FLORIDA SUPREME COURT UNANIMOUSLY APPROVES FLORIDA HOMETOWN DEMOCRACY AMENDMENT ! Thursday June 22, 2006 It is with great pleasure that Florida Hometown Democracy announces that the Florida Supreme Court has today unanimously approved our citizen's initiative to amend the Florida Constitution for placement on the 2008 ballot. The Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment will "put the voters back in charge of the places where they live" by requiring that certain land use changes must be submitted to the local electorate for approval. Land use changes affect a community more than just about any other type of local decision. Because citizens are stuck with the consequences of these land use changes, it makes sense that they should have the final say to accept ! or reje ct such changes. "We are committed to getting this citizen's initiative on the 2008 ballot." said FHD chair Lesley Blackner. "We love this state and hate the failure of local government to protect Floridians from bad growth. The best way to fix the broken machine is to change who approves comprehensive plan changes. We have greater faith in the electorate than we do in elected politicos." Blackner urges all Floridian voters to go immediately to the FHD website, www.floridahometowndemocracy.com , download the petition, sign it and mail it in and get involved in this grassroots effort. "We need the people of Florida to get behind this historic opportunity to change the politics of growth once and for all. Let's get together and make this happen. The future of Florida will thank us." Lesley Blackner can be reached at 561-659-5754. Please download from our website and SIGN THE PETITION ! http://www.FloridaHometownDemocracy.com The following is a newspaper article about this grassroots movement: Hometown Democracy means war is brewing By HOWARD TROXLER, St. Petersburg Times Columnist Published June 25, 2006 If you could line up all the Florida residents who ever fought a Wal-Mart or a new development on one side, and every city council or county commission member who ever approved one on the other side, you would have one heck of a war. Well, that war looks like it's coming. This past Thursday, the Florida Supreme Court approved a voter petition that goes by the nickname of "Hometown Democracy." Hometown Democracy is the ultimate citizen revolt. It would take power away from Florida's city and county elected officials, and give that power directly to local voters. How? By requiring voter approval for every change to a city or county's "comprehensive plan," which determines what kinds of things get built where. Each city and county in Florida has one of these maps, usually called a "comp plan." They are the backbone of each community's decisions about future land use. Where should the industry go in our town? Where should the stores go? Where should the homes, the parks, the green spaces go? Imagine such decisions placed directly in the hands of voters, instead of city councils and county commissions! (Just to be clear: The amendment would not require voter approval for rezonings or building permits. But any zoning decision still has to obey the comprehensive plan.) Assuming that Hometown Democracy gets enough petition signatures, it will go on the statewide ballot, most likely in 2008. This proposed amendment to the state Constitution is the result of a tide of resentment against local government that has been building across our state. We have seen it in fights over big box stores and shopping centers. We see it today in Yankeetown in Levy County, where development issues have divided the people and led to a state investigation. We see it in our own back yard in Treasure Island and St. Pete Beach, where voters have risen up to try to take decisionmaking away from City Hall. St. Petersburg right now is deciding whether to amend its comp plan at the request of the Sembler Corp. Now we are likely to see the fight played out across the entire state. This kind of amendment, more than pregnant pigs or choo-choo trains, is why the Legislature and Florida's business community have fought for the past few years to crack down on voter petitions. But the Supreme Court's ruling was unanimous, a slam-dunk. The court said that: 1) Hometown Democracy does not violate the rule that all proposed amendments must stick to a "single subject." 2) The ballot language of Hometown Democracy is clear and not misleading. The second part of the ruling was especially important, because the court had thrown an earlier version of Hometown Democracy off the ballot in 2005 on those grounds. The amendment was opposed by the Florida League of Cities, the Florida Association of Counties and the Florida School Boards Association. The court's ruling not only shot down the cities, counties and school boards, but it also contained encouraging language for future voter petitions. The court said that once a problem in the language of a petition has been fixed, opponents can't just keep raising new arguments and new challenges. "Allowing piecemeal attacks on a proposed amendment," the court said, "would not only be fundamentally unfair to the proponent of an amendment, it would be a misuse of the process for approval of citizen initiatives." What happens now? First, Hometown Democracy's organizers have to get enough signatures. Only 69,000 signatures have been officially verified and they need 611,000. But the backers say they already have more signatures in hand, and experience shows - as the critics of petitions themselves admit - that it is highly likely they can succeed. Barring some other successful challenge to the amendment, that will leave Florida's cities and counties with one last option: Prove to the voters that Hometown Democracy is a bad idea. That will be a fun debate. Local officials will have to defend their track record and make the case as to why they, and not the voters, are better suited to decide what gets built where. And if Hometown Democracy passes? Then those who want to build things in places in Florida where they weren't originally intended will have to convince the entire community it's a good idea. What a concept! ) Copyright, St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.
- Status
Yee Haw
Right now the condo market is sinking big time here. Many folks are walking away from the 10%deposit they put down on place before it was built thinking they would flip it after it was built. Sales of built one are slow, real slow as well. Personally I think the only good use for developers is as chum.
Right now the condo market is sinking big time here. Many folks are walking away from the 10%deposit they put down on place before it was built thinking they would flip it after it was built. Sales of built one are slow, real slow as well. Personally I think the only good use for developers is as chum.
Same over here....
Orange Beach, Gulf Shores, and Pensacola condo market is tankin too Rick. Heard of someone who wanted to get a deal on one and low balled 3 sellers....all three accepted!! Those folks who bought pre-Ivan and took big mortgages to let renters pay the payment, are crying now. The condo associations assessed owners huge $ to rebuild. If the storms miss us this year, the market will probably come back strong. Amazing how short people's memories are.
Orange Beach, Gulf Shores, and Pensacola condo market is tankin too Rick. Heard of someone who wanted to get a deal on one and low balled 3 sellers....all three accepted!! Those folks who bought pre-Ivan and took big mortgages to let renters pay the payment, are crying now. The condo associations assessed owners huge $ to rebuild. If the storms miss us this year, the market will probably come back strong. Amazing how short people's memories are.
I'm concerned
Florida voters approved pregnant pig laws for our state constitution along with class size amendments and zoomy trains without means to pay for either one. Now they're going to decide complicated land use issues? I don't know folks, I'd be VERY wary of this one. Yeah, legislators and developers can really suck but given our electorate's track record I don't think this is such a good idea.
Florida voters approved pregnant pig laws for our state constitution along with class size amendments and zoomy trains without means to pay for either one. Now they're going to decide complicated land use issues? I don't know folks, I'd be VERY wary of this one. Yeah, legislators and developers can really suck but given our electorate's track record I don't think this is such a good idea.
Irrelevant
This strikes me as a mis-use of the HOW site, yet the matter is fascinating nonetheless. Thanks for sharing.
This strikes me as a mis-use of the HOW site, yet the matter is fascinating nonetheless. Thanks for sharing.
A misuse?!?!?
NO WAY! Florida is quickly disappearing as a cruising alternative, if not already gone for the average boater. Read any of the sailing or boating rags from down that way. Marinas are disappearing at an alarming rate in Florida and elsewhere. Ramps are too. And anchoring is basically now taboo in lots of places. Plus, the ICW is always under threat. If you boat, this is of specific interest and should be discussed here at HOW/SOW and any other site you can. If we don't get involved it will be gone. That's a benefit of sites like these - common interests, common problems - heads and docks, they're closely related. Do something, if it's just vote in the local elections that wind up controlling these things. ok, now back to our regularly scheduled programming....
NO WAY! Florida is quickly disappearing as a cruising alternative, if not already gone for the average boater. Read any of the sailing or boating rags from down that way. Marinas are disappearing at an alarming rate in Florida and elsewhere. Ramps are too. And anchoring is basically now taboo in lots of places. Plus, the ICW is always under threat. If you boat, this is of specific interest and should be discussed here at HOW/SOW and any other site you can. If we don't get involved it will be gone. That's a benefit of sites like these - common interests, common problems - heads and docks, they're closely related. Do something, if it's just vote in the local elections that wind up controlling these things. ok, now back to our regularly scheduled programming....
As a land developer ...
I sympathize with people who feel displaced when marinas are sold and waterfront properties turn residential. It is a pretty basic economic issue. Waterfront property is in great demand with all the people in this nation who are achieving financial success. As long as we support a growing economy, there will be pressure on desirable properties. As long as property owners have rights, this will be a battle that has two sides. It is true that investors are turning away from home speculation in a big way right now and it is having a major impact on sales and prices. The demand for homes among people that truly want to purchase a home for personal use still exceeds supply, but interest rates and balking at high prices have had an effect on those sales as well. But when people want a home, they come back and buy as prices stabilize and their desire overcomes their trepidation. I don't see the stress on waterfront properties having much relief. I think we (the US) should be looking at waterfront property in Mexico with a gleam in our eyes!
I sympathize with people who feel displaced when marinas are sold and waterfront properties turn residential. It is a pretty basic economic issue. Waterfront property is in great demand with all the people in this nation who are achieving financial success. As long as we support a growing economy, there will be pressure on desirable properties. As long as property owners have rights, this will be a battle that has two sides. It is true that investors are turning away from home speculation in a big way right now and it is having a major impact on sales and prices. The demand for homes among people that truly want to purchase a home for personal use still exceeds supply, but interest rates and balking at high prices have had an effect on those sales as well. But when people want a home, they come back and buy as prices stabilize and their desire overcomes their trepidation. I don't see the stress on waterfront properties having much relief. I think we (the US) should be looking at waterfront property in Mexico with a gleam in our eyes!
Or . . .
you could have sensible regulation of land usage that allows for us peasants to go to the beach too. That limits density in sensitive areas and maintains some public ownership/access. Or we can wait for the worsening hurricanes to clear the developements away. Then we landlocked sailors/citizens can pay to let the wealthy rebuild in harms way. Maybe if developers had to establish a fund to pay for disater relief for those who live in developments develpoed in harms way. Hmmm . . . Naw that would probably interfere with free markets and the citizens subsidies for free markets. Mike
you could have sensible regulation of land usage that allows for us peasants to go to the beach too. That limits density in sensitive areas and maintains some public ownership/access. Or we can wait for the worsening hurricanes to clear the developements away. Then we landlocked sailors/citizens can pay to let the wealthy rebuild in harms way. Maybe if developers had to establish a fund to pay for disater relief for those who live in developments develpoed in harms way. Hmmm . . . Naw that would probably interfere with free markets and the citizens subsidies for free markets. Mike
What, Mike ???
You seem to have several trains of thought, but I can't seem to make any sense out of them. How do you correlate land use regulation with public ownership of property and public access? How are hurricanes correlated with landlocked citizens paying for homes for the wealthy? Which citizens are subsidizing free markets? How does developer funded disaster relief interfere with free markedts? When you string words together, it would help if they actually meant something tangible ...
You seem to have several trains of thought, but I can't seem to make any sense out of them. How do you correlate land use regulation with public ownership of property and public access? How are hurricanes correlated with landlocked citizens paying for homes for the wealthy? Which citizens are subsidizing free markets? How does developer funded disaster relief interfere with free markedts? When you string words together, it would help if they actually meant something tangible ...
I understand
what Mike is saying. The private development of the shorelines restricts access to the beaches and ocean - a public resource. Here in Oregon beach access is weighted heavily to the public and that is just the way it should be. It has nothing to do with markets. It has everything to do with fairness. His point about hurricanes is also well founded. Our government spends massive amounts of money repairing and fortifying areas that should not be built on in the first place. If you own property in an area that is subject to huricanes that is your decision. No one else should have to pay for it when the inevitable hurricane comes along and wipes out the infrastructure.
what Mike is saying. The private development of the shorelines restricts access to the beaches and ocean - a public resource. Here in Oregon beach access is weighted heavily to the public and that is just the way it should be. It has nothing to do with markets. It has everything to do with fairness. His point about hurricanes is also well founded. Our government spends massive amounts of money repairing and fortifying areas that should not be built on in the first place. If you own property in an area that is subject to huricanes that is your decision. No one else should have to pay for it when the inevitable hurricane comes along and wipes out the infrastructure.
Florida does not want you
As someone who lives in Miami and suffers with this everyday - Don is correct - If you do not have a mega yacht Fla does not want you here. Finding a slip is almost impossible and when you do bring a note from your banker that you are wealthy - my slip fees have gone up twice this year and almost doubled in 3 years. talk about inflation - miami beach does not want crusisers as they are deemed undesirables and polluters and create crime so you can't stop there for more than a few days. DIY yards are drying up on the miami river as the land is being taken for condos - head south into the keys and it is the same as it is north and now headed to the west coast of fla. soon if you can not put your boat on a trailer and pull it out of the water at the end of the day there will be no place to drop a hook. the other sad part is that this is a tourist economy and that means a lot of low skilled labor at minimum wage - typically those workers live in houses that get hardest hit by hurricanes as they are older - the houses get condemened and then a developer buy them for big houses or condos and the people who live there must move on but to where - no low income housing is being built - in the keys there is beginning to be a lack of workers as tourist workers just can not find housing by the way the beaches are still relatively open - much better than Conn which basically does not have any open beaches (lived there for 3 years) and the new big houses and condos are really hurricane proof as the codes are really tight - it is just that the developers run the city gov't or in bed with them and down here money talks and politicans love money so the developers get whatever they want chuck
As someone who lives in Miami and suffers with this everyday - Don is correct - If you do not have a mega yacht Fla does not want you here. Finding a slip is almost impossible and when you do bring a note from your banker that you are wealthy - my slip fees have gone up twice this year and almost doubled in 3 years. talk about inflation - miami beach does not want crusisers as they are deemed undesirables and polluters and create crime so you can't stop there for more than a few days. DIY yards are drying up on the miami river as the land is being taken for condos - head south into the keys and it is the same as it is north and now headed to the west coast of fla. soon if you can not put your boat on a trailer and pull it out of the water at the end of the day there will be no place to drop a hook. the other sad part is that this is a tourist economy and that means a lot of low skilled labor at minimum wage - typically those workers live in houses that get hardest hit by hurricanes as they are older - the houses get condemened and then a developer buy them for big houses or condos and the people who live there must move on but to where - no low income housing is being built - in the keys there is beginning to be a lack of workers as tourist workers just can not find housing by the way the beaches are still relatively open - much better than Conn which basically does not have any open beaches (lived there for 3 years) and the new big houses and condos are really hurricane proof as the codes are really tight - it is just that the developers run the city gov't or in bed with them and down here money talks and politicans love money so the developers get whatever they want chuck
Nauti, you may understand ...
because you are using the same vague thought processes. How is development of privately owned lands restricting public access to the ocean and beaches? Are you saying that publicly owned lands are being developed and that what was once public access is now private because public lands where sold or given to developers? Where is that happening? Or are you saying that the public has the right to trespass on private property as long as it is vacant and not being used currently and that when it is developed, the public is being displaced? Where, in America, is the logic in that? But you also fail to realize that ocean front beaches and public access to beaches is not restricted in most, if not all, states. In New Jersey, for instance, ocean front private property rights do not extend beyond the beach. That is, ALL beaches are available for public use, even right in front of ocean front homes and high rises. If you ever visited, you would notice that streets, or small alleys give public access to the beaches, often times right between homes in very exclusive, private neighborhoods. The towns are allowed to require and sell beach passes to cover the expense of lifeguards and maintenance, etc. but the fees that are charged are regulated by the state so that they can't get away with overcharging non-residents in order to be exclusive. In other examples, private property that is developed in coastal areas have to obtain approvals from a coastal regulatory agency of the Dept. of Environmental Protection. In one of our developments on Sandy Hook Bay, we were required to provide public parking spaces (on our private road) and build an ADA compliant boardwalk down to the beach to provide public access in front of the condominiums we built. We are right next to a county park that also provides access, but it doesn't matter that fishermen could simply walk over from the county park, we were required to put in a new access that didn't exist before. Some of our customers may have been a little put-off by this public access right in front of their new homes, but that's the condition they had to accept when they purchased so they have nothing to complain about. We also build homes on the Hudson River overlooking the spectacular Manhatten skyline. All this land was previously vacant and had the remnants of industrial uses from the past. It wasn't suitable for public access and none was made available, even though it lies on the banks of a unique setting. With residential development, beautiful promenades are now being linked along the river from the George Washington Bridge down to Jersey City for public access. Now anybody can walk and view the scenery. This doesn't happen without the money that is generated by people who are willing to spend well over a million dollars for a condominium overlooking the Hudson and New York skyline. I am not sure what your complaint is about the government spending money to repair hurricane damage in areas that are affected. Should the government also not spend money in areas of the midwest that are hard hit by tornados, or areas of the west that are ravaged by forest fire or earthquake damage? How about the flooding in the east right now? Should those areas also not receive any aid? Is the cost of your insurance affected by those that need insurance for hurricane damage and that makes you angry? Chuck, you have a sympathetic point, but I think that you do not understand that property owners have the right, that is protected by Land Use Law, to utilize their property in accordance with the zoning laws and land use regulations of their municipality. You may think that politicians can arbitrarily deny development plans based on public opposition, but that is a misconception that many people have. When towns deny approvals without the legal position to do so, the courts will overturn their decision at great expense to the taxpayer. Normally, township officials understand their obligation to approve plans that conform with zoning laws and have no variances. Many people make the assumption that approvals are made because the politicians were all "paid off", but this is far from reality in MOST cases. We do know that corruption exists and it makes a spectacular story when it hits the papers or when movies portray the greedy developer. In the end, most builders honestly provide homes for people (like you) that want to purchase them, and jobs for people (like me) that need them. A huge segment of our economy benefits from the building industry. But say, if you want to shut down development, there is one sure way to do it. Shut down the economy in your neck of the woods. You may have to sacrifice your job, but what better gift can you give to your fellow man than an unobstructed view from your favorite anchorage that you may have to give up for yourself because you can't afford your boat?
because you are using the same vague thought processes. How is development of privately owned lands restricting public access to the ocean and beaches? Are you saying that publicly owned lands are being developed and that what was once public access is now private because public lands where sold or given to developers? Where is that happening? Or are you saying that the public has the right to trespass on private property as long as it is vacant and not being used currently and that when it is developed, the public is being displaced? Where, in America, is the logic in that? But you also fail to realize that ocean front beaches and public access to beaches is not restricted in most, if not all, states. In New Jersey, for instance, ocean front private property rights do not extend beyond the beach. That is, ALL beaches are available for public use, even right in front of ocean front homes and high rises. If you ever visited, you would notice that streets, or small alleys give public access to the beaches, often times right between homes in very exclusive, private neighborhoods. The towns are allowed to require and sell beach passes to cover the expense of lifeguards and maintenance, etc. but the fees that are charged are regulated by the state so that they can't get away with overcharging non-residents in order to be exclusive. In other examples, private property that is developed in coastal areas have to obtain approvals from a coastal regulatory agency of the Dept. of Environmental Protection. In one of our developments on Sandy Hook Bay, we were required to provide public parking spaces (on our private road) and build an ADA compliant boardwalk down to the beach to provide public access in front of the condominiums we built. We are right next to a county park that also provides access, but it doesn't matter that fishermen could simply walk over from the county park, we were required to put in a new access that didn't exist before. Some of our customers may have been a little put-off by this public access right in front of their new homes, but that's the condition they had to accept when they purchased so they have nothing to complain about. We also build homes on the Hudson River overlooking the spectacular Manhatten skyline. All this land was previously vacant and had the remnants of industrial uses from the past. It wasn't suitable for public access and none was made available, even though it lies on the banks of a unique setting. With residential development, beautiful promenades are now being linked along the river from the George Washington Bridge down to Jersey City for public access. Now anybody can walk and view the scenery. This doesn't happen without the money that is generated by people who are willing to spend well over a million dollars for a condominium overlooking the Hudson and New York skyline. I am not sure what your complaint is about the government spending money to repair hurricane damage in areas that are affected. Should the government also not spend money in areas of the midwest that are hard hit by tornados, or areas of the west that are ravaged by forest fire or earthquake damage? How about the flooding in the east right now? Should those areas also not receive any aid? Is the cost of your insurance affected by those that need insurance for hurricane damage and that makes you angry? Chuck, you have a sympathetic point, but I think that you do not understand that property owners have the right, that is protected by Land Use Law, to utilize their property in accordance with the zoning laws and land use regulations of their municipality. You may think that politicians can arbitrarily deny development plans based on public opposition, but that is a misconception that many people have. When towns deny approvals without the legal position to do so, the courts will overturn their decision at great expense to the taxpayer. Normally, township officials understand their obligation to approve plans that conform with zoning laws and have no variances. Many people make the assumption that approvals are made because the politicians were all "paid off", but this is far from reality in MOST cases. We do know that corruption exists and it makes a spectacular story when it hits the papers or when movies portray the greedy developer. In the end, most builders honestly provide homes for people (like you) that want to purchase them, and jobs for people (like me) that need them. A huge segment of our economy benefits from the building industry. But say, if you want to shut down development, there is one sure way to do it. Shut down the economy in your neck of the woods. You may have to sacrifice your job, but what better gift can you give to your fellow man than an unobstructed view from your favorite anchorage that you may have to give up for yourself because you can't afford your boat?
I am a Bit Conflicted Here
Here is how I look at it. A property owner has every right to do whatever he wants on his property short of endangering or ill affecting the property of his neighbors. However the community should not have to spend inure additional expense to facilitate the development of a piece of property. There may be examples where a development is advantageous to all and would certainly deserve a positive vote. So why not let the community decides? Out here the last thing we need are more condos there is too much traffic already and real tough to build roads on top of condos beach or water. Enough is enough.
Here is how I look at it. A property owner has every right to do whatever he wants on his property short of endangering or ill affecting the property of his neighbors. However the community should not have to spend inure additional expense to facilitate the development of a piece of property. There may be examples where a development is advantageous to all and would certainly deserve a positive vote. So why not let the community decides? Out here the last thing we need are more condos there is too much traffic already and real tough to build roads on top of condos beach or water. Enough is enough.
Speaking of Florida
I noticed that there seems to be a waterway through the state from the west to the east. Is it passable by sailboat? Now on to subject. People pay more for condos then slips. Baby boomers are starting to reach retirement age so many are going to move to Florida. The special thing about retires is that they don't need to live near a job and also have a nice pocket full of cash. So, condos are going to continue to be built and it's going to get worse. Especially with the prediction that the hurricanes this year are to head up the east coast. In fact, I would bet that in time, it will start to spill over to the other gulf states beach properties. So, if you owned a marina and were making say $100,000 a year profit off it but could sell it for $3,000,000 to a condo builder, what would you do? So start building your mooring anchor.
I noticed that there seems to be a waterway through the state from the west to the east. Is it passable by sailboat? Now on to subject. People pay more for condos then slips. Baby boomers are starting to reach retirement age so many are going to move to Florida. The special thing about retires is that they don't need to live near a job and also have a nice pocket full of cash. So, condos are going to continue to be built and it's going to get worse. Especially with the prediction that the hurricanes this year are to head up the east coast. In fact, I would bet that in time, it will start to spill over to the other gulf states beach properties. So, if you owned a marina and were making say $100,000 a year profit off it but could sell it for $3,000,000 to a condo builder, what would you do? So start building your mooring anchor.
Yes, It Is Possible
It is going to be a tight fit with your H34 mast and unless you have the shoal keel it is better to go around. There was a plan for another up north from around Cedar Key to the St Johns River I was told but it was stopped shortly after it started and never got off the ground again. There is probably no way something like that could be built now. You are absolutely right about the marina owner selling his property. My point is we taxpayers should not have to pay to provide access water sewer etc to make a crowded area more crowded and for some developer to make big money to take out of the area unless we vote to do so. It has become so stupid here that property owners are fighting to not allow beach replenishment because it allows enough beach front for the public to use the beach or they complain about the color of the sand. I can't imagine what they will say when another storm comes through and washes their house or condo building away.
It is going to be a tight fit with your H34 mast and unless you have the shoal keel it is better to go around. There was a plan for another up north from around Cedar Key to the St Johns River I was told but it was stopped shortly after it started and never got off the ground again. There is probably no way something like that could be built now. You are absolutely right about the marina owner selling his property. My point is we taxpayers should not have to pay to provide access water sewer etc to make a crowded area more crowded and for some developer to make big money to take out of the area unless we vote to do so. It has become so stupid here that property owners are fighting to not allow beach replenishment because it allows enough beach front for the public to use the beach or they complain about the color of the sand. I can't imagine what they will say when another storm comes through and washes their house or condo building away.
What's TOO crowded?
Rick, you raise questions that will be questions for the ages. Was it too much traffic when the first traffic signal got installed? Was it too much traffic when you couldn't get thru the light in one cycle at rush hour? Or is it too much traffic when ALL the available land is finally built out and the builders can't sell their empty units because there is too damn much traffic on the roads and the customers finally stopped coming and began looking for homes where there isn't so much freaking traffic and they can look at scenery instead of more freaking buildings! And how does a City planner figure out where to draw the zoning lines and who gets what when so much has already been decided and precedent is already established? Is it fair when landowners made money on their land in the past and then regulations are established to pull the rug out from under landowners who held out for years to keep their investment in raw land for a later return? Many people think that those kind of losses are fair game for people that are wealthy enough to own land in the first place. But maybe establishing development zones that can be developed only by purchasing "development rights" from landowners in a preservation area is a fair minded idea. Remember, Daniel Boone left Kentucky for Missouri back in about 1800 because Kentucky was getting too damn crowded for him in his old age!
Rick, you raise questions that will be questions for the ages. Was it too much traffic when the first traffic signal got installed? Was it too much traffic when you couldn't get thru the light in one cycle at rush hour? Or is it too much traffic when ALL the available land is finally built out and the builders can't sell their empty units because there is too damn much traffic on the roads and the customers finally stopped coming and began looking for homes where there isn't so much freaking traffic and they can look at scenery instead of more freaking buildings! And how does a City planner figure out where to draw the zoning lines and who gets what when so much has already been decided and precedent is already established? Is it fair when landowners made money on their land in the past and then regulations are established to pull the rug out from under landowners who held out for years to keep their investment in raw land for a later return? Many people think that those kind of losses are fair game for people that are wealthy enough to own land in the first place. But maybe establishing development zones that can be developed only by purchasing "development rights" from landowners in a preservation area is a fair minded idea. Remember, Daniel Boone left Kentucky for Missouri back in about 1800 because Kentucky was getting too damn crowded for him in his old age!
OK, Scott, I get it
You're a developer. No problem with that, it is your right. I grew up in NJ. I still have fond memories of Nickel Night at Bertram's Island. Please do not even try to compare beach access in NJ to access in Oregon. Here we keep wide open swaths of land open for the public, not narrow walkways to squeeze onto the beach. The beaches and ocean are public assetts. Lots of people, including Californians with $$, want to move here and the coast could be lined with homes. But, the people here wont have that. Have your vacation home, but not pressed up against the beach. Unfettered access to the beach and the glory of the natural scenery is a right for us all, not just those with the ability to purchase it. As for hurricanes. I am tired of paying taxes to rebuild infrastructure in places that we know are going to be hit and devastated by hurricanes. It is a direct subsidy to the owners and developers of that property. I am all for the private sector but wish it wouldn't cry to get bailed out when things go bad.
You're a developer. No problem with that, it is your right. I grew up in NJ. I still have fond memories of Nickel Night at Bertram's Island. Please do not even try to compare beach access in NJ to access in Oregon. Here we keep wide open swaths of land open for the public, not narrow walkways to squeeze onto the beach. The beaches and ocean are public assetts. Lots of people, including Californians with $$, want to move here and the coast could be lined with homes. But, the people here wont have that. Have your vacation home, but not pressed up against the beach. Unfettered access to the beach and the glory of the natural scenery is a right for us all, not just those with the ability to purchase it. As for hurricanes. I am tired of paying taxes to rebuild infrastructure in places that we know are going to be hit and devastated by hurricanes. It is a direct subsidy to the owners and developers of that property. I am all for the private sector but wish it wouldn't cry to get bailed out when things go bad.
Nauti, you'd be sad ...
There are about 120 townhomes on the Bertram's Island site now. They were built a few years ago after a loooong planning process. Most people on the lake think it was a travesty ... but Mt. Arlington wanted their sewers to be built and upgraded and the developer stepped up to the plate and the land was/is privately owned ... Oregon has a very low density, obviously, compared to NJ so you're right ... there is no comparison. Besides, with all the federally owned land that exists in Oregon and western states in general, there is naturally a great deal of protection from development that you folks in the west enjoy at the expense of all the folks in the east where federally preserved coastline is not nearly so prominent. In fact there is no federally preserved coastline in New Jersey. You complain about aid for hurricane damages, I'll complain about not having access to all that beautiful land without having to travel clear across the country to enjoy! Don't spoil your scenery - Keep those Californians out!
There are about 120 townhomes on the Bertram's Island site now. They were built a few years ago after a loooong planning process. Most people on the lake think it was a travesty ... but Mt. Arlington wanted their sewers to be built and upgraded and the developer stepped up to the plate and the land was/is privately owned ... Oregon has a very low density, obviously, compared to NJ so you're right ... there is no comparison. Besides, with all the federally owned land that exists in Oregon and western states in general, there is naturally a great deal of protection from development that you folks in the west enjoy at the expense of all the folks in the east where federally preserved coastline is not nearly so prominent. In fact there is no federally preserved coastline in New Jersey. You complain about aid for hurricane damages, I'll complain about not having access to all that beautiful land without having to travel clear across the country to enjoy!
Don't spoil your scenery - Keep those Californians out!Caloosa hatchee- Okachobe-St Lucie
Now I don't know if this is the right place for this, it likely is not, but at the very least Capn Dave believes in this and is doing something about it with his petition...;-) What good to complain? It is a good thing to explore different view points and it makes this great country the better for it too. Franklin, there is a waterway across, and sure beats going 'round the tip and Key West. I took a 40ft Endeavour through there in 2001. I'm thinkin we had a mast 49 ft from the water, check on the miniumum clearance to get through. An easy ride from the St Lucie through three locks, many bascule bridges to the locks at Lake Okachobee, through the "S" daymarkers (shallow outside don't do it at night in 30+ knots of wind) to the locks on the Callosahatchee, then an easy ride down to Ft Myers.all locks were free, great scenery, good people; all in all a great trip.
Now I don't know if this is the right place for this, it likely is not, but at the very least Capn Dave believes in this and is doing something about it with his petition...;-) What good to complain? It is a good thing to explore different view points and it makes this great country the better for it too. Franklin, there is a waterway across, and sure beats going 'round the tip and Key West. I took a 40ft Endeavour through there in 2001. I'm thinkin we had a mast 49 ft from the water, check on the miniumum clearance to get through. An easy ride from the St Lucie through three locks, many bascule bridges to the locks at Lake Okachobee, through the "S" daymarkers (shallow outside don't do it at night in 30+ knots of wind) to the locks on the Callosahatchee, then an easy ride down to Ft Myers.all locks were free, great scenery, good people; all in all a great trip.
- Status