Neal Pierce Column on City/Surburb

Pierce's column is particularly thought provoking this week. I was asked to post it:

"BACK TO THE CITY" -- IS THIS THE MOMENT? August 24, 2008
by Neal Pierce

City or suburb? For decades that's been the choice for most Americans. Suburbs have been the hands-down winners -- by the millions, we've rushed to the urban edge.

But could we be on the cusp of an historic "back to the city" shift? The case is building.

Alan Ehrenhalt, executive editor of Governing magazine, says we're in the midst of a "demographic inversion."

Check such cities as Atlanta and Washington, he suggests -- they're beginning to resemble historic Vienna or Paris, the centuries-old pattern in which the people of means chose to live near the vital city centers, while the poor were left to live in the less expensive outskirts.

Atlanta, for example, is seeing so many better-off whites move in that its decades-old status as a predominantly black and low-income city may soon be reversed. Conversely, suburban Clayton and DeKalb counties are already registering black majorities while simultaneously serving as immigrant gateways.

A parallel switch has been under way in Washington, D.C., for several years as young professionals have poured into neighborhoods such as the 14th and U Street corridors that were an epicenter of the 1968 riots. Chicago has registered sensational gains in downtown living. The same phenomenon is being registered continentwide -- strong on the West Coast, even cropping up in such Sun Belt cities as Charlotte and Houston.

Why this shift, now? Industries, with their smokestacks, noise and pollutants, have largely disappeared from city centers. Random urban street violence, the scourge of urban life in the 1970s and '80s, has subsided dramatically.

And, writes Ehrenhalt in a recent New Republic article, today's youth, bored by the cul-de-sac world they grew up in, are the cutting edge of the new population move: "It is striking how pervasive the pro-city sensibility is within this generation, particularly among its elite."

The cities' revival is even broader -- not just young singles and married couples but "mingles" (unmarried and gay couples) and "jingles" (ex-suburban empty-nesters), notes William Hudnut, former Indianapolis mayor and Urban Land Institute senior fellow.

There's a big cautionary note here -- we're not about to witness abandonment of the suburbs, or rapid movement back to all our city cores. "But we are living," Ehrenhalt notes, "at a moment in which the massive outward migration of the affluent that characterized the second half of the 20th century is coming to an end."

So what are the affluent and their middle-class friends seeking? "Walkable urbanism" -- places with convenient

Read the rest of the column here.

Changing Sarasota

Below are two pictures of the Payne Park area of Sarasota. The first picture shows what the park and surrounding area looks like today. The second is a postcard picture of the same area when the baseball field and trailer park were still there (about 1970?).

The area just east of Payne Park has been the subject of a proposed development for the last two years. Concerns about height, density and traffic have resulted in a number of changes to the original plan.

More recently a design charette was conducted to find "community consensus" concerning these issues. A description of the charette and the result can be found at School Avenue Charette website.

The process will continue to the Planning Board and the City Commission in the next month or so.

[The picture showing the current view of Payne Park is from the Charette website. There are other aerial pictures of this site also.]

Hiassen on Population

Carl Hiassen's latest column talks about the growing population of Florida: the latest data and what it all means. As usual Hiassen has some excellent comments on the state of State. Below is an excerpt.

The beleaguered sense among many Floridians -- that they're not only being overtaxed but overrun -- will not soon go away. Politicians who resist calls for strict land-use reforms and continue to shill for special interests risk being dumped from office by those whom they've ignored.

It's happened already in scores of municipalities where voters got fed up watching their green spaces malled and paved while the waterfronts went condo.

The social equation isn't complicated. The more people you cram into a place, even a place as vast and geographically diverse as Florida, the more stressful life becomes for everybody. It also becomes more expensive. Ask anyone in New York or California what happened to their taxes as the populations of those states swelled.

A bipartisan group that advocates semi-sane growth policies, 1000 Friends of Florida, last year predicted that the state's population would double to 36 million by 2060, and that seven million acres of agricultural land and wilderness would be converted to concrete and asphalt.

That was before the real-estate market tanked and the subprime mortgage racket imploded, but there's no denying that even an overcrowded Florida continues to hold some mythical allure, whether you live in Dubuque or Port-au-Prince.

Despite their rising disillusionment, about 62 percent of those interviewed for the Leadership Florida poll said they'd still recommend the state as a place for friends or relatives to live.

For strangers? Maybe not. Because growth is an exalted industry unto itself, rather than the natural result of a broadening economic base, lawmakers have always focused on attracting hordes of new residents at all costs. The first casualty of such a fast-buck mentality is the quality of life.

One out of five Floridians surveyed in November say they are ''seriously considering'' moving elsewhere.

This is what's known as a message. And, for those who've sold out Florida's future to enrich their campaign coffers, it breaks down like this:
Enough.

Thaxton on Water

October 25, 2007

One can't help but notice that: Atlanta is running out of water, Florida is in an ongoing drought, Mosaic phosphate mining, if allowed to proceed, would use up copious amounts of water and possibly compromise our fresh water supply while only providing back 10% of its product to a dying agricultural industry in Florida.

We ignore the implications of a limited water supply at our peril.

With this in mind, I bring you some notes I took at a fascinating talk given by Jon Thaxton on water, October 13, at the First Methodist Church as part of their environmental series, downtown Sarasota.

"WATER: FACTS & MYTHS"

"Sarasota's economy and environment must both be healthy to survive."

Jon Thaxton (County Commissioner) has been ringing the alarm bill since 1990. (I recall Horace Sutcliffe, the state hydrologist, saying that all the water to southwest Florida was compromised because of the sump action of the orange, Disney and phosphate industries bringing salt water intrusion into our freshwater aquifer. That was in 1975.) The Florida Aquifer is the largest fresh water cavern in the world!

We have estimated a per capita need for water. Sarasota County uses less per capita than most any other county in the state, 80-86 gallons per person per day, while the state average per person is about 126 gallons. Water charges in the county are on a graduated schedule so the first 4,000 gallons are at the cheapest rates with prices going up as one uses more. Some questions we must ask ourselves:

* How much water will be needed for the people who are expected to move here?
* Estimate drought tolerance for our water system - factoring in rain and population fluctuations throughout the year.
* Then look for new water sources; figure out how much to charge.
* Approve and manage future growth appropriately.
* Up until now, Sarasota figures out its water needs and costs after growth arrives.

Currently, Sarasota County has a diverse set of water supplies. We can't rely on surface ground water. We can't rely solely on the aquifer as it needs rest to be recharged. We feasibly have enough water to take us to 2018-2022. It takes about 8 years to bring new sources on line (permits, put in lines, etc.) after it has been identified.

Sarasota's newest source is to tap the fresh water going into Dona & Roberts Bays. This requires a balancing act to take fresh water from Cow Pen Slough while restoring the estuary where much energy has been expended to bring it back from the brink by restoring wetlands.

Historically Manatee County built a long term water source while Sarasota allowed wells and septic tanks. But now, Sarasota, Manatee & Charlotte counties are all looking for new water sources. An interim water supply is being tapped - the Peace River - taking 36 million gallons of water a day. Sarasota receives one of the largest takes from the river. The Peace River is close to running out of water by having water demand that exceeds supply.

The budget needs to build schools, parks, roads, water, judicial systems are 50% of the need. We plan for an absolute minimum. Under normal conditions, we can meet 95% of our water needs. But we are in a drought. Cyclically these can last 2 to 5 years. According to the Peace River Water Authority all reserves will have been consumed by January. Last year at that time we had millions of gallons in reserve, next year we will likely have none.

Sarasota has two different kinds of water storage: surface water & underground. No, we won't run out of water, but we will run out of cheap water and we will harm the environment by taking the portion it needs to survive for ourselves. As for the aquifer, when we take out more than too much - then we invite salt water intrusion and degradation of our future water supply.

SWFMD (Southwest Water Management District) has said Sarasota County must team up with local counties who have very different growth management philosophies. We will have no say in their water usage. This proposition is not being run by the voters. Is this a deal we want?

The days of cheap water in Southwest Florida are gone. All water sources in the future will be more expensive. This should be no surprise as we have known that this was coming.

Consider that we used up five years of stored water in the first nine months of this year. That supply for us is gone. If the rains stay away and the drought continues into next year, we will have no storage reserves going into next year's wet season. What's in our future? A moratorium on all watering of landscaping. Thousands of dollars invested in plantings will be lost. Only a very small percentage (maybe 5%) of our potable water is used for drinking and cooking. Up to 40-60% could be used for landscaping, golf courses, swimming pools. It's going to take some political will to change our habits and policies.

What can be done? Desalinization? Not yet. It's expensive can use up 2 gallons of water for every drinkable gallon produced. We destroy wetlands and waterways by dumping the byproduct: brine.

All the old artesian wells that I knew of as a child are gone. Every 1st Magnitude Florida spring is now polluted due to nutrients.

Cisterns are an option. Used in households here only a few decades ago - the water could be used for bathing and watering yards, flushing toilets. At one time in Key West, it was their only water supply. Re-use water could be used on golf courses, etc. Have buildings save rainwater from the roofs in lakes (in town, in water vaults built into the building).

Not only Florida needs a water policy - the whole country does. It's a national priority. Don't fool yourself that because Florida is tropical, that the 50-60 inches of rainfall a year is abundant. It turns out to be just the right amount to keep our particular environment charged - our plants and animals require this amount to survive.

Thaxton went on to say that "historically we have done a pathetic job with water planning." And, we can't treat this resource the next 50 years the way we have treated it for the past 50 years.

Do you hear the alarm?

[Submitted by Jude Levy]

Pelican Press Endorses Super Majority

From the Pelican Press

Super majority amendment is good government

Come November - and much sooner actually as absentee ballots are being mailed out this week - voters will be faced with a chance to require significant changes in city and county government, some of them possibly confusing.

But one issue is simple. It would require a super majority of at least four commission votes instead of three to permit increased height or density changes in our comprehensive plans. ...

The Pelican Press strongly believes the community of Sarasota deserves the added protection of super majorities on comprehensive plan changes in both the city and the unincorporated area of the county.

Read the entire editorial here.

City Charter Amendments - Vote Yes

Dear Friends,

Save Our Sarasota's Steering Committee has endorsed four amendments to our City Charter that will be on the November 6th ballot. As a public interest group, we do not endorse candidates. However, we feel these amendments are important enough to the future of our City to merit our support and encourage your support as well.

The amendments will give Sarasota citizens a stronger voice in growth decisions and provide local campaign finance reform.

A super majority amendment would require the vote of four of five City Commissioners when changing the City's Comprehensive Plan to permit an increase in height or density.

Three campaign finance reform amendments would:

• Lower the campaign contribution limit from $500 to $200, bringing the City of Sarasota in line with Sarasota County;
• Allow contributions only from individuals, thereby preventing corporations from bundling multiple contributions from several business entities; and
• Change campaign finance reporting dates so that the press and public learn where the money is coming from before they vote, not after.

Sarasotans for Good Government, chaired by Susan Chapman, has been formed to support passage of these Charter amendments. If you would like to contribute toward the cost of signs and mailers to promote these measures, you may send a check,* limited to $200 per person, to:

Sarasotans for Good Government Campaign Account
46 Palm Avenue South,
Sarasota, FL 34236

If you would like a sign for your yard or are able to volunteer, please send an e-mail with your request and it will be forwarded to Sarasotans for Good Government.

Please vote Yes on November 6th and forward this to others who care about our city.

SOS Steering Committee

*No corporate checks. If check is for more than $100, please note occupation.
Political advertisement paid for and approved by Sarasotans for Good Government Political Committee.

Smart Growth and Living in the Suburbs

There is an interesting series of articles concerning smart growth in recent issues of the LA Weekly. This issue spotlights the neighborhoods where some of the most well known smart growth planners live. Not quite smart growth areas:

Do As We Say, Not As We Do
Smart growth’s biggest boosters still love suburban living
By DAVID ZAHNISER

If any one principle provides the underpinning for smart growth, it’s density — putting multistory homes around rail stations, on bus corridors and at the heart of urbanized areas.So why are so many smart-growth advocates avoiding density in their own lives?

Take Henry Cisneros, a board member with Smart Growth America. The onetime head of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development came to Los Angeles a decade ago to work for the Spanish-language channel Univision — and immediately found a home in the plush, gated community of Bel Air Crest.

Cisneros, who now runs a company that builds entry-level housing, says that when his family moved, it was thinking heavily about crime — the 1997 North Hollywood bank shootout and the slaying of Ennis Cosby, the son of actor Bill Cosby. He also insists that he was not the driving force behind the decision on where to live.

“It’s the place my wife found,” he says. “We didn’t know the community very well. It’s what she chose, and given that I traveled a lot, and we did not know L.A., I felt it was the right thing to do by the family at the time.”



Cisneros now splits his time between L.A. and San Antonio, leaving his daughter and son-in-law as the main occupants.

Many other high-density housing advocates have also avoided the multistory lifestyle they say Los Angeles so desperately needs.

Take developer Nick Patsaouras, a onetime board member with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority who heads the firm Polis — Greek for “city.” Patsaouras, who designs apartment buildings around rail stations, lives in a single-family neighborhood in Tarzana and would need to walk one and four-fifths miles from his hillside home to find the nearest bus.

Then there’s Los Angeles Planning Commissioner Mike Woo, founder of the Smart Growth China Institute, which urges the largest nation in the world to embrace “sustainable transportation and urban planning alternatives instead of duplicating the mistakes of the developed world.”

Woo lives on a hillside in Silver Lake where every home is zoned R-1 — a planning designation meant to keep apartments and condos far away. “This is one of the best neighborhoods in L.A. — other than [its lack of] bus access,” he says.

Consider also Pasadena architect Stefanos Polyzoides, a guru of new urbanism, who has designed transit-oriented housing developments around the Metro Gold Line. Polyzoides lives in a leafy section of Pasadena less than a block from San Marino — which prohibits all construction of apartments. His street has not only restrictive single-family zoning but also signs that bar anyone from parking without a permit.

Polyzoides, who has not only a house but also an 83-year-old Caltech observatory on his land, gives a pithy explanation for his low-density lifestyle choice: “I can afford it,” he says. “And (b), I think I’m doing a tremendous favor to my city by adopting a historic building that I am taking care of.”

More on this story can be found here.

Another story in the series is titled:

Peddling Smart Growth
Call your project “smart” — even when it isn't — and get millions in public funds.

It, too, is a good read.

Downtowns and Prosperity

From an article in The Economist:

San Jose has attempted to create a commercial heart by selling city-owned land or even giving it away to developers. The city offers tax breaks and uses a portion of the property tax to pay for improvement projects. Since the late 1970s the redevelopment agency has shelled out $2 billion, almost two-thirds of it on downtown. It has built museums and theatres to lure people to the centre. Trams have been supplied to entice them out of their cars.

Such largesse has indisputably made the middle of San Jose more appealing than it used to be. By any measure other than an historical one, though, the campaign has been a failure. The office vacancy rate in downtown stands at 21%—higher than it was four years ago, during the dotcom slump, and almost twice as high as the Silicon Valley average. The theatres, which were supposed to lift downtown, now depend on the council to bail them out of trouble. In a city of 912,000 people, just 30,000 passengers ride trams each day. All this in a wealthy metropolis that has higher house prices than anywhere else in America, according to the National Association of Realtors.

Despite its anaemic condition, most visitors to San Jose at least know where downtown is. That is not the case in Las Vegas. The historical centre, with its string of small casinos and its neon cowboy, once seemed glitzy. It is now a shadow of the Las Vegas Strip, which has grown dementedly since the late 1980s, building ever larger, more exuberant hotels. Despite offering better odds than their competitors, the downtown casinos took in $630m last year, compared with $6.7 billion on the Strip. And they are the brightest spots in the area. Beside them lie cheap motels, shuttered shops and bail bondsmen.

The article is titled "Where the lights aren't bright." It is worth reading.

Trees and North Port

North Port is in south Sarasota County - it is one of the fastest growing areas of Florida. The following story highlights one of the growth issues:

Article published Mar 8, 2007 in the Sarasota Herald Tribune
By HEATHER ALLEN:

NORTH PORT -- City hall insiders know it as the battle between "the tree people" and "the builders.

"The dispute is what you would expect: conserving vs. building. But this squabble isn't as simple as it sounds.

Not in a place where the transformation from a sleepy town into a booming community of big-box stores and $400,000 homes affects everyday life and where roads can't be built, repaired or widened fast enough.

Perhaps no issue better illustrates the friction between the people who think things are changing too fast and those who say development is the key to North Port's future than the yearlong effort to draft a tree ordinance.

Conservationists say they're trying to bring a responsible sense of environmental stewardship to the city.Builders and some city leaders view their efforts as unrealistic and a threat to North Port's economic engine.

And while some portray the conflict as environmentalists vs. builders, the city has not been on the sidelines. In 2002, it sent out mailers telling residents that a proposed tree protection law which assessed fees for protected trees removed during new development would weaken tree protection, not improve it.

"There's a misconception that every builder clear-cuts every lot that they can," said Paul Morgan of the North Port Contractors Association. "I think you've got some people who are very passionate about their trees and I can understand it to a point -- because I love trees.

"The finger-pointing began last year when the city decided the best way to quell the feud was to appoint an equal number of tree people and builders on the Blue Ribbon Ad-Hoc Tree Committee.

The eight-member board was asked to craft an ordinance that would set steeper fines for illegally clearing land and propose other preservation standards.

But what was intended to be a collaborative effort quickly fell apart when the builders quit the committee.

Instead of scrapping the committee, additional tree enthusiasts were added to replace the departed builders. Then, last month, the city commission dissolved the committee and directed city staff to draft an ordinance, a decision that has some tree committee members claiming the city never took them seriously in the first place.

Growth Control

Orlando Sentinel article.

Sierra Club backs push to let voters rule growth

The group's $35,000 gift boosts Florida Hometown Democracy, which business groups decry.

Kevin Spear Sentinel Staff Writer Posted March 1, 2007

Backers of a statewide proposal to give voters ultimate authority over new subdivisions, shopping centers and other future growth received a $35,000 contribution and vows of vigorous support from one of Florida's largest environmental groups Wednesday.

The Florida Chapter of the Sierra Club stepped firmly behind the Florida Hometown Democracy campaign, which aims to gather enough voter signatures to put a proposed constitutional amendment on next year's ballot. If passed, local politicians would have to win voter approval to change growth-planning guidelines.

"I think more and more people are becoming outraged by how we are growing," said John Hedrick, Sierra chairman for growth issues, who announced his group's support in Tallahassee. "I think people feel cut out of the planning process."

Hedrick said the Sierra Club in Florida has 18 local groups with a combined membership of more than 30,000. Each group has pledged to secure thousands of voter signatures.

Ross Burnaman, co-founder of the movement, said the proposal needs about 611,000 verified signatures by early next year. So far, Hometown Democracy has gathered 250,000 signatures, and about 110,000 have been approved by county elections supervisors, he said.

The proposal has drawn the ire of business associations and interest groups. Among them, the Florida Chamber of Commerce has launched a campaign that mocks the proposal as a "Hometown Democracy Scam."

"It would mean no new jobs and no new roads in Florida," said Adam Babington, coalition director at the chamber in Tallahassee. "It would turn every growth decision into a negative political campaign."

Florida Hometown backers said that kind of reaction stems from fears among development interests that the proposed amendment would make it harder to maximize profits.

"I think the Florida Chamber of Commerce is a little hysterical," said Lesley Blackner, the other co-founder of Hometown Democracy. "It's not a scam; it's about letting people vote. Maybe they don't want endless [population] density crammed down their throats."

Burnaman, of Tallahassee, and Blackner, of Palm Beach County, are land-use and environmental lawyers who joined together in 2003 to start Florida Hometown Democracy.

Voters can get ballot-petition forms online at florida hometowndemocracy.com or by calling toll-free 1-866-779-5513.

The initial effort to get on the 2006 ballot was struck down in 2005 by the state Supreme Court, which ruled that the proposed amendment's language did not meet legal requirements. The two lawyers regrouped later in 2005 with revised language that went on to win approval.

Another obstacle to the initiative emerged last year when Florida voters decided that future ballot questions must gain at least 60 percent support to be approved, rather than the simple majority that long had been the standard.

Still, observers say the proposal has a good chance of getting on the 2008 ballot and perhaps a better chance of winning approval.

"I think if it were on the ballot today it would pass easily," said University of South Florida political-science professor Susan MacManus, adding that resentment for growth is "strengthening day by day.

"If voters approve Florida Hometown Democracy, her worry is whether people would vote on complex growth issues.

"Local elections have low turnout, and I think you might have critical decisions being made by people with an agenda," MacManus said.

Tom Drage, lead attorney for Orange County government, said he is concerned about whether voters will want to inform themselves on many complicated issues.

In the past four years, Orange County has reviewed 262 applications for changes in growth plans and approved 125. Those vary from wording changes to reclassifications for intense development.

Tim Jackson, an Orlando planning consultant and vice president of the controlled-growth advocacy group 1000 Friends of Florida, said his organization is concerned Florida Hometown Democracy will turn local planning into popularity contests based on who has the most cash for marketing campaigns.

"We're not promoting it," Jackson said. "We are promoting people being engaged actively in their community."

The Central Florida think tank myregion.org, which has business and government backing, recently conducted a survey asking residents to pick from among alternative visions for managing a population that could double to more than 7 million residents by 2050.

Hedrick of the Sierra Club said the survey suggested that such growth in inevitable."That's poppycock," he said. "They are not asking the fundamental question of, 'Is that what the people of Florida want?' "