Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Longboat Key's VIP Room


As I watched the commission workshop yesterday afternoon, I was once again made aware that sadly we live in a community where the Very Important People are granted unusual access to our political process and looked upon with favor. On the other hand run-of-the-mill residents have 3 minutes to address a group of commissioners who, many observers lament, look as though they could not care less about what is being presented to them. Unfortunately the dichotomy between the politically important and the rest of the residents has been a way-of-life in this community for quite a while. If you look at my web site - http://www.lbksite.com/ - you can see that I campaigned on this problem several years ago. Nothing has changed from then to now, except that the commission has become a homogeneous pro-development clique. If you are opposed to the Key Club expansion or against needless commercial over-development on the key, you are out of luck. There are no remaining commissioners who have not expressed support for the new and illegitimate vision plan and the Key Club expansion. The same can be said for the planning and zoning board. We have achieved homogeneity in government. We have also become embroiled in two litigations over expanded commercial land use championed by the commission and the planning and zoning board.

To be specific about Thursday's commission workshop, my comments center about that part of every regular commission meeting where there is an opportunity for the public to be heard. At this particular workshop there were perhaps ten or twelve residents attending who wanted to petition the commission to finally resolve the peacock over-population in the village that has been going on for years. Also in attendance was Murph Klauber and his daughter. Every one had followed the rules and submitted forms to the town clerk asking to address the commission.

Mr. Klauber was first to speak. Mr. Klauber and his daughter addressed the commission for more than 6 minutes without interruption from the mayor telling them they had exceeded the 3 minute rule. Mr. Klauber was petitioning the commissioners to prevent the partial reopening and requesting that the commissioners visit the Colony to examine the condition of the various units. You may recall that you the taxpayer paid Mr. Klauber over six and half million dollars a few years ago to settle a law suit brought on by the commission.  Upon completion of their presentation one commissioner immediately volunteered to be at the Colony at 9 AM the next day to meet with Mr. Klauber. The commissioner appeared quite eager to assist the Klaubers.

Now the dozen or so village residents had their chance to address the commission. They were there to beseech the commissioners to control the more than 50 to 150 peacocks that are allowed to roam freely in the village, mostly in a two block area of the community. It had been over a year since the commission promised to remove all but 12 peacocks. Today more than 50 birds remain with no indication that anything is going to be done about the problem any time soon. The village residents took time out of their day to petition the commissioners to do something about the peacock problem that results in incessant property damage, constant loud noise and peacock excrement which carries the danger of histoplasmosis which "can cause high fever, blood abnormalities, pneumonia and even death". Children in the neighborhood are forced to play in the equivalent of a barnyard. Peacock feces in constantly being tracked into resident's homes.

One commissioner suggested that any discussion of peacocks be postponed yet another month until the next commission workshop. I found this to be in stark contrast to one commissioner's willingness to be available the very next day at 9 AM sharp, in response to Mr. Klauber's request that the commission visit the Colony. No commissioners offered to visit the village. Each village resident who wished to speak was under a strict 3 minute rule unlike Mr. Klauber and his daughter.

I wish that things would change in our community and that our town government might become more responsive to its citizens. Instead we read week after week about our commissioner's grandiose plans to rapidly advance commercial interests on the island. I and others are unable to think of a single resident oriented action taken by the commission over the past year. Our community will have no opportunity to enhance Bay Front Park this year since the commission has exhausted our allowed chances to alter the comp plan helping the Key Club. It is a good thing the Key Club is paying for all the work the town is doing on their behalf.

The festering peacock problem in the village, that has a real and negative affect on several village residents, goes unnoticed and unattended by the commission and the town month after month.

Perhaps the village needs a Very Important Person to champion their causes at town hall.

Perhaps an island-wide homeowners organization might effectively counter the influence of VIPs in our town government.

Monday, March 21, 2011

Where are all the Boomers going?


The following are excerpts from two of many articles I have found that address baby boomer retirement. I believe we need to examine the boomers and adjust our community values to both attract and accommodate the "new" generation of retirees. Currently more than 75% of our property owners are retired and relatively affluent. Strip mall and hotel developers are not going to reinvigorate our residential community and return home values to where they should be. If we wait for outside interests to create some sort of commercial presence in five to ten years from now, we may miss an opportunity to make our own changes that we will most likely have to make eventually, if we want to remain a viable community. The 2010 census shows that Longboat had a shift in demographics where the number of residents decreased by 41% in a decade. The generation that made Longboat great are no longer here. We need to find a way to welcome a new generation.  The boomers are the answer and we need to find a way to bring them to our community.


Retiring Boomers Impact Demand For Housing

By MARCI SHATZMAN, October 11, 2009

Jeffrey Katz has been selling real estate for seven years to house hunters in the adult communities, and in the past two years he's noticed something new. "Boomers are focused on how old the community is," said Katz, who's with REMAX/Advantage in western Boynton Beach. They think a new community will attract younger seniors. "They want to be among their contemporaries and not their parents' [generation]," he said. Katz said 90 percent of his clients are Baby Boomers who are moving here to retire or buy a second home.

Baby Boomers take on Retirement


May 2, 2010 By Joni
 
The active lifestyle that baby boomers have enjoyed throughout their working life continues into their retirement life. It isn’t enough to just be not working anymore. They demand more from life. Everything this generation does is studied and surveyed. They were the first to be targeted by market analysts and set new standards for generations to come. How business markets to the boomers has also changed. The priorities set by the boomers, no matter what the venue, have become the standard across the country.


The activity level of the newly retired has also impacted our communities. Well known for their activism in political and social issues their entire lives, this generation has brought that energy to their personal lives as well. No longer is a house in the suburbs enough. Now communities are being built to once again feed the need of this aging generation. These communities include a wide variety of amenities to attract these seniors. Fitness centers, walking trails, social outlets and hi-tech security systems are the new standard for these neighborhoods. Convenience to shopping and community centers located nearby is a must. Golf courses, complete with a country club atmosphere, are hi-lights that are very attractive to the active senior and not to be ignored.

We are at a difficult juncture between two generations that has a particularly profound impact on retirement and second home communities. Longboat Key is unusual in that it is almost entirely retirement oriented. On top of that the climate encourages a majority of the residents to seek cooler places for much of the summer. Additionally, aside from the village at the north end, a predominance of large condominium complexes and the lack of a viable community center do not contribute to a sense of community. Each condominium is in a sense self-sufficient. We have wonderful clubs and organizations that are made possible by the efforts of dedicated individuals. We have the Key Club that is the jewel of the island. However, the club is more exclusive than inclusive because of high membership costs that prevent a majority of Longboat  residents from finding a sense of community there. Times have changed. Boomer studies are revealing that the next retirement generation wants to belong. They are active and social.

Longboat Key offers an unusually attractive shopping experience only a few minutes away at the circle and downtown Sarasota. Many thriving retirement communities would love to have such sophisticated shopping so close at hand. I lived for a time in the Hollywood Hills in Los Angeles. On a good day it might take an hour of fighting traffic congestion to reach shops in Beverly Hills. And those were weekdays.

What we do not yet have to offer the boomers is that sense of being part of a vibrant social and active community. Yes we have amenities but they are underdeveloped. We need to open up our beaches to perspective residents. Bike riding on this island is at times dangerous. I have been in many communities that have in the past decade adjusted to the times and created new and attractive activity experiences for their residents. Perhaps the time has come to also change with the times. It could be fun.




Friday, March 18, 2011

Politics vs Pragmatism in Government


damnant quod non intellegunt



Two weeks ago I met with a Manatee County Commissioner. The purpose of my meeting was to lobby the commissioner to seek alternative solutions to unpopular tall cell towers. I did not know what to expect when I entered the county commissioner's office.

I was greeted by a smiling affable young man who asked me to sit down. We spent a few minutes becoming acquainted about where we lived and both being or having been commissioners. I then began to talk about alternative technologies to cell towers. As we talked I presented the commissioner with several printed reports and informational materials. My presentation quickly became a discussion about cell phone reception and I soon realized that the commissioner already knew quite a bit about cell towers and the county's involvement in a cell tower litigation at Lakewood Ranch.

We talked about the fact that there are over 200,00 cell towers in America but that there are also over 300,000 Femtocells being used in homes throughout the country to improve cell phone indoor reception.

Our meeting lasted over 45 minutes. At the end of our meeting the commissioner informed me that he would ask his technical staff to research Lucent's LightRadio technology and that he would let me know what his staff learned.  

I left the meeting with the feeling that Manatee County has acquired another hard working intelligent commissioner, who is vitally interested in making the best possible decisions based on facts and knowledge. I will request meetings with several other county commissioners with the same expectations of discussing cell tower alternatives with pragmatic public servants more interested in optimal solutions than appeasing their friends or business interests at the expense of voters.

It takes a lot of effort to do the work that is required to gain a full understanding of the many complex issues that confront elected officials every month. However, not doing the work, and making decisions based solely on the votes of fellow officials, is a betrayal of public office. Too often uninformed decisions are made that adversely impact residents and entire communities, when a little honest work and an open mind could have resulted in policies that are win-win for everyone concerned.

How can anyone make an intelligent decision from a place of ignorance? It is one thing to not know what questions to ask, but in this day of Goggle one need only enter a few words and a wealth of information is immediately available. Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn. Making uninformed decisions is a disservice to the voters who placed in their elected officials with their trust and faith. From my meeting with a Manatee County commissioner I feel confident that he and his fellow county commissioners will do their best to make informed decisions.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

A Modest Proposal



Dear Attorney Persson:

Let me respond unequivocally.  The very first time that I, as a member of the P+Z Board, saw the seventy pages of data submitted as Resolution 2011-01, was when I downloaded it from the Town’s web site on March 4, 2011.  Attorney Stroud had appeared before the Board a couple of times with an overview presentation  --  but no hard data had been covered.  Rest assured that had she done so I would have brought up the same points I am making now.  It now develops that our Town had already submitted another version of the data to DCA for its review, several months ago.

Aside from the overall thrust of what direction the body politic has in mind, I am especially concerned at this time with the matters dealing with density on our island, so my overall review has been limited..

As you are probably well aware, prior to this gambit by the Key Club, the density projections assured those who read the existing Comprehensive Plan  --  that only two single-family homes could be built on Islandside.  As for Harbourside, it was projected that 22 additional dwelling units could be built.

These estimates contributed to the other calculations in the Comprehensive Plan that showed the time for evacuation of our island in the event of catastrophe.  This projected time, which used as a given that a total of 276 new units island-wide, was barely within the allowable limits.

In contrast to this number it has been publicized that the Key Club, by its own estimates, projected that it could build an additional eighteen hundred new units on its properties.

Of course this was not permitted, since our zoning restricted the available units within the PD and GPD, solely to the “development sites.”  However, the Town, in its wisdom, has excised these words  --  thus allowing additional density.  For reference, please see: Chapter 158, Section 158.009, Description of district and district policies, subsection (L).

As to my recent comments, the high-lit with strike-outs Table 3, Page 19 of the Future Land Use Element tries to massage some of the numbers which contribute to “VACANT LAND AVAILABLE FOR FUTURE DWELLING UNITS.” In RM-3 it shows 26.05 acres with 3 du/ac to now have 43 instead of the original 78.  (But 26 times 3 is still 78.)  In RM-4 it shows 26.98 acres with 4 du/ac to now have 86 units.  (But 27 times 4 is 108.)  In RH-6, 10.35 times 6 is 62, not 31 as shown.  But these are minor variances.

In MUC-1, formerly PD, it shows 30 possible new units  --  but this is far from accurate.  I have tried unsuccessfully to ascertain exactly how many units are contained within the limits of the Harbourside development, but there are still 269 acres of non-housing land available there for future Key Club proposals.  So with the above revised  Chapter 158, Section 158.009, Description of district and district policies, subsection (L). the sky seems to be the limit as to what can be built.

The other glaring and obvious discrepancy lies in MUC-2, formerly the GPD.  Here the original projection for two (2) single-family units now shows 158 new units.  This entirely ignores the additional 196 tourism (plus the 158) units that have already been approved  for the Key Club expansion development.

So it results that the total effect of the change to the above language in our zoning has opened the door to a massive increase in density on our island.  This attempts to bypass our Town Charter, which is very explicit.  Article II, Town Commission, amended.  Comprehensive Plan for town, Section 22 (b).  The present density limitations provided in the existing comprehensive plan as adopted March 12, 1984 shall not be increased without the referendum approval of the electors of Longboat Key.

In any event, and without any serious attempt on my part to quantify the matter, the massive proposed increase in our island’s population will blow our Evacuation Time completely out of the water.  Absent a new bridge or tunnel directly to the mainland, we will be hazardously impacted. Witness the current traffic on our island, which is so tenuously connected to the mainland through two already impacted islands and two drawbridges, prone to malfunction.  And, watch the existing traffic piling up!

I brought this to our Board in the attached communication to Ms. Simpson and made a part of the background data submitted to the P+Z Board at its last meeting..

I also brought this matter up to Ms. Simpson with the request that the P+Z Board discuss the matter before the Commission takes action  --  and her response was :

The proposed amendments will be brought to the Board for full adoption once they have been transmitted to DCA and the send back their formal comments. At that time Board discussion is appropriate.

For full adoption?  What about discussion?

Why?  Is not the P+Z Board the curator and motivator in the matters dealing with the Comprehensive Plan?  Mr. Person, this is frustrating.  Unless someone explains to me wherein my conclusions are wrong, I would be grateful for a response. It is inconceivable that our Town would proceed along this course while it is so obvious to me, a non-attorney, that these matters are in direct conflict with our existing development controls.

In my humble opinion it is ostrich-like to assume that nobody but me is aware of these details. Maybe I will not live long enough for this matter to be finally adjudicated, but I do not plan to just ignore it.

With kindest personal regards,

Bradford Saivetz

Frog in the Fryingpan


Put a frog in a fryingpan of hot water and it will immediately jump out. Put a frog in a pan of cool water and gradually heat the water, the frog will stay put until it is soup. We are I fear proverbial frogs in a fryingpan. Our community is more and more rapidly being commerciaslized, yet it appears we either do not notice, or we are so disconnected for this community that we simply do not care what happens, just as the frog does not notice the steadily warming water.

I wonder how many Island Side property owners would have bought into the Longboat ambiance and perceived investment security of this island if the Key Club, in its expanded form had been already in existence. Somehow I feel the people who live at Island Side might have looked elsewhere for a more spacious and relaxed environment. A place where their investment would be in more caring hands.

I have several friends in Bay Isles who are worried that the planning and zoning board, in concert with the commission, will legislate a massive expansion at Avenue of the Flowers Plaza that might, if we are lucky, include an assisted living facility. It is not clear what height and density increases are being contemplated by the planning and zoning board. Of course all this is being done without the participation of the owners of the properties in question. It might be a good idea to find out what they want. Has anyone found out why all the businesses at Avenu of the Flowers left?

Blackpoint Partners, who have some sort of connection with Loeb Partners, who are trying to increase the Key Club land value at Island Side, are still planning a 1600 unit condominium addition on the golf course at Bay Isles as Blackpoint Partners states is their intention on their web site:  Blackpoint states they will be able to expand their presence on Longboat by changing the development codes. It appears from the actions of our town government that Blackpoint knows what it is talking about.


I attended a party in the village this evening where people are in shock at the thought of a 7 story mixed-use structure that covers several properties in addition to Whitney Plaza at the entrance to one of the most charming enclave of old Florida homes on the west coast. Wouldn't it be appropriate to ask residents what they want instead of forcing commercial development on them? I have always believed that local government was supposed to be responsive to its constituents. Here the residents are not asked.

6 story mixed-use structure

What if the present town government gets its way and abandons a comprehensive plan that, up until 2008, has been responsible for making Longboat one of the premier residential retirement communities in America? 75% or more of our residents are retired so let's not quibble about being a retirement community. Do the people on the commission and the planning board believe that people will spend more time on the island if they greatly expand commercial development on the island? One need only look at the percent of part-time residents to see that that is unlikely. Who then will patronize all the new stores and hotels that are envisioned by the current government? If you lived in Sarasota or Bradenton would you fight the traffic over the bridges just to go to a small community with a few more stores and no beaches? If you were an investor would you build a six story strip-mall on the north end with its seasonal sparse population that did not ever support Whitney Plaza? A few people clambering for more development do not fill stores and shops.

Perhaps a decade from now, if ever, investors will take a gamble and build more commercial space on Longboat. Then retailers will have to be persuaded to open business where more than half the people leave for 8 months a year. Businesses on Longboat have not failed because of a lack of store space. They failed for lack of year-round business.

Meanwhile our local government has not introduced a single initiative to expand social amenities in our community to attract home buyers to a more inviting environment.

For an in-depth analysis of what is happening please goto:
 http://lbk-folk.blogspot.com/2011/03/modest-proposal.html

Foot Notes:

Blackpoint: http://www.blackpt.com/portfolio_LongboatKeyClub.html "refinanced property’s $45 million non-performing loan under a new lender, installed new management and developed master plan to add approximately 1,600 new units to density."

Whitney Plaza"Consensus was reached by planning board members at their Tuesday, March 15 regular meeting in making plan changes that would allow Whitney Beach Plaza to rise from its current one-to-five stories with 65 feet of height in total. The board also agreed that a developer coming forward with a project should be allowed to include plans for a residential component, as long as it doesn’t exceed 20% of the total project." 

Bay Isles: "The board directed town special counsel attorney Nancy Stroud to come back with potential plan amendments that would allow for a residential aspect of a town-center overlay district, which would include Avenue of the Flowers and land east through parcels along Bay Isles Road, such as the Longboat Key Public Tennis Center and the religious institutions. Stroud suggested a policy that would allow the town to provide fiscal incentives for proper revitalization to both areas when funds are available. Although the planning board isn’t looking for a new residential component along Bay Isles Road, consensus was reached to see if developers might come back with a senior-living facilities component." 

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

A Need for Pluralism in Government


The 2000 census had 65% of our population over 65 and a median age of 67. The median age of homes in Longboat Key was 22 years, with 4% of them rented. 60% or more of the homes on Longboat are not occupied most of the year. An unknown percentage of our homes are homesteaded by residents who summer off-island, which adds to our seasonal fluctuation in population. 75% of our residents are retired.

The 2010 census may show that we and our homes are 10 years older now. The median age may be considerably older. The average home age will most likely exceed 30 years. We already know that Longboat lost more than 2,400 residents between 2005 and 2010. It will be interesting to see if the percentage of non-resident ownership has increased. This will be a good indicator of the direction our community is headed in the next few years. We may want to find some way of reversing these trends.

I grew up in Larchmont NY. I recently returned to my childhood community and found a vibrant prospering community where the average house is perhaps 60 to 80 years old. The homes are well maintained and worth a fortune relative to their size and age. I mention Larchmont to counter certain politicians who tell us our community is aging and we need hotels and more stores to being us back to life. By comparison Larchmont is a fossil compared to the age of our homes.

I believe that certain business interests along with a clique of pro-developer, pro-business expansion minded residents have formed an informal political entity on this island that discourages anyone, who is not of their ilk, from running for public office or town boards.

I have talked to dozens of residents over the past three years, urging them to run for commission. Alas, not a single resident wanted to confront the political colossus that has emerged within our community. Several residents have said that they did not want to put out the effort only to end up as an ineffectual member of the commission or a board, who is ignored or treated rudely by those who are currently in power. The result is that the voice of those residents who do not want to see our residential community commercialized has, for the present, been effectively silenced.

If the current pro-developer, pro-business majority on the commission and the planning and zoning board want to thwart a robust and healthy political process on this island, one need only look at this year's non-election to see that is exactly what is occurring.

My questions to you are threefold. One, do you believe that having elections where no one runs are beneficial to our community? Two, do you believe that having a "politically correct" commission and planning board promotes new innovations? Three, do you feel that increasing commercial development will have a beneficial impact on the value of your home?

We are currently creating a political vacuum on this island as a result of the ascendancy to power of a cohesive pro-commercialization political group. This group of people have effectively choked-off any political opposition to the degree that no one is willing to challenge incumbents. Favored candidates can count on the support of several community organizations and groups.

Positions on the commission and the various community boards look like a game of musical chairs. Commissioners reach term-limits and return to positions on boards they had previously occupied. We have ex-commissioners returning to office a second time. It is difficult to find a new face in the crowd.

For perhaps the last five years an island clique has been forming a miniature Rolodex of political players who all think along similar lines. Our community has reached a point where no one, who is not in the group, wants to occupy positions on the commission or the various boards.

Anyone who is considering running for office is confronted by a unified group that now controls our community's politics. If you do not agree with the group then you will be confronted by a daunting opposition that has proven to be quite effective if one looks at recent elections and board appointments.

Is having in effect a single political party good for Longboat? If people with intelligent new ideas are discouraged from participating in local government, then how will beneficial change come about? Are we better off having a small group of like-minded people control who is allowed to serve in local government? Does it trouble you that no one offers to run for office, election after election? Last year was different. The Key Club played a major role in our election process. The results demonstrated that commercial interests have finally managed to gain control of town government.

The next mayor of Longboat Key should be, by tradition, Bob Seikman. However, Comm. Seikman does not appear to be part of "the group" and more than one columnist has written about who the next mayor may be. If commissioner Seikman is denied being mayor then all I have written in this piece will be in a sense prophetic.

I feel I need to repeat that I believe the town government needs to focus on the issues that confront our residents such as public amenities and activities, better utilization of public spaces, improving our community image and better community marketing instead of the interests of a few business owners. Certainly businesses on our island need as much help as we can give them. If the commission wanted to immediately help our local business owners, they would not force them to pay taxes for beach dredging as if they were located in the "A" beach tax district, when all but a few are located east of GMD in the "B" tax district. If I owned a business on Longboat I would feel singled out.

Where is our commission when it comes to our taxpaying residents? I see most of the commission's efforts directed towards the Key Club and expanding commercial interests on Longboat, while the rest of our community is left to languish in economic despair.