PO Box 1212
Tampa, FL 33601

Pinellas
(727) 726-8811
Hillsborough
(813) 258-5827
Toll Free 1-888-683-7538
Fax (813) 258-5902

Click For A FREE Quote
TOOLS
CONVERSION CHART
STANDARD DEVIATION
MORTGAGE CALCULATOR

Updated November 2024


RETURN TO NEWS INDEX

Condo tower debate still casts shadow
By KATHY STEELE
Tampa Tribune
Published: Nov 11, 2009

BAYSHORE - Six years hasn't been long enough to settle debate about a proposed condominium tower on Bayshore Boulevard.

The Tampa City Council initially rejected the project at Bayshore and DeSoto Avenue; developers at Citivest won a reversal in the 2nd District Court of Appeal; and the council in 2007 reluctantly approved the tower based on the court ruling.

That was followed by public hearings on the tower's design before the Architectural Review Commission. Residents at Bayshore Royal condominium appealed that decision in June before the city council. The council sided with the commission and reaffirmed its approval of the project.

Last week, the Architectural Review Commission in a 5-2 vote denied another appeal filed by Bayshore Condominium alleging that development guidelines for South Howard Avenue's commercial overlay district should have been applied to one parcel of the project's site.

No one from Citivest or the property's owner, City National Bank of Florida, spoke at the hearing.

"I don't know all the ramifications of this," said attorney James De Furio, who represents Bayshore Royal. His clients, he said, want the district's guidelines applied. De Furio said an appeal to the city council is a likely next step.

The parcel at issue is the smaller of two comprising the entire lot and has no frontage on South Howard.

"I did not feel the overlay should truly apply in this situation," said zoning administrator Cathy Coyle. "There are always circumstances that you have to evaluate."

Bayshore Royal residents say the 346-foot tower, if built, would block their view of Bayshore and bring increased noise and traffic.

"If you didn't want (the overlay district) to apply to the parcel, lines should have been drawn differently," said resident George Deakin.

Commissioner Julie Brown, who voted against denying the appeal, said both sides are right "in some regard." But, she said, "I think we should apply the law as written to that portion. I think that's the intent of the drafters."

The choice is not so clear cut, said Commissioner Beth Eisenfeld. It could be burdensome to property owners if they have one project but have to deal with two sets of zoning rules. "It's not black and white," she said.

Reporter Kathy Steele can be reached at (813) 259-7652.



| INTRO | FAQ | RESIDENTIAL | COMMERCIAL | NEWS | RESOURCES | TOOLS | TEAM | CONTACT | CLIENTS LOGIN | PRIVACY |

FacebookTwitterLinkedin
Copyright 1999-2024, Appraisal Development International, Inc