending to return onto SR 70 east or west would have to go to the stop light at Stone River Road and make a U-turn to proceed north on Tara Blvd. This traffic pattern presents serious safety concerns. Going eastbound on SR 70 would require crossing two lanes of traffic, a bicycle lane, plus the exit from Regions Bank. The only alternative, cutting through the plaza to exit onto SR 70 between the Circle K station and Bank of America parcels, presents a different but no less undesirable solution. The SR 70/Tara intersection is already graded "D" on a scale where A is best and F is failed. One tragic death and numerous accidents have occurred there--three in the last month alone. The proposed changes would make this intersection even more hazardous.
Won’t the County do a traffic study to ensure that our safety is not further impaired?
No. The County will not require a new study to be done prior to site plan approval, even though the last one was done years ago. The County requires applicants to provide their own traffic study. Committee members believe a study commissioned by a developer might be in favor of the developer.
Why is the requested Land Use Equivalency Matrix (LUEM) objectionable?
Lake Lincoln already has the right to build another 180,000 square feet in the 12 Oaks Plaza area (DRI #11, Phase III). We estimate they have built less than one half of the permitted 436,000 square feet. Can you envision the traffic on this corner if the current commercial square footage is doubled? Now imagine if this modification could permit even more square footage. The traffic pattern will be totally unsafe. We are simply asking that the developer finish what is approved before seeking extra square footage.
One of the requested modifications is for a monopole cell tower to be erected. Where would this be located?
Note: cell phone towers are now known as communication towers. This more generic naming allows for expansion of equipment such as television dishes, wireless internet, paging, two-way radio and amateur radio in addition to cell phone transmission.
The developer will not commit to a specific location for a cell tower at this time. Keep in mind that a cell tower could be approximately 200 feet high and as close as 400 feet to some homes in the Preserve or Ashley Oaks. Homes within 500 feet of a cell phone tower depreciate in value by more than 19%.
I would probably live beyond 500 feet of a proposed communications tower. How would my home value be impacted?
Real estate appraisals are based on prices in all the community, therefore the 19% decrease in value of homes near the tower would lower your home value, too.
Cell reception is poor at my home. Wouldn’t a cell tower help me?
Possibly. Studies show that people very close to a cell tower do not actually receive improved reception. A new cell phone tower was erected in 2010 within 2 miles of Tara. If your cell provider pays rent to access that tower, your reception may improve.
I heard cell phone towers are environmentally harmless, so why oppose this use?
Current cell phone tower installations bear signs warning of potential danger. Scientific research has demonstrated that emissions from cell phone towers cause a variety of harmful effects in laboratory animals and may be hazardous to humans. These risks were sufficient to cause the International Association of Fire Fighters to oppose placing cell phone towers at their firehouse locations.
Has an environmental study been done regarding the potential placement of a communications tower and the impact on the wildlife in our area?
Not to our knowledge. “The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has issued voluntary guidelines for tower construction aimed at minimizing bird kills. These guidelines include: co-location of new antennae on existing towers; keeping towers below 199 feet; sitting towers within existing tower “farms”, and not close to sensitive bird habitat; eliminating guy wires; dismantling inactive towers as soon as possible; using visual markers in areas of raptor and waterfowl movements (both groups are prone to daytime collisions with guy wires), etc……” Each of the proposed communication tower locations is frequented by waterfowl as well as osprey, in addition to numerous other wildlife.
Wouldn’t the location of a cell phone tower in the shopping plaza be helpful to attract commercial clients?
It won't attract new commercial clients, but it could deter them. A number of establishments, Bonefish Grill being one example, will not locate in an area near a cell tower.
The picture of a cell tower shown at the presentation had a chain link fence around it. Is that secure and will that property be maintained?
A cell phone tower must be enclosed by a chain link fence. It may also have barbed wire or concertina wire on top to deter graffiti artists and others who might want to damage the facility or to protect the area from adventurous youth. The cell tower will also have large equipment boxes (resembling small trailers) as well as propane gas tanks to power the generators. These are unsightly and potentially hazardous. There is the noise of the generators running, buzzing and clicking when they kick in for monthly start-ups. Some generators require a controlled climate, so there may be air conditioners to maintain constant temperature. If you care to take a look at an existing cell phone location, visit the Forestry station on SR 70 and look at the bottom of the tower, where windblown debris remains and rust is taking its toll on the metal fixtures. Note, too, that there might be multiple carriers using a single cell tower. Each carrier will need to have its own equipment/containers/generators at ground level.
How will the proposed changes impact the environment, if at all?
The developer proposes to “mitigate” one acre of existing wetland. This means that one acre near SR 70 would be built on and, in return, the developer would designate a separate parcel that they currently control to be wetland. However, changes in County ordinances currently being proposed might permit the applicant to pay a fee rather than mitigate the acre. There was an annual report done by the developer as required by the Manatee County Planning Commission. However, it did not model how the changes requested could impact the storm drainage systems in the Tara communities. It also did not make mention of how these changes would impact the indigenous creatures who currently use the wetland in question.
Why did the TMA Board authorize spending up to $20 per home to oppose the developer‘s modifications?
Lake Lincoln's request for changes at 12 Oaks Plaza has been the subject of four open community forums. At each of these meetings, residents strongly opposed the proposed changes. The TMA Board, which is charged with “promoting the health, safety and welfare of the owners and residents of Tara," determined it had the right and the responsibility to take this action on behalf of members.
Is this just the beginning of an endless effort that would require TMA to pay much more to challenge these changes?
This effort is not endless. Its purpose is to persuade the County Commissioners to reject the developer's proposal. Since the hearing before the County Commission is scheduled for August 17, 2010, we expect resolution by the end of summer.
Why wouldn’t TMA just hire an attorney to handle all of this work?
A great deal of background work and research has been conducted by committee members, and more leg-work is envisioned in the immediate future. TMA does not want to spend the Association’s money if volunteer members would do the work themselves. Committee members represent a broad spectrum of expertise from engineering, real estate planning, cell tower knowledge, commercial real estate building, property appraisals, traffic, etc. Committee members have already invested hundreds of hours of their own time and some of their own money for this effort. Committee members have met with County and State officials, as well as the developer, and will continue to dialogue with those who are integral to this project. It is expected that TMA will engage an attorney to guide the presentation before the Board of County Commissioners. Legal representation also enables us to have more than 10 minutes to speak on the subject at the County meetings.
I support the ad hoc committee’s efforts. What can I do to help?
• Return your signed petition to the TMA Office, in person, by fax, or by email. If you have misplaced the petition form, download it from the TMA website at taramasterassociation.com; call the TMA at 941-756-0554, Ext. 0; or stop by the TMA office at TGCC.
• TALK to neighbors and encourage them to return their petitions if they have not yet done so and WRITE County commissioners to voice your opposition.
• Keep checking taramasterassociation.com and/or watching our limited access tv channels (795 and 796 for cable subscribers; 117 and 118 for all others) for updates on information and activities related to the 12 Oaks Plaza effort.
• Mark your calendars to attend two key meetings: the Planning Department on June 10, 2010 and the County Commission on August 17, 2010. Be prepared to wear a red shirt and take a nice bus ride to these meetings with your neighbors.
Click on the link below to view: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PROPOSED CHANGED TO TARA DRI – COMMERCIAL LAND@ On November 13, 1980, Manatee County granted a Development Order to Tara, Ltd., for the above referenced DRI, a 1,137 acre, multi-use development located southwest of the State Road 70/I-75 intersection in Manatee County. The development was originally approved to contain 4,040 dwelling units; a 54,000 sq.ft. service center; a 125,000 sq.ft. community shopping mall; a 50,000 sq.ft. commercial service plaza; an 18 hole golf course; a restaurant; an auto service station; and a 150-unit motel. Buildout of the three phases was schedule to occur in 1985, 1990, and 1995, respectively. The Development Order has been amended eight times, most recently on May 9, 2006 (Ordinance No.906-35).
CURRENT NOPC DESCRIPTION The applicant has requested the following modification to the Development Order:
|
