"What we did have will never be the same" - This quotation is taken from a comment left on my last post. It is representative of something I am hearing from people who don't like the changes they see taking palce in the city. I would like to share some thoughts I included in an e-mail to one such person and hear your comments, because there are certain issues being raised that have to be based on misunderstanding on someone's part. Of course that could be mine.
I am hearing a lot of reference to what Sarasota used to be. One thing I know is true is that all of downtown Sarasota has been zoned to allow for 18 story buildings for more than 40 years. The fact that more of these buildings weren't built in the intervening years has much less to do with city government than it has to do with the attractiveness of those potential investments. When I studied Sarasota 4 1/2 years ago in preparation for the City Manager selection process, the predominant angst was over the stagnation of downtown and the fact that nobody was willing to invest there, and I spoke to neighborhood leaders as well as businesspeople. The Five Points property was a tall building in the past. The One Hundred Central project was formerly surface parking and a bunch of bank drive-throughs that weren't particularly attractive.
At a presentation sponsored by the local chapter of the American Institute of Architects I saw an extremely enlightening (and entertaining) presentation made by a Sarasota native who had gathered photographs of downtown taken 20 years ago, a period he said had recently become a reference point for the "charm" of old Sarasota. Let me just say that it wasn't pretty, nor was anything much on the charming side. That was asphalt and concrete, which was exactly the point that native was making.
I used to come to Sarasota around that time for weekend escapes from Naples, where I lived, because there was a lot of charm here - but I don't remember any of that being downtown, that's for sure.
There is also a lot being said about the City Commission "allowing" too much downtown development. In truth it is not the city that allows development, but the United States constitution, which guarantees private property rights, which includes development rights as allowed under city codes.
Here are my questions: First, do you understand that what the City Commission did in adopting the new downtown zoning codes was lower the number of stories allowed in most of downtown? Second, if you believe less development should be allowed, would you support the use of your tax dollars to purchase development rights from private property owners, which is just about the only constitutionally-allowable mechanism to stop such development? Finally, which of the changes downtown do you see as positive?
This should be an interesting discussion!
I am hearing a lot of reference to what Sarasota used to be. One thing I know is true is that all of downtown Sarasota has been zoned to allow for 18 story buildings for more than 40 years. The fact that more of these buildings weren't built in the intervening years has much less to do with city government than it has to do with the attractiveness of those potential investments. When I studied Sarasota 4 1/2 years ago in preparation for the City Manager selection process, the predominant angst was over the stagnation of downtown and the fact that nobody was willing to invest there, and I spoke to neighborhood leaders as well as businesspeople. The Five Points property was a tall building in the past. The One Hundred Central project was formerly surface parking and a bunch of bank drive-throughs that weren't particularly attractive.
At a presentation sponsored by the local chapter of the American Institute of Architects I saw an extremely enlightening (and entertaining) presentation made by a Sarasota native who had gathered photographs of downtown taken 20 years ago, a period he said had recently become a reference point for the "charm" of old Sarasota. Let me just say that it wasn't pretty, nor was anything much on the charming side. That was asphalt and concrete, which was exactly the point that native was making.
I used to come to Sarasota around that time for weekend escapes from Naples, where I lived, because there was a lot of charm here - but I don't remember any of that being downtown, that's for sure.
There is also a lot being said about the City Commission "allowing" too much downtown development. In truth it is not the city that allows development, but the United States constitution, which guarantees private property rights, which includes development rights as allowed under city codes.
Here are my questions: First, do you understand that what the City Commission did in adopting the new downtown zoning codes was lower the number of stories allowed in most of downtown? Second, if you believe less development should be allowed, would you support the use of your tax dollars to purchase development rights from private property owners, which is just about the only constitutionally-allowable mechanism to stop such development? Finally, which of the changes downtown do you see as positive?
This should be an interesting discussion!
posted by Michael McNees at 4:02 PM
19 Comments:
Your comments make sense. However, I think what people mean, at least from my point of view, is that it is still asphalt and concrete. When you are downtown now there is a feeling of being "walled in." It seems like a fort. It no longer feels "small town." You can put in brick walkways and planters and set backs but you still have lost the open air feeling of a coastal community. Sarasota is a City on the Bay. What is the Master Plan to incorporate the Van Wezel, Municipal Auditorium and the Quay area? That is one beautiful part of the City with access to the water. I guess I would wonder what discussions, if any, have occurred with the State concerning Rt. 41. Does it have to stay there in the future or could planning be done to reroute it at some point in the future. How about access to that area from the City. Could there be pedestrian raised crossing areas? Even a mall connection in the future? Maybe a concept plan available for viewing utilizing software allowing viewers to actually see areas under consideration would be helpful.Not just a concept drawing but an interactive 3-D visualization. You mention that the Commission reduced the height of buildings. Maybe the height should have even been lower.Firstly, I don't think the Commission should be blamed or commended just as you should not. I think there are some questions though. For example, how are the tax dollars from the developers eventually routed to the City. Who all "gets a cut" before the net amount is added to the City revenue. Since 2000 how many dollars from downtown development have come into the City as additional revenue. This would be net of dollars expended to assist development as well as needed infrastructure and maintenance requirements. Is there a list of City owned property showing the historical purchased or estimated cost and the appraised value of these properties less than a year old? Perhaps the market would prove advantageous to the City to dispose of parcels to generate revenue. What have developers been asked to do relative to "sustainable" goals. If there is an economic impact from a project on a community then there is a vested interest on the part of the community to take steps to anticipate the effect and reduce it.This is where development standards come into play. What has the City done itself as far as "sustainable" efforts in its own projects to serve as an example. You are presently renovating City Hall. What is the actual anticipated "life cycle" cost savings due to materials and mechanicals being renovated or replaced in this building.What materials actually are considered recycled, or "green". Will the building be eligible for any LEEDS certifications? The point here is that there are methods available to communities to require developers to meet certain standards. We don't have to dictate the design but we can dictate in other ways, such as environmentally. We could ask for more "open areas" and greenery in the form of "pocket parks." Also, why not more cooperation with the County. They are very environmentally oriented. Obviously there would be ways to conserve revenues even by consolidating certain functions. I know this is a bit off the subject but it seems that this is a time for creativity and "thinking outside of the box." Mr. McNees, perhaps it is time to reassess your organizational structure and consolidate where needed and truly identify if the present structure can meet the strategic plan. To have a department remain that may have outlived its usefulness simply because it has always been a department no longer makes sense.
Consolidate where possible, eliminate where necessary and rehire where demand indicates.
Sarasota has so much going for it. The "Cultural Coast", I believe, was really coined for Sarasota. It should remain high on the list of priorities. What is being done to encourage the arts to stay downtown. I think that was the City's niche and I think it is losing its identity with that part of its history. I think that it is important to remember that it is people that make a City. Using 2000 as a benchmark do we know what has been added downtown in addition to "Whole Foods" that provides an interest in coming to the downtown area say for the weekend. This could be shopping, entertainment, etc. Do we know what has moved out during that same time period? Maybe we just need some actual facts. Not the development that is anticipated but let's look at what has actually happened since 2000? Maybe we could see a trend and determine if it is favorable or not.
Mr McNees
I'm trying really hard not to be insulted by someone who without the time or experience pretends to "know" what our City was about before you've declare Sarasota lacking of charm prior to this modern day development boom that you seem to be a proponent of.
I saw the presentation you speak of as well, and if you knew the man doing the presentation as I do, you would know that Ernie has always had a very good sense of humor, which was how it was presented- not intending it to be a social discourse as to the state of Sarasota then or now.
Secondly, I'm a 20 year resident of this great city and have lived downtown the entire time. I do not share your thoughts that there was anything very charming about this area, I have enjoyed every moment of my time here. I've witnessed a lot of change since I first moved here, and while I'm not a native to Sarasota, I can certainly understand their concern for what is being lost in the rush to redevelopment here in downtown Sarasota into some sort of bad Disney Land. I also share similar concerns with those that feel it is becoming like a gated community where only the most wealthy are going to be able to afford to live.
It's true the City has seen an avalanche of development going up in the downtown core- some privately funded, but some of the largest have recieved very generous incentives. I have heard previously on this Blog that such negotiations and complicated deals are necessary in securing the likes of the Whole Foods Market in the downtown and that the City has learned from that process- have you?
Instead of building badly needed City parking for the downtown on City owned land and maybe- what a concept- affordable housing for those being pushed out of the market (it is your land remember?) the leadership continues to hook their proverbial wagon to those that show little concern for what we are about. Providing public subsidies and land on grandiose plans that go nowhere but in the dumper while we continue to wait for that parking space. The latest deal in the works remains so convoluted and complicated I'm not even sure YOU understand it- you really think we need a mall downtown?
Lastly, you spoke of the former building that once occupied the property that the Five Points project now sits and the empty lot where 100 Central now sits. The old Bank that occupied that site was not as tall or massive in its footprint as the one that is there now and as for the 100 Central project- after giving the developer absolutely everything they required in return for the grocery store downtown- the city saw it in their good graces to give them a city right of way to build that hunk of concrete on Central Avenue that juts out into the middle of the street. Do you actually wonder why those that have lived here for many years have grown to question the decisions being made in the City? One needs look no further than why the city continues to behave as if we should be grateful for every dream a developer has for this community. If you were really interested in consensus building you should start listening more to those that have lived and worked in this town longer than you and the developers carving a swath through our City.
I agree with what you had to say because I have lived here for 30 years. Downtown had some charm left over from the boom in the 20's & 30's but the rest has been uneventful. Downtown was for the poor because nobody else "wanted" to live here. That is usually the places you find affordable housing. Now people are complaining because it is becoming a place people want to be, which is obvious by the increase in property values. This is not rocket science. The majority of people must like it if people keep investing and we are very much on the hot list of places to live.
I would support more bayfront access and I think the commissioner will have to look at this as in the master plan with all the people who will be living downtown now.
Also I SAW THE PRESENTATION TOO and it was not Earnie but a local architect that was an important force in saving a lot of historic sites around the city.
I will be short and sweet.
I love what is happening downtown. I love the architecture, aside from the Herald Tribune burger building, but even that is great compared to what was there.
I am happy developers are finally investing into our city and bringing us something to stay downtown for. Maybe the old timers do not get the young crowd needs more than the opera, ballet and string of old crowd type stores. There are some things that have relocated to other parts of our county, like the Granery but that had nothing to do with development; they had to move because they could not survive downtown. But now we have Whole Foods and that is great. We also had that awful Burdines but now we have a Theatre with 20 movies bringing the youth. We used to have surface parking lots that we will now have life living on them with amenities that will be interesting.
I think people should have bought in the country if that is the life they want because, hellooooo this is a city. And a small one at that with so much potential.
I thank the commission or at least the commission that put together the master plan to move us into the 20th century. We are no longer in Kansas!!
First, to 11:54 PM - I hope you will not feel insulted, I was mostly sharing observations of others, and as for myself I don't pretend to know anything about Sarasota 20 years ago, but as a fairly frequent visitor I saw what I saw. The presentation I referred to wasn't by an Ernie, and was most definitely intended as social commentary. You have suggested that I seek opinions from those who have lived here longer than I have, and that precisely was the intent of the questions in my post. Did I not ask for your opinion?
You made a statement that some of the largest buildings under construction downtown received "very generous" development subsidies. I would ask which projects you're referring to, because the Savoy, Rivo on Ringling, Kanaya, 1350 Main, Plaza at Five Points, The Broadway project, Alanari, and a number of others are proceeding with no public subsidy or support whatsoever. These are private property owners exercising their rights to develop their property consistent with zoning that's been in place since the 1960's at least. One simple point remains, which is that the decisions that downtown Sarasota would not be a place of two or three story buildings were made many decades ago. I would ask, in all sincerity, how you would have the city stop these developments? What legal mechanism is available, or do you support spending public money to but out development rights?
I will assume that one of the "grandiose plans" you're referring to is the PLaza Verdi project. What made that project "grandiose" was the effort not only to secure public parking, but also to provide improvements for and cement the presence downtown of two Sarasota institutions, the Opera and the Golden Apple Dinner Theater. I still believe those were valid objectives, and I hope we never stop striving for great things, even if they get complicated or generate criticism. As far as Pineapple Square goes, I agree that is a complicated project that few understand as of this point. I have never spoken a word either for or against it, rather have said that we must first clarify all of the details and then make them understandable to the public. Then decisions can be made by your elected officials regarding what's best for the city. And I don't shop, so my opinion about a mall downtown doesn't count for much. There are, however, a great number of people who believe a stronger core of retail is critical for the city. I encourage you to share your opinion with the decision makers.
As far as the hunk of concrete on Central Avenue goes, I'll put you in the "hate it" column. I'll just say that for me it looks a lot better today that it did when first erected, and that we are satisfied that the street will function safely and satisfactorily.
I love having a Starbucks next to the Library, I love the Library next to Whole Foods, I love Whole Foods next to the Lemon Avenue brick road, I love the Brick on Lemon with Mattisons and the Gator Club, I love the restaurants, all of them next to FINALLY great shops, I love shopping now downtown.
I do not even go to malls anymore but support the people putting their hearts and souls into making this a destination.
I love Burns Court Cinema but that is my secret place to take people that are clueless about the treasures all around that have been part of our growth. I love shopping in the antiques stores along Pineapple. I also love the new main streetscape with trees and lights and the lights going in on Orange Avenue.
I love the city purchased the Federal Building, it looks stunning. I love Payne Park and the skating area for kids. I love the bayfront park with the children's play area. I love arcades to keep the hot burning sun off my important skin. I love how FST has expanded.
I only wish the ones that do not like growth to move to downtown Bradenton. I think you have good potential of nothing happening there for another 10 years. In fact you could just keep finding cities that have not been discovered yet and keep moving. That is the reality if we keep making babies and our population keeps growing.
Sarasota is not just for the ones that discovered it 20 years ago. It is for everyone willing and able to live here.
For 9:01 PM - Phew! - there are a lot of questions in there! As I said in my previous comment, and as ponted out by a previous writer, Sarasota is a city. It has been zoned as such for decades, but has been slow to develop. Those wishing to live in a small town can choose to do so, but living in Sarasota means living in a small city. I have spoken to a number of former "city people" who are moving from the barrier islands to downtown for exactly the reason that our small city is beginning to develop and mature as such. Clearly some would prefer something different, I suppose that's why there's chocolate and vanilla.
I certainly agree with your comments about reconnecting the bayfront, that was one of our master plan's big objectives. So far the opposition to narrowing 41 has been large based on traffic concerns, the history of which I won't go into here.
I think you will be surprised at the flow of funds into the CRA, and the small percentage of that money that has gone to development incentives - I will put those numbers on the blog when I can pull them together. And nobody gets a "cut", it all comes straight to the city first.
The city doesn't own a lot of land downtown beyond that which we're working to develop to leverage parking. I certainly wish we did! And you've asked some other good questions, which I will get back to.
I personally want to be one more voice that supports what downtown is becomming.
I enjoy downtown more and more, the quality of its renewed retail, the art in the streets, the pedestrian friendly sidewalks. I can't wait to see more happen!
Michael McNees said...
One correction - I referred to the 1350 Main project as one that hadn't received city subsidy, thinking about CRA funds. An eagle-eyed reader points out, correctly, that they were allowed to encroach into city airspace which could be considered city support. Point taken.
Now back to 9:01 PM - (I really wish people would post a name or nickname, it would make a thread of conversation much easier to follow.) You mentioned the idea of looking at how we're organized based on the current demands we face, and I think that's such a good idea that we recently started to do just that. Of course we're always looking for tweaks here and there, but in this case I gathered a number of department heads and asked this question: "based on our changing environment and current set of challenges, does it make sense to assume that our traditional organizational structure is optimal?" Not everyone probably agrees what the correct answer to that question is, but we will certainly be continuing that analysis. I'll just say it's hard for me to conclude there's not some room for improvement.
There is really not much to not like. The improvements to our city have been needed for a long time and as a 50 year old timer, I can say that without much hesitation. Our downtown had been dying since it was great over 40 years ago. And it was not even a great downtown then, it just had some interesting events and there was really nothing else to do. I loved it then and I love it now but I did not enjoy the in between.
We need a positive blog about development in Sarasota.
Rather than anti-developer, pessimism and lack of ambition represented by some loud associations, i believe we should gather around something that would support quality development and make sure it is not stopped by a handfull of people who feel like they represent past, current and future citizen of this city.
We want to move forward and see things happen and improve. Keep up the good work.
I moved into the City of Sarasota exactly 20 years ago!! At that time, the Kress buidling was renovated. There was a food court inside and on weekends there was live music. I went to all of the parades and events downtown. I went to movies at the Burns Court Cinema. I walked my dog and played with my kids at Bayfront Park almost every day. I could ride my bicycle EVERYWHERE!!!! I had wonderful and interesting neighbors. My neighborhood was truly a neighborhood!!!! Now I live in a subdivision where all the houses look exactly the same, cold and unwelcoming. How I long for my charming little bungalow on Laurel Street. But wait, it's no longer there. It's been torn down in the name of progress. Houses are being built that all look alike, just like my subdivision. Oh, to have my Sarasota of 20 years ago back again, when life here was great and traffic was well not like it is today!
Okay wait a minute. 20 years ago the houses on Laurel Street sold for 40-50 thousand dollars and it was a very mixed neighborhood and not at all very safe. The neighborhood has preserved the land use and has become a very wonderful family neighborhood, something it was not 20 years ago. We have a park and the area residents get together every couple of months to have a party. This area has grown up for the better and we do have some new homes coming into the area but it is mainly just like it was without the trash in every yard. We are even working on being listed as a national historic area. We work on preservation very hard in Laurel Park and think we are doing a wonderful job. I am happy the neighborhood has grown up some because the area has improved but still does not feel like a subdivision. We are in a city and feel fortunate to live so close to the action of things with maintaining our history.
I wanted to write about all I love but the post a few back needs addressing because I have been here for 20 years as well and do not know what the person is talking about. All the things she enjoyed 20 years ago were not here 20 years ago. Okay the Kress did not go downhill because of progress, it went downhill because of no business because downtown was so ugly - Just ask the investors that lost all their money in that renovation. People who invested in downtown 20 years ago took huge risks and it is not until recently you could invest in downtown and feel good about it. That is the downtown I want to live in.
I always dreamed of living on Siesta Key and now I cannot imagine leaving downtown. I really like the improvements.
I am sorry for you.
You did not have to leave for Lakewood Ranch or some kind of boring subdivision.
Actually you should get out of it because, except for the Kress building, I don't see what else you can no longer do today. I think you can do a lot more than that today. As far as I know there are plenty of good places to eat inside and outside in downtown, Bayfront park is better than ever for kids, there are still many events, markets, live music pretty frequently in downtown, Burns Court is still there, etc... Really.
I am so sick of hearing people say they do not like what is happening downtown. First, it is not the city's fault that some developers are building things we do not like. That would be the person building the building so start going to them and asking them to do improvements you think would work. Second, I thank the city for doing a Master Plan because this was too great a city to let it go so downhill like it was for the past 30 or so years.
People who lived downtown were not just the poor. Living here since 1956 I can tell you that there was nothing but orange groves south of South Gate and Bahia Vista was a little 2 lane dirt road. Everyone lived in the City. A Kwik Chek on 3rd St (now Fruitville), Maas Brothers downtown, movie theatres, shops, dime stores, restaurants, it had it all, as well as Ringling Shopping Center being the "mall." Riverview High was in the woods. So not only "poor" folks lived here, EVERYONE lived in the city.
When discussions among City officials and their advisory boards consider "affordable" housing downtown as $350k to $500k, do you think there will be a diversity of all social cross sections living downtown? The people that lived downtown in all the years nobody wanted to be downtown are being pushed out now, and I think that diversity is going with them.
In response to 12/22 1:03 and 12/22 1:10. 1:03 you sound like a real snob!! Laurel was a wonderful place to live 20 years ago!!! Trash in the yards?? Not where I lived. The mixed neighborhood is what made it a wonderful and interesting place to live!! Crime, we hardly ever locked our doors!!! You probably would have put your nose up at the Laurel of 20 years ago, my neighbors to the west were gay and my neighbors to the east where a "mixed" couple (she was black) and they had three beautiful children. He was a sex therapist, of my!!! The neighborhood was very progressive!! We had cook outs, and neighborhood get togethers, we watched out for each other. 1:10, what did I talk about that you don't understand? The Kress Building was renovated in 86 or 87. There was a food court, offices, retail shops, and live music!!! If anybody lost money, they didn't know what they were doing because in the beginning it was well attended!!! We had Burns Court Cinema, Island Park, Maas Brothers, family churches, and wonderful family downtown events!!! If we wanted glitz, we drove over to St. Armands!! If we wanted charm, we just got on our bicycles. If we wanted real neighbors, we just walked down the street!!
Post a Comment
<< Home