10,000 Plus Milestone! - Late last week the number of visits to this blog since December when a counter was added hit 10,000. My thanks to everyone who has participated in this experiment in "local government direct". I know this tool doesn't necessarily reach everyone in town, but it seems to be useful to some - perhaps many. Thanks for reading and for sharing your opinions.
posted by Michael McNees at 9:42 AM
9 Comments:
Congratulations on the milestone.
On the web site subject, maybe you can answer why the official City of Sarasota web site would link to a local real estate agent's commercial site under the category "Beaches" instead of the Sarasota County official site for beach information? Or, provide that information on sarasotagov.com itself for City of Sarasota beaches. (I was searching to find out whether grills are allowed on Lido Beach and obviously the minimal info on the real estate agent's site doesn't have that.) I haven't contacted the city web site administrators via the web site as previous contacts and questions via that route have gone unanswered.
Good question. I just went to that "Beaches" page, and didn't have too much of a problem with it until I clicked on the "Real Estate" button, and went to the referral - at that point I agree with you, we'll have to create a better link.
Between the County's site, that has all the info on beaches, including rules, contacts for shelter rentals, etc. and the CVB site, I think you have a couple of choices.
Hi Mike,
I just got finished reading the article in the Pelican Press regarding a group that wihes to construct a pedestrian overpass at Main Street and Highway 41. Mnay discussions have been had in the past as to how the city would reconnect the downtown and the bay front. Andres Duany's 2020 Master Plan had as its central goal the solution for achieving this. Many in the community were opposed to the idea of reducing the speed and volume of traffic along the bay front- making it easier for the pedestrians to cross over.
However unfortunate it is that Duany's recommendatioons were not pursued, I hardly see a pedestrian overpass as a viable solution- especially the one about to be presented as I understand at the Commission's July 5th meeting. As I see it, this proposed solution would destroy the bay front permanently with its ludicrous scale and function.
I understand that Jack West designed the original solution back in the late '50's, and I have a tremendous amount of respect for his work. This is not an issue of the architect that may have designed it, but an issue of whether these types of structures function effectively and are worth the cost of constructing them- and of course what their physical impact is on the immediate area.
Having been a long time resident of downtown and attempting to cross to Island Park on numerous occasions, I understand people's frustrations at the physical barrier that 41 presents. I also believe that debates of pedestrian overpasses- particularly in this location should not be undertaken without more research and alternatives from experts that have worked with them in the past and a design community locally that cares deeply about the impacts that such short sighted solutions will have on the community.
I hope that the City Commission on July 5th is not drawn into this debate without being better prepared to discuss the issues.
Congratulations!
I think your leadership has contributed to many wonderful things going on with our city, including your last observations about the policies/politics the city commissioners seem to be overriding/overstepping. You put it more diplomatically than that but I think that was the idea.
It seems as if the city commissioners feel they "know" more than our hired employees, experts and citizens. I keep wondering when these commissioners will wake up and realize they have been scammed by the Pineapple Square developers? Am I wrong in my memory when John Simon sat at the commission table, somehow speaking some reasons he deserved all he is being given, and promising the construction will start immediately! I guess again, I see things different than that developer because immediately or this week does not mean several months later and still going. It continues to baffle me how we can be giving away so much of the people money, land and time to this developer.
I guess my question is, when do they start construction as they promised during the meeting our commissioners gave them the State Street Parking lot?
(okay, the city gave the developer the 11 million dollars State Street lot, city owned property, for 1 million dollars and air rights to build parking in their development, which consultants stated does not have enough parking for their tenants, on land the city can never own and the lease for the land will expire in 80 years, in addition the city has to allocate many of those city spaces to the church for a deal the developer promised. Sounds like a good deal commission.)
Dale - I don't think there's much probability for a rush to approve a specific design on Wednesday. Reconnecting the bayfront is, as you point out, one of the objectives of the master plan, and perhaps an overpass is part of the answer. My reaction to the structure being proposed was that it seemed very large and intense for the location. I put the idea of a design contest out there some time ago, which is something the City of Naples did a little while ago in facing a similar issue at their "Four Corners" intersection. As I recall they offered cash prizes for the best concept from a design professional and the best from an amateur. I wasn't able to generate much interest, but it could well be that I didn't run the idea up enough flagpoles. One curiosity I have is why some find it so difficult to gross 41 as it is now. While I easily understand the issue for older residents, or prhaps someone with small children who have to move slowly, for the majority of people the light does change, the cars stop, and a crossing can be made (and I too spend a fair amount of time in that area on foot.) I do easily understand the aesthetic negatives of so much traffic there, perhaps as this discussion moves forward those who recognize that issue will speak up a bit more than they have in earlier conversations, subsequent to the adoption of the plan that is.
Darren - my point regarding our processes was fairly simply to suggest that we could all, as an organization, agree to reaffirm our commitment to them. In our business we engage in a constant, relentless tug-of-war between how long it takes government to do things, people's related frustrations, and the very legitimate legal and public policy issues that make things take time. I promise you that rarely does a week go by that some citizen, be it a builder, neighborhood activist, business owner, or just someone pulling a minor permit doesn't want us to expedite, fast-track, short-cut, simplify, or in some way lessen the burden imposed on them by some law, policy, or procedure. The only thing we get hollered at for more for than being too flexible is for refusing to be flexible at all. So it's always a balancing act, and it imposes a responsibility that we as staff take very seriously. I believe that the Commission does as well, as their comments during our discussion generally illustrated.
I can't answer for the Pineapple Square timetable, nor can I argue with your recollection that we would see work begin "tomorrow."
The ideas to put up structures along the bayfront is really hard to comprehend. The bayfront should be left as open as possible. I do not even agree with the lease to the current Marina Jack owners because the waterfront should be for all and not controlled by that single owner. He does seem to be taking over the whole area, when will it stop. The master plan, as I remember, suggests taking back the bayfront to the pedestrian and the city and less room for the cars. The city should really look back into rerouting US41 around the city to the north, possibly by the airport instead of rerouting the people that live, visit and work downtown.
Personally, I really dislike the thought of overpasses.
Mr. McNees
My friends who live on the bayshore side of 41 and who cross at 41 and Gulfstream refer to it as a humilating experience. The crossing at 41 and Main is only marginally better and has been improved with the countdown lights. When you install the left turn lane on 41 South onto Main, the crossing will deteriate for walkers even more.
Maybe because you are young and jog you can get across without being intimidated by the traffic, but people with children, older citizens and others find it a real barrior.
How about an underpass since the city appears not willing to follow the comprehensive plan and move route 41. Anything but that ugly overpass being promoted currently.
Resident - Thanks for your (and your friends') perspective, I know it is shared by many. The energy around this issue seems to have shifted somewhat, when it was last discussed the dominant voice was from those who had preserving traffic flow as the highest objective. Whatever one thinks of the "overpass" proposal that's being shown to the City Commission tonight (July 5), its emergence may push the whole conversation about connecting the bayfront onto the front burner.
Post a Comment
<< Home