Of New Urbanism, Arcades, and Jogging - I've recently been doing a bit of what most people call jogging (I call it "running" because it makes me feel much more athletic, but I recognize that as slightly delusional.) I've taken to making one run a week that covers as much as possible of downtown Sarasota, so I can get an up-close look at how different projects are going, what our city facilities look like, and how things overall are coming together. One thing that has been interesting as we've gotten closer to summer is how drawn I am as I go to any shade I can find, and how the few arcades that we do have make such good shade. (I know what you're thinking - "his running is nothing like people walking!" If you're saying that, you have quite obviously never seen me running.)I also had the opportunity when I was in the Florida Panhandle a couple of weeks ago to visit a number of the small New Urbanist communities that are springing up along the coast. Seaside, for example, has all the charm its reputation would suggest, but for my personal taste was just a bit too close - though I'm sure I could live there quite comfortably. On down the coast was another called Rosemary Beach, that was also quite interesting and somewhat "roomier." Both featured arcades to the curb line under living space quite prominently - in fact in some cases small balconies or other features actually extended over the parking space., and were both attractive and functional.
My point isn't to trigger another great debate on arcades. It is simply to state that when the City Commission voted to effectively "ban" arcades, staff was also given direction to evaluate where and when arcades make sense and eventually bring that discussion forward. I think along the way everyone agreed that arcades in and of themselves aren't an evil, it's the correct application of them as a design feature that counts. I hope as the issue comes forward in the future, that's the conversation we have. My recent (welcome) exposure to arcades prompted me to say so!
posted by Michael McNees at 6:01 PM
20 Comments:
I guess I had thought that there was a consensus arcades on private property are fine. We have some…Five Points Plaza, Palm Avenue, but that most people’s concept of what they wished for Sarasota was sidewalk greenery rather than arcaded sidewalks. It’s kind of like what we heard from a lot of people about Selby Five Points Park…greenspace vs. paved plaza. I would hate to see us move ahead even thinking about more arcades over public sidewalks with residential units right above before we see how our experiment with this concept has worked out---1350 Main.
Some of this, of course, is personal taste. I happen to look at that photo and see an uninviting tunnel with no greenery to soften it, whereas others may see a cool, inviting people space. Was in Palm Springs recently and, despite the heat, found myself avoiding the few dark arcaded areas and being drawn to the beautiful, open, tree-lined sidewalks.
By the way, I was interviewed by the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reporter and he was not searching for negative comments about the blog. He took down my comments (positive) and printed them. Much to my dismay when I read the last one, cringed, and thought, “Could I possibly have said something that sounds so silly?” Guess I must have. Anyhow…congratulations…your blog is courageous and deserving of awards.
A suggestion for a future blog topic: What are people’s reactions to the suggestion to name N Highway 41 “The Renaissance Trail,” with five subdivisions---The Whitfield Mile, The University Mile, The Ringling Mile, The Whitaker-Pioneer Mile, and the Cultural Center Mile?
It's time to re-visit the arcade issue. The city should set policy based on what is in the best interest of the citizens and not on the loud protest of a few zealots.
It is so unbelievable that a petition signed by almost 2,500 persons...and it would have been easy to get lots, lots more signatures (collection was stopped months before the arcades meeting)...plus a filled commission chamber of concerned citizens is "the loud protest of a few zealots." Among those speaking at that meeting were distinguished architects and planners.
At what point do concerned citizens cease being "a few loud zealots" and have an opinion worthy of consideration?
Downtown Sarasota is habitat of the Sarasota Crane, but no worries, the Sarasota Crane is not on the endangered species list.
Gretchen - I agree, I don't know anyone who opposed arcades on private property. There are also, along with people at the other end of the spectrum who would allow them everywhere, people in the middle who believe that in certain applications, i.e. small or irregular lots or other specific circumstances, allowing them over public right-of-way could yield a better outcome for everyone. My opinion is that the discussion did become very much "yes or no", and very Main Street-focused, without a good examination of any potential middle ground. I believe that's why the commission gave the direction they did.
By the way, I certainly appreciated your comments in the paper and don't remember anything silly. And thanks for the suggestion regarding the NOrth Trail project, it's a good one and I'll put something up on it later today.
Logan, one good thing about the cranes is that everything they're building downtown is on already developed land, so every unit downtown is one less unit being built on natural land somewhere to the east. That is anti-sprawl, and one of the main philosophies of our downtown, "new-urbanist" strategy.
I think it is time for the city to realize there are situations that arcades will definately work and be the best use of our public land and there may be areas it will not be best. It is a very closed mind that thinks 2500 signatures means the issue is dead. First those signatures were not received in good process but solicited with a very distorted view of the arcades. People need to realize that our downtown is a city and it is not like the neighborhoods surrounding it. There will be tall buildings and concrete. There will be people living in many nooks and crannys, overlooking the sidewalks. I fully support arcades but reserve opinion about the locations because there may be locations that it just does not work. I wish people could keep a little bit more of an open mind about these things instead of shutting the gate to the discussion because they fear loosing.
Has the downtown property owners spoke on this issue? Is this not their land and area, just like Park East is "their area"? I do not remember any property owners saying they do not want arcades so when do they get listened to? All neighborhoods say they are experts on their neighborhood and they are the ones deciding on their direction. When does the city, the people financially invested and owning the land get to say what they want? Has the commission ever thought about that? After all it is a city as pointed out and should not be made green just because the surrounding areas want it so. Cities serve a purpose and that is to have many amenities in a very confined area for many people. Parks are not cities and cities are not parks.
The one place I would like to see an occasional arcade is where there is an open space above it. Not as a way to get more building space several stories up and turn the street into a canyon. The, now closed, Bayou Bleu restaurant would have been a good place for such a balcony over the sidewalk and it probably would have saved that business.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I watched the Zealots collect the 2,500 signatures and pack the city council meeting. They distorted how the arcades would look in their information they used to acquire the signatures. They scared people. They are a threat to reasonable discussions about the future of downtown.
comment deleted
This post has been removed by the author.
14/6/06 9:03 PM
hum?
Downtown Resident - I understand your point, and even started this thread with my own thoughts about how the arcade discussion to date had been somewhat narrow, and have posted previously on the subject. But I hope everyone can express an opinion without having to label those with different opinions, otherwise we get bogged down in what becomes finger-pointing and questioning of motives and never get to the real issues.
To Downtown Resident:
We've covered this territory before on this very blog. There is a letter from the Chair of SOS on file at city hall that confirms ALL of the petition signatures were collected before the computer graphic that you object to was produced.
The graphic was used later, at the time people were being asked to attend the commission meeting on arcades. Perhaps that is the reason SOS was told it could no longer have a booth at the Farmer's Market because it was a "political" and not a 501c3 organization. It is interesting that another organization which did not have 501c3 status continued to be allowed to promote its political cause from a booth at the market. We did not complain because it, also, was an organization of constructive citizens advocating a good cause. But it is an interesting free speech issue.
I do agree that there are instances where an arcade without residential above could be an interesting design element and could benefit a retail establishment per the "srqcomment" statement.
I also think we're here to share ideas, problem solve and be open enough to change our minds, not to name call and close down discussion. Thank you for making that point, Mike.
Regarding again the 2500 signatures...I was solicited to sign the petition and I was told a huge doom and gloom story about arcades. The way the petition was gathered was not by a group really trying to understand the subject around arcades, it was their sole purpose to have them banned. There is nobody that is be able to verbally dispute those facts. This is not an issue of listening to the neighborhoods and citizens this is the issue of SOS wanting their way on one view, which is theirs. I did not see any meaningful dialogue of discussion about the benefits and possible downfalls of arcades, just downfalls seemed to be their view. Democracy involves many different views and to have just one view is very narrow minded.
I do think the conversation needs to be opened back up and the City Commission should not have removed the options to have arcades and arcades with livable space above them.
I also seek shade when I can find it and wish the building at One Central had arcades that covered the pedestrian sidewalk and was not stepped back. All Town Planners know this is not an optimal solution to building a city but the arcades should be over the sidewalk.
On Monday the Commission will consider the lease extension with Marina Jack. Will there be discussion concerning the utilization of that area concerning Duany's comments that the area may be underutilized. I believe his comments were based on the City as a whole and the possibility that the whole area should be considered for its bayfront location and public access.I am hopeful that discussion will ensue concerning future considerations as a 20 year lease is a long time regardless of the present lessee's capital investment.
I apologize if my remarks about SOS were inappropriate. I do feel that when I was asked to sign their petition that their literature and verbal descriptions of the impact of arcades were inappropriate to helping citizens understand the real issue. They used what I consider to be inappropriate and misleading information about the issue.
Beyond that, if Sarasota is going to have a true urban downtown and not drift back to the backwater, failed urban center it was in the 1980’s then it needs to consider a variety of urban possibilities, including significant increases in urban density to support a viable urban center and yes, possibly arcades. The heat of the summer is an excellent time to wish for arcades for a little spot of shade. Trees are nice in some places as well.
Thank you downtown resident. I do understand some people took offense at the computer graphic of what a totally arcaded downtown could look like. I think all graphics are very problematic, whether they be of arcades or of proposed new development projects. Models are a much better diagnostic tool.
Thanks to staff for asking for a model of the Sarasota Bayside (Quay) project and to the developer and WilsonMiller for agreeing to provide one. (And the $15,000 estimated price does not seem like too great a financial burden for a large city project.)
Less than two years ago I spent about 7 months painting murals in a private home in Rosemary Beach so I know it very well. That photo is looking north from just off 30a and is basically Main Street if I recall.....Upper Main, if you will...
If you turn around and go South across 30a to where the original Rosemary Beach shopping area was created, you'll find no arcades. I liked the look of both and while I probably wouldn't want to see arcades on both sides of a narrow city street and nothing but, it looks great in some places. And in fact, back when I was painting up there, my wife and daughter would drive up to visit once a month and we would walk around....it's designed as a walking community, by Andres Duany. If it started raining, you know where everyone headed....to the arcade areas.
So I would not be in favor of any outright ban on arcades.
Skip
I support Sarasota allowing arcades to be built. I also support builders being able to build living space above the arcades.
We cannot keep comparing ourselves to other cities or trying to justify when and why or where arcades will work.
We are a great city in the South and we could create an unique area different than others. Arcades gives us this opportunity. I see that they may not work in all areas but we need to let go of Sarasota staying just the way it was because nothing stays the same.
We are building a city and cities require density, shopping, exitement and people space. Cities do not work because there are parks and open space and green lawns with trees. These are not the things that make up a city. Luckly for those that seem to be jerking from the thought of our city becoming a real city, our city is small and surrounded by great neighborhoods that can keep us green.
Thanks for the good conversation on arcades, and for some new voices. To the model comment, on Monday Cooper, Robertson, our Cultural District consultant, used a fairly low-tech model to demonstrate their concept and its relationship to the surrounding buildings, and it was quite helpful. I understand the model is available in our Planning Department for viewing, and I suspect such things will become more and more common in the future.
Post a Comment
<< Home