top of page

Talking points and email template for FLUM-58

St. Pete has set August 13th as the date for the all important City Counsel meeting to determine if FLUM-58 will move forward with a spot rezone to allow for a high rise building to be place right in the middle of your neighborhood. All correspondence with the city of St. Pete needs to be submitted before August 7th, 2020. This means it's time to come together again to protect the character of our neighborhood. To do so we've created a contact list, email template and list of talking points that you can use to make your case against spot rezoning and the placement of high density housing in your PGSP neighborhood. We don't have much time, so every bit of help is appreciated. Here's what you need to do before August 7th, 2020:

Email all city council:

Dist. 1 Robert Blackmon (Linnie Randolph) 727-551-3528

Dist. 2 Brandi Gabbard (Linnie Randolph) 727-551-3528

Dist. 3 Ed Monanari (Ben Weil) 727-551-3304

Dist. 4 Darden Rice (Jayne Ohlman) 727-893-7232

Dist. 5 Deborah Figgs-Sanders (Renee Long) 727-551-3305

Dist. 6 Gina Driscoll (Kayleigh Sagonowsky) 727-893-7148

Dist. 7 Lisa Wheeler-Bowman (Renee Long) 727-551-3305

Dist. 8 Amy Foster (Kayleigh Sagonowsky) 727-893-7148

Compose an email:

Here's a sample for you to use.

Subject line: August 13th agenda item – FLUM-58

Dear Members of Council:

I am writing to urge that on August 13th, you vote NO on the proposed Zoning and Land Use changes of the Grace Connection tract at 635 64th St S, outlined in FLUM-58.

I am a (homeowner/resident/voter) in the Bear Creek community. The tract’s proposed rezoning and redevelopment into high-density, multi-family affordable housing is not consistent with the intent of the NS-1 designation outlined in Saint Petersburg’s Comprehensive Plan to “reinforce (the district’s) unique character”, “while permitting rehabilitation, improvement and redevelopment in keeping with the scale of the neighborhood”. Approval of FLUM-58 would be akin to trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.


Thank you very much for listening. You have very tough jobs, and my family and I appreciate the consideration you will give on this issue.

Sincerely – Name, address, phone

Proposed talking points – divide them up. Send over the weekend and then follow up with calls Mon-Tue-Wed

- We don’t argue that it is not in the city’s interest to support development proposals and/or applications which promote affordable housing. We argue that the Bear Creek neighborhood is not the right place for the proposed zoning and land use allowances. We'd like to see all areas the city has identified for such projects. Where is the plan?

- Given the current single-family zoning of the neighborhood and the tract, we would like to see private developers who would build additional single-family stock on that tract. It is hard to fathom, given the land-locked, built out nature of St. Pete, that a single-family home builder could not be enticed to purchase or otherwise develop this site.

- The motivation for citing such redevelopment on this tract appears to be largely political in nature. The city appears to have placed sufficient resources to push through this application for Spot Zoning, first with the City itself trying to buy the land and attempting to alter the Zoning and Land Use, followed by supporting the FLUM-58 Applicant and the entity under contract by generating reports and providing data which predominantly supports the approval of the Zoning and Land Use changes

- The tract is environmentally sensitive, with a Preservation zoning designation on the GIS for at least part of it. Bear Creek, and estuary that flows directly into Boca Ciega Bay, wraps around the church property. Has consideration of what the impacts of run-off from additional impervious surfaces, waste and increased human activity been considered?

- Because it is located in such close vicinity to the Coastal High Hazard Area, the city must consider the location of this proposed development and how the additional 200-400 residents will be evacuated during a hurricane, especially assuming that many of these supposed 55+ residents would be relying on public transportation.

- As stated in of the Comprehensive Plan, the characteristics of this suburban neighborhood include “single-use development, (with) horizontally oriented architecture…” The tallest building in the surrounding neighborhood is no more than 2-stories. FLUM-58 proposes up to 72 foot (or roughly 7-story) buildings, which is not consistent with the horizontal orientation of this neighborhood.

DO NOT DO: DON’T – argue effects on crime. Pejorative and there is no evidence.

DON’T – argue traffic will increase in-and-of itself. All the available evidence is that SFH generates more car trips than multi-family.

235 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page