Amendment 4

[ChriswUfGator]

Yes clearly you never said any such thing...

Dude....the city of st pete just tried to do this....DCA wouldn't let them because there was nothing in Floridaa Statutes allowing it

[ChriswUfGator]

and no...comprehensive plan (or comp. plan) is not short for comprehenvive land use plan...which should be obvious given that land use is only one element of the plan!

And yes, that's exactly what's it's short for. You're a planner and you're actually arguing this?

[CS Foltz]

Gentlemen............short answer is "Yes"...........voters will approve or disapprove! Seems kinda simple to me! Maybe because I am a simple person? I, personally, have no problem making time to cast that vote if I want the best we can have or afford! Days of shotgun developement, unbrindled sprawl and the strip malls from hell ,along with bulldozing every tree in sight, should be over with.

[thelakelander]

Days of shotgun developement, unbrindled sprawl and the strip malls from hell ,along with bulldozing every tree in sight, should be over with.

Neither option stops any of these. 

[simms3]

Days of shotgun developement, unbrindled sprawl and the strip malls from hell ,along with bulldozing every tree in sight, should be over with.

Neither option stops any of these. 

But it does hold up any kind of progress on any kind of development and costs the taxpayer more money to implement (voting is expensive).  If voting for amendment 4 does indeed take an economic toll on the state by hindering any and all new development, can we afford that right now?  FL property values will plummet and all growth aside from immigration into Miami will be stymied further.

[CS Foltz]

No ultimate answer lake, but atleast the voters will have some say in things that apply to their area! Concurrency has not worked, at least in my world and the departments that are supposed to control those issue's  have not or have been bought off by developers or have looked at the revenue income without taking into account all of the "what if's" within the effected, or to be, developed area..............something needs to be done and what we have now is not working!

[thelakelander]

^How does traffic concurrency (its being replaced with the mobility fee in Jax) play into this discussion?  The best way to change public department strategy and mentality is through elections.  If the general public is ignorant enough to keep placing the same ole same ole in charge, don't expect this route to turn out any better.  Does anyone have an estimate of how much a typical public referendum cost taxpayers on average?

Simms3, I don't know about the rest of the state but we've got so much land already vested, it will have no impact on slowing sprawl.  The greater impact will be on urban infill projects where current comp plans allow for automobile oriented development instead of walkable.  In general, corridors like Philips, Baymeadows, Main, Lem Turner, Emerson, etc. will have less of a chance to redevelop as sustainable walkable districts.

[tufsu1]

and no...comprehensive plan (or comp. plan) is not short for comprehenvive land use plan...which should be obvious given that land use is only one element of the plan!

And yes, that's exactly what's it's short for. You're a planner and you're actually arguing this?

and you're showing how little you know about planning/growth management in Florida.

but let's assume you are correct....if comprehensive plan and comprehensive future land use plan are synonymous, wouldn't that mean Amendment 4 is subjecting the entire plan to public referendum if there was a proposed change?

Here's the City of Jacksonville plan

http://www.coj.net/Departments/Planning+and+Development/Community+Planning/Comprehensive+Plan/2030+Comprehensive+Plan.htm

Do you really want to go to the polls for every text change to this document?

[tufsu1]

Yes clearly you never said any such thing...

Dude....the city of st pete just tried to do this....DCA wouldn't let them because there was nothing in Floridaa Statutes allowing it

ok so maybe I didn't explain this well....the City tried to adopt a simpler future land use map (in addition to the one they already have) called the comprehensive future land use plan....here's an article about it

http://blogs.creativeloafing.com/dailyloaf/2010/09/17/amid-public-outcry-st-petersburg-city-council-tables-new-land-use-map/

Now I am not advocating for what St. Petersburg tried to do....but the reality is that the only way referenda on all "comprehensive land use" changes would work is if the land use categories were much broader and simpler....thereby minimizing the need/desire to change them

[British Shoe Company]

I am voting "NO". 

We have elections to put people in office to make decisions.

If we do not like what their decisions, we can vote them out. 

[fieldafm]

Days of shotgun developement, unbrindled sprawl and the strip malls from hell ,along with bulldozing every tree in sight, should be over with.

Neither option stops any of these. 

Which is why 4 doesnt solve the problems that created the amendment in the first place... so, you're essentially just throwing out the baby with the bath water.

If 4 resulted in a type of zero sum game, I would at least consider it. 

Wouldnt a better solution be to focus on changes to impact fees?  This would increase the barriers to entry without costing the public in the form of astronomically higher election costs(elections are anything but cheap).  Citizens barely go to the FREE public meetings as is now.

[CS Foltz]

Not sure changes to impact fee's would do it. Concurrency was supposed to alleviate problems where a development was taking place and what happened...........those fee's were not even used where they were needed at the impacted area. Elected officials being removed after they have allready ok'd a development does nothing to keep a development from taking place.......so something different needs to happen but for right now Amendment 4 is it..............so vote as you see fit and we will see just what happens!

[thelakelander]

Going either way on Amendment 4 also has no real impact on traffic concurrency.  Besides, concurrency is about to be replaced by the mobility fee.

[CS Foltz]

OK lake! Land useage and comp plans is what 4 will affect. Mobility Fee is still controled by elected officials who can be bought and paid for by those that can afford them......public just puts them into office! One of these days we might get some people in there who will actually govern by the publics wishes.........one of these days!

[thelakelander]

The fee, if passed as proposed, has a pretty good structure for determining the proper fees associated with both large and small developments regardless of land use.  That's something we really can't say about the existing concurrency system.  As for elected officials, at the end of the day their performance goes back to the general public who put them in office.  No amount of modifying rules will effectively offset the amount of ignorance exhibited by us when we continue to elect more of the same.