County Commission Supports Rezoning as Bradfordville Residents Raise Concerns

County Commission Supports Rezoning as Bradfordville Residents Raise Concerns

The need for affordable housing and the desire for local government planners to promote dense growth met the concerns of  residents speaking against the impact of a proposed project.

The proposed zoning change for 30.9 acres located near the intersection of Bull Headley Road and Bannerman Road will increase the number of “dwelling units” from 16 to 247. In addition, the change will allow for approximately 300,000 square feet of commercial space in buildings up to four stories high.

More recent information indicates that an assisted living facility and residential apartments are planned for the project.

Planning staff told the county commission that the change in zoning is consistent with smart growth principles. These principles encourage higher density growth to combat the problems associated with sprawal.

During the public speaking part of the meeting, the majority of the people spoke in opposition to the rezoning request.

The speakers argued that the proposed rezoning will facilitate a project that is not compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods.

In addition, speakers told the county commissioners that the current infrastructure in the area will not support the proposed high density development.

More specifically, Summerbrooke residents complained about the increased traffic that will be routed from the development through the neighborhood.

A number of speakers told the county commissioners that they are not against development, just development that is not compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods and the current infrastructure.

A consultant for the applicant for the rezoning request told the county commissioners that speakers were raising questions that were addressed three years ago when the comprehensive plan was amended. He argued that residents should have challenged the changes at that time.

The legal counsel for the applicant told the county commissioners that they have voted for a framework that allows for the rezoning at least two times over the last five years.

County Commissioner Desolge was the first elected official to speak and defended the rezoning and made the motion to approve the rezoning.

Referencing the Summerbrooke residents speaking against the project, Desloge said, “they don’t like what they don’t understand.”

County Commissioner Dozier said her support for the rezoning was based on rules that were adopted years ago.

County Commissioner John Dailey, who is running for mayor, voted against the rezoning arguing that Bannerman Road needed to be widened before the development moved forward.

The final vote was 6-1, with Dailey voting no.

18 Responses to "County Commission Supports Rezoning as Bradfordville Residents Raise Concerns"

  1. Bill Carlton   July 10, 2018 at 9:54 pm

    Makes one wonder if someone’s pockets are getting lined. To jump the allowable density 15.43 times is unfathomable. Where is there a need for 300,000 square feet of commercial space in that location? The commissioners need to start representing their constituents, thinking for themselves, and not let the planners make these decisions for them.

    Reply
  2. Edwin Rodriguez   July 10, 2018 at 9:56 pm

    I’m not against development on Bannerman, I’m against development without Bannerman widening.

    Reply
  3. Watcher   July 11, 2018 at 11:29 am

    Did any one really think the vote would go any other way?

    Reply
  4. Dirk Dynamic   July 11, 2018 at 12:26 pm

    I moved out of Killearn Lakes 15 years ago because the infrastructure out that way was not anywhere near up to the level of traffic. No improvements since. Lots of new residents. That retail space will be 3/4 empty. And the roads even worse.

    Reply
  5. MT   July 11, 2018 at 5:56 pm

    It’s all about the capacity of Bannerman rd. It can’t handle the increasing traffic and must be widened first.

    Reply
  6. Mike   July 12, 2018 at 9:01 am

    When the rezoning applicant said “speakers were raising questions that were addressed three years ago when the comprehensive plan was amended. He argued that residents should have challenged the changes at that time.”
    So that brings up the question:
    Three years ago, was this “comprehensive plan” presented to area residents so they had an opportunity to review and discuss it, and “at that time” challenge any changes to their area or vote on it? If so, then the applicant has a reasonable point. If not, this argument by the applicant is ridiculous on it’s face.
    I live in the Northeast area, and I have absolutely no clue what’s in the “comprehensive plan” in the next three years. I guess along with my fellow area residents, we need to get busy now and see what this “comprehensive plan” has in store for us – if we even can do that “at this time”.

    And to Mr. Desloge: As it reads in this story, your reference to Summerbrooke residents sounds like an insult. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t – but you should “understand” this: Your job is to serve the residents in your district and that job can be taken from you or any other commissioner at the voting booth. We residents in your district “understand” that.

    Reply
  7. Bev Johnson   July 12, 2018 at 9:27 pm

    Look at the contributions to the commissioners. Follow the money

    Reply
  8. Eagleeye   July 13, 2018 at 3:50 pm

    Hmmm contractor buddies with the commissioners just like the fraud and pocket lining that goes on with the city. Is anyone surprised? Rest assured it will increase crime and traffic more so than without the changes. Great way to “ugly” up the neighborhood. Maybe you should put these out near your house for a change…

    Reply
  9. DavidB   July 13, 2018 at 4:48 pm

    Desloge is such a two-faced bastard. They all are.

    Guess I’m selling and moving to Jefferson County.

    Reply
  10. David   July 15, 2018 at 7:44 pm

    The Mullet Wrapper labeled the “flight” to the northeast as racist. Folks I’ve talked to who’ve moved up there say they are simply tired of “boom box cars” with bass that registers on the Richter scale, grime, and crime. Would the downtown ‘leaders’ cater to these ‘flight’ residents? Not a chance. The best place for a new safety complex would be where the population is going. Instead, it’s to be built on the ‘southside’. And now the ‘leaders’ seem to want the same urban density the “flight” is moving away from. Could both of these actions be just a tad punitive?

    Reply
  11. Terry   July 15, 2018 at 10:13 pm

    If one wishes to see the concerns of Summerbrook’s residents, one only needs to visit phase I of Welaunee’s Canopy development and the look of a high density development, plus adjacent to small County roads already at or over capacity. Phase II is slated to start in the near future. IF you were aghast at the number of trees cut down in phase I, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

    Add to this, two noted environmental experts’ recent reports expressing concerns of its largest stormwater pond’s underlying sensitive karst area and lack of assurances of potential sink holes. The developer’s own geology engineer recommended additional bore tests in 2016 which have never been done!

    Yes, Summerbrooke residents certainly have concerns.

    Reply
  12. Diana S.   July 16, 2018 at 12:09 am

    Desloge sounds dismissive of these people he’s supposed to REPRESENT. How can these commissioners claim to be representatives when they vote the OPPOSITE of what the people want??

    Reply
  13. rb   July 16, 2018 at 7:04 pm

    Density means different things to different folks. Take for the example mentioned ….Welaunee”s Canopy Development. $300K plus homes built on 40 foot lots across from a dense apartment complex…….yet there are some buyers this does not bother ! However the point is , these folks that buy these homes knew in advance of the density element and bought anyway. The Bradfordville folks were there long before these “”fill in “” development folks made the scene therefore they have a legitiment gripe and the zoning department/commissioners /etc., should take notice, before they are voted out of office and have to go and get an honest job !!

    Reply
  14. David   July 17, 2018 at 8:36 am

    From the above story: “Planning staff” “smart growth principles” Most planners are educated to be in accordance with U.N. Agenda 21.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21

    Basically, Agenda 21 and all of the urban/regional planners who are trained with this which is 99% of them believe that everyone should live in high-rise (small footprint) government housing downtown and take mass transit everywhere. No cars. Period. Subdivisions are bad. Cul-de-sacs are bad. Private homes are bad (huge “carbon footprint”) and large luxury homes in gated or exclusive quiet communities are positively terrible for a multitude of global warming, socio-economic and humanitarian reasons.

    The expansion outside of the urban services district is seen as a tumor that if it can’t be stopped/excised, needs to be brought under the Agenda 21 tent by fiat.

    Reply
  15. Mike   July 17, 2018 at 10:23 am

    Agreed, David. Seems I recall hearing about two years ago on Preston Scott’s Morning Show that Gillum and the COT were supporting the Agenda 21 principles. Perhaps my memory is incorrect, but wouldn’t surprise me at all that Gillum-COT would eagerly embrace any UN-sponsored “sustainability” programs – all of which are designed to overrule individual nations’ laws and basically control people’s lives in one way or another. The “global warming” movement is designed with those same goals of control: Everyone must live their lives according to UN-approved (globalist) programs of “sustainability”.

    The remarks above about the “Canopy” development are not undeserved – I live nearby and have driven through it. No trees, (why the name “Canopy” – is that a joke?) cookie-cutter houses practically touching each other – it’s everything Tallahassee traditionally isn’t and has rejected in the past.
    Nothing against the people who buy there, but these types of developments are a sad thing to happen to tree-covered Tallahassee. What unique charm can we claim as a community when Tallahassee looks like any treeless, overbuilt cookie-cutter area of south and central Florida – or California?

    I like what the City of Apalachicola has ruled: No structure, commercial or residential, can be built in Apalachicola that does not resemble and fit with traditional Apalachicola structures.

    Reply
  16. Faye Steele   July 18, 2018 at 1:04 pm

    Proctor has collected 27+ campaign contribution checks from the. The others have accepted checks as well. Follow the money and pay attention during this election cycle. We must elect individuals with integrity who do not have ties to local vendors or corporations.

    Reply
  17. Faye Steele   July 18, 2018 at 1:05 pm

    Proctor has collected 27+ campaign contribution checks from the. More than anybody else. The others have accepted checks as well. Follow the money and pay attention during this election cycle. We must elect individuals with integrity who do not have ties to local vendors or corporations.

    Reply
  18. Rod   July 20, 2018 at 9:45 pm

    Hmmm… a nice area of town. Let’s dump crime in it. Never mind that it is robbery considering that it will tank property values. How about some incentives to bring manufacturing to Tallahassee so people can get real jobs and stop flooding the city with crappy college bars, hipster restaurants, and student housing. Stop ignoring the locals who despise living in a town filled with around fifty thousand (more than a quarter the amount of the permanent population of the city) transient people who only want frivolity and have no ties to the future of this city.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.