Blog

REMARKS   25 Total remarks on this post. Add your own remarks below

• August 28th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
  Chuck Welch

  “in an effort to address noise and flow of pedestrian traffic within the merchant market area.”

  And the flow of vehicular traffic?

  I still wonder when the original issue with trains blocking streets became one primarily about noise.

  I don’t see the Downtown Lakeland Partnership listed. Do you have reports that CSX will work with that group also?

  Finally, just so I’m clear, to who exactly are you attributing these August 28th, 2007 projections?

  Thanks.

• August 28th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
  Bob Gernert

  Has the Lakeland Downtown Partnership shown any willingness to work with CSX? If so, that has not been evident.

  The Lakeland Chamber’s Taskforce is on point with their CSX discussions and it is a Winter Haven priority that Lakeland’s concerns be addressed.

  The current projections outlined in this post were developed in consultation with CSX and the sources cited in the post.

• August 29th, 2007 at 8:32 am
  Dee Dee

  Bob,
  On the point of asking has the LDP shown willingness to work with CSX. The residents of Sundance have had for over a year and continue to have a willingness to work with CSX. Yet in that 1+ years, have had no results. In fact, the city is not even willing to speak to us any longer. If CSX and the city really wanted to resolve issues, I believe Rick Hood has mine and Pam’s #’s on speed dial.

  And I do believe Lakeland’s concern is not only the 4 trains coming to the ILC, but the additional train traffic on the main line from the reroute of the line in Orlando.

• August 29th, 2007 at 8:49 am
  TW

  As a Lakelander, I find it hard to understand why this is a devisive issue.

  Jobs for hundreds and eventually thousands throughout our region vs. the inconvenience of increased rail traffic through Lakeland?

  What is to debate?

• August 29th, 2007 at 9:32 am
  Mr H

  As an resident of the Sundance Ranch Estates I “feel” my neighbors & I are in agreement that CSX will be causing us a GREAT bothersome when were use to our privacy,quiet times & our area that is very known for the older generation wanting to retire out here! Not all retireees are wanting to move-in to gated communities that surrounded us! We welcomed the “new” subdivisions & schools growing up around us but building an huge CSX terminal like CSX is wanting out here won’t benefit my neighbors & friends who’s homes will most likely be destroyed and sold way under mkt value! I’m sure anyone who owns a home has to see that if you lived in your own home for over 10 years like we have here or longer value your home & when a BIG corporation like CSX wants you “OUT” of the way to as I’m hearing everytime I read the newspaper or watch TV “that this project will bring in more jobs”….but are the people of Winter Haven realizing that residents of Sundance are just like all in the city limits…we lose “OUR HOMES” & memories for a project that can be moved abit further down the road & be in nobody’s way and still benefit everyone even CSX!!!

• August 29th, 2007 at 10:08 am
  Christi Gomez

  TW
  What is the Debate?
  It is not just increased rail traffic through Lakeland….That is just the most recent issue brought to the forefront! It is so much more than that; it is about poor planning…. It is about not taking care of the residents of Polk County that are going to live next to this project and to protect their rights to a peaceful way of life. It is about being responsible for our environment! It is about being good stewards of our land uses. It is about not allowing heavy industrial use within 100 to 300 feet from residential. It is about making sure we have the infrastructure in place to support this huge project. Who is going to pay for the entire infrastructure needed to support this? What about the burden that will be placed on the existing roads or the need to build more schools? Yes jobs and economic growth is positive, but we must weight the positives against the negative and we must have appropriate review and planning before we even consider a project like this. We must be intelligent about this and not let the offer of millions/billions of dollars and the potential for jobs impair our good judgment or common sense. There is a lot more at risk here than Jobs! As far as Mr. Gernert comment about Lakeland not having the willingness to work with CSX… Well all I can say about that is Good Luck Lakeland Downtown Partnership trying to get CSX to work with you… they sure did not make an effort to work with the residence of Sundance! Why do you think they are spending their hard earned money on attorneys if CSX was willing to work with them!

• August 29th, 2007 at 10:44 am
  Bob Gernert

  An earlier effort by CSX to involve Sundance residents reported here: http://blog.winterhavenfl.com/2007/03/01/csx-initial-offer-to-sundance-residents/ was not productive.

  Now certain Sundance residents have sought resolution in the courts. That is where specific issues must now be decided.

  We maintain that Polk County has the brains and the talent to do this correctly.

• August 29th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
  Richard Frank

  Living in Winter Haven now just two years, the sound of osprey, locomotives and outboard motors together are still new to me. I have a casual knowledge of the plans for the transportation facility. My initial reaction is to support it.

  I agree that we should concern ourselves with the affect of increased industrial roadway traffic. Does the industrial traffic have the space, dedicated lanes, and traffic control devices necessary? Tractor-trailers moving in and out of the facility should not crowd out residential commuter or pedestrian traffic, nor put them at increased safety risk. Those are the issues I think residents have the most right to demand be addressed.

  But with regard to increased rail traffic, I don’t see that as a valid reason to oppose the facility. This line is not a new rail line, and Winter Haven is a train town. It’s one of the few cities in Florida that you can so easily recognize has a history as a train town.

  I’m confused regarding Lakeland’s position on this as a critic. Is the goal to push the facility out of Polk county down the line into Highlands or Hardee? Because looking at a map, it appears to me that just as many trains would end up traveling further through Polk in passing through. It also appears that as much industrial traffic would pass through Polk, also in traveling further to and from Orlando and Tampa. But the county would miss out on the economic benefits and forfeit control over the facility. I’ve not looked at any official studies so maybe I’m missing something here (?).

  On the issue closest to me, the environment. Polk is centrally located. Rail is vastly ( http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/efficiency/images/eefig_521.gif ) more efficient than diesel tractor trailers. Plus, improved efficiency on the ground may help us use less of the worst form of transportation, air. It seems to me that one of the best ways to serve the environment is to build an efficient rail facility right in the center of Florida. Which for a few of us is quite literally our back yard. I hope we can do something for those so directly effected, and everyone has a right to say “not in my back yard”. But the tracks are already there.

  We are not dealing with the Orange Blossom Special ( http://www.flarr.com/salobs.htm ), which was christened by in Winter Haven in 1925 by “six bathing beauties” with bottles of orange blossom perfume. But rail is making comeback, for good reason, and I’d like to see Winter Haven play a role in that comeback.

• August 29th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
  Christi Gomez

  Typical response from you Mr. Gernert! I expected nothing more. But I am sorry sir you do not know all the facts only what you have read in the proposal that was published, that is not all there is to that. You do not know all the efforts we have made and the hours we have spent trying to get CSX to come and deal with us as individual homeowners or the efforts we have made just to get them to answer simple questions. CSX has not made any other counter offers or even bother to call me back when I have called to ask questions. They don’t want a peaceful resolution. As far as Polk County knowing what they are doing, that is a matter of opinion, you have yours obviously! I am not as worried about the County as I am about the City of Winter Haven, jumping into this head first…. the County at least finally listened to the concerns of many citizens NOT the City of Winter Haven. The City of Winter Haven did not even take into consideration how this would affect neighboring communities before they started this deal! Give me a break!

• August 29th, 2007 at 6:23 pm
  doubleeagle

  Dee Dee and Christi Gomez,
  If I understand this you staked your claim next to a wastewater plant, spray field and railroad. Now you are surprised you may have industry next to you. It seems like you didn’t do your homework and now you crying foul.

  Now its all about you? I just think you didn’t plan well. We need jobs for the long haul.

  Your property is worth less? I’ll bet I can find byers to pay more than your appraisals.

• August 29th, 2007 at 8:16 pm
  Dee Dee

  Actually, I did do my homework and continue to. Yes, it’s next to a railroad track. One track. On the other side lies property that came to be the wastewater treatment facilty from the EPA. So I live next to one track with trains which run throughout the day and actually add to my country lifestyle. I live across from a wastewate treatment plant and spray field which are both quiet, courteous neighbors who have no lights and activity at night. I also had no reason to believe, as anyone else would have, that the EPA would sale a piece of property, then 30 years later, change it’s standards of water treatment, which allowed the city all this wonderful property to dispose of, at bargain basement prices I might add.

• August 30th, 2007 at 7:26 am
  John M

  The wonderful thing about this blog is that every time a post comes out about CSX you can almost set your watch by when the Sundance Anti-CSX comments (The same 3 points stated over and over and over again. We get it) will start rolling in. It’s amazing to me the “Not In My Backyard” attitude. Numbers just came out that unemployment is up to 4.8% in the county. A great way to see that go even higher is to stop such projects at the expense of a few keeping their “country lifestyle.”

  Personally, I want to see economic growth in this county. If you want country lifestyle, eat at a Cracker Barrel.

• August 30th, 2007 at 8:51 am
  Eddie Gooch

  Beautifully put, John M. I am sure there are other places that let you place your refrigerator in your front lawn.

  Mr. H - You say “…our area that is very known for the older generation wanting to retire out here…”. I hear that all the time too from major business leaders in and out of the area - “When I retire I want to take my hard earned pension and move to the Sundance Ranch”. Why not put your money where your mouth is and stop standing in the way of an opportunity that will allow more people to even have a job to retire from…

• August 30th, 2007 at 10:39 am
  Christi Gomez

  John and Eddie,
  With all due respect…. Why don’t you do some homework… call other cities who have dealt with this kind of thing talk to other County Commissioners from areas that have had to deal with CSX and find out the truth! What is good for the many does not have to hurt the few! I am all for growth and jobs if you can read…. I am against poor planning and sneaking City officials who would sell just enough land under the requirements for a DRI. Your response is typical of people who don’t have an ounce of empathy for others that are hurting that is why the world is in the mess it is today people like you who could care less about others. This will be my last remark ever on this subject because you just can’t fight ignorance! I hope nothing ever abd happens to your homes that you work hard to have and if that bad thing does happen I hope you don?t have to deal with ignorant people making stupid remarks to you.

• August 30th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
  Eddie Gooch

  Christi -
  I am sorry you are so upset. That certainly wasn’t my intention to upset you. I suppose I would be upset too if deep down I knew the comments of myself and John M were spot on and I just didn’t want to hear them. Now THAT’S ignorance.

• August 30th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
  Chuck Welch

  Bob: Thanks for clearing that up.

  John and Eddie: Can you two tell me how many Polk County residents CSX will hire as long term full-time employees — if they build the ILC? I’ve heard from the others. I’d like to hear what you two think. Thanks.

• August 31st, 2007 at 7:08 am
  John M

  Hey Chuck,

  I know exactly what you’re getting at Chuck, so I’ll restate what the post already says…

  “150-200 depending on the number that relocates from existing Orlando/Tampa facilities for automotive and intermodal”

  I can read the “depending on the number that relocates from existing Orlando/Tampa…” and I know that when they build this facility they’re not going to turn around and hire 150-200 fresh Polk County residents who have no current association or background with CSX. I know that some of these positions would be filled internally, as they should.

  Anyone who works for a large corporation knows that when the opportunity comes for advancement, if the corporation immediately goes to the outside and does not promote from within, it creates copious amounts of resentment among current employees. CSX is doing what any responsible company would do and promote within not only for the strength of their company but for the morale of their current workforce. How many would this be at this point? I don’t know that anyone can make that assumption.

  What I can say though from experience is that a drive from either Tampa or Orlando to south Winter Haven gets very tiresome on a daily basis. While there’s no guarantee these people will not commute from Tampa/Orlando, there’s a good chance that the lower cost of living and the shorter drive from within the county would be mighty appealing, ultimately adding to the number of residents in this county and increasing the tax base.

• August 31st, 2007 at 9:13 am
  Gordon Black

  Sen. Paula Dockery is now completely out of power. Her last ally, Sen. Lynn, has jumped ship. She will never stop CSX now.

• August 31st, 2007 at 3:36 pm
  Chuck Welch

  John M.: You see, the thing is, I don’t know you. You have no link, so I can’t go to your website to learn more about you. The flip side is: you don’t know what I’m getting at, unless you believe I ask specific questions because I want to learn what you think.

  Except for two people who I know in the blogging community, I’ve not had the opportunity to speak with anyone who has said this project is a good long term deal for the residents of Polk County. You mentioned employment issues, so I wanted to know how many jobs you were expecting.

  Thanks for answering.

• August 31st, 2007 at 6:28 pm
  Bob Gernert

  Chuck,
  If you’ve not had the opportunity to meet more that two people who feel this project is a good long term deal for the residents of Polk County you are either not getting out enough or you have entered this discussion with a a bias you are not willing to admit.

  I suspect it really may be the latter.

• September 1st, 2007 at 8:18 am
  Dee Dee

  For anyone wanting more information on the real cost of the ILC, Doc Dockery, did a very professionally done and informative study that was presented to the County Commissioners this past week. Copies are available to anyone who would like one. At least it was a unbiased third party of consultants who were hired to formulate the numbers, not a Sundance resident. It was actually so well received that the County may use those formulas to project future projects and costs.

• September 1st, 2007 at 8:34 am
  Mike

  Mr. Gernert talks of bias in regards to Chuck’s position. Some can argue that Mr. Gernert’s position is just as bias.

  Will there be economic growth. Most likely yes. What kind and the benefits versus the costs and the totality of the changes in our communities is in question. Many of us have argued for responsible planning and we are very thankful that DCA has required a DRI. At least now we all can be involved in this process instead of just one small city. I will not lie, and will state that I am totally opposed to the project and wish it to go away. There are, in my opinion, better economic partners out there that won’t impact this county and it’s citizens as much as CSX will do.

• September 1st, 2007 at 9:27 am
  Chuck Welch

  Bob: I have made it clear where I stand on the this issue. And why.

  The mere fact is I am beholden to no one. No boss, or bosses. And my position in the community is merely as a concerned citizen.

  My ideas on the CSX project are based on my study of it and of the comments made by the people who’ve involved themselves.

  I don’t feel a need to champion it, or disparage it, based on some geographic, political, or economic goal. I simply want all the facts known by all the citizens before we go into such a big project. A project that our children may pay for — economically and environmentally. Is it too much to ask that we throw a lot of “sunshine” on such a large project as this?

  Bob, as for your snarky bias comment: For weeks you’ve been quick to make personal your comments to me. (Examples easily provided if you’ve forgotten.)

  Look at how you twisted what I wrote today: My comment was “opportunity to speak.” You misquoted it as “opportunity to meet.” There is a big difference. You can be introduced to someone in 20 seconds, but speaking with them takes time. You need a give and take. To talk with someone who wants to understand your position, not just disparage you because you don’t agree with what they say.

  This blog has become the conduit for the CSX position, and for that it is an important resource. However, it is not a welcome place for discussing the project.

  If you’d like to meet me in person, explain your point of view, try to understand mine, fine. I am willing to do that.

  And if anyone else wants to speak: I include my real name, email address, and URL. I’m easy to find. I can travel all over the county to listen to what you want to say.

• September 2nd, 2007 at 1:17 am
  Jean

  Let’s face the facts. The CSX ILC will impact all areas SE of Winter Haven. It is time to address quiet zones, overpasses, road widening, and possible noise, light, and air pollution.
  The property in question got changed from Agriculture, to Institutional by the county in 2003 (Winter Haven was going to have a powerplant). Then, after annexing the property, the city of Winter Haven changed the land use from Institutional to Industrial in 2006 (to accommodate the proposed logistic center). Clearly Industrial should not be adjacent to residential. I don’t know how that got past city and state planners at the Department of Community Affairs. How unfortunate for the nearby residents!
  Industrial property requires more than just a berm when next to residential. There should be land uses such as business park, commercial, office/professional between industrial and residential. I know of no other location anywhere where industrial has been permitted next to or in close proximity to existing residential. Just how far reaching the negative impacts will be is dependent on the planning occurs NOW.
  CSX and Winter Haven should take the lead to be proactive- that means finding solutions to these concerns and funding sources.

• September 2nd, 2007 at 10:28 am
  Bob Gernert

  This particular blog entry was posted to provide accurate information regarding various aspects of the proposed CSX intermodal terminal. That there are strong opinions both pro and con is and has been evident with each post regarding this project. To a great extent there is a rehashing of point - counterpoint with each side firmly entrenched. It’s time to move on.

  The entire project is now under review by the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI).

  This will address the complex issues involving infrastructure, environment and buffering on both a county and regional basis. As this review moves forward we will report further information as it becomes available.

ADD REMARKS (please be civil)