"Home Ownership in America Has Collapsed"

An interesting discussion from "On Point" about the collapse of the housing market, and the dilemma facing Millennials - the generation that is larger than the Baby Boomers, now coming to maturity.

Why Homeownership Isn't Catching Up With The Rest Of The Economy

Home ownership rates are at a 20-year low.  Millennials and more aren’t buying. We’ll look at what American’s think now about owning a home.

Realtor Helen Hertz stands in front of one of her listings in Cleveland Heights, Ohio Friday, Oct. 24, 2014. Hertz, a real estate agent for more than three decades, has seen firsthand what has happened to the market in the wake of the recession and foreclosure crisis. (AP)

Do you want to own a home?  A house?  A condo?  After everything the country and the economy have been through, fewer Americans own a home today than at any time since 1995.  Almost twenty years.  The headlines on housing – if you care about owning – are dire.  “Home Ownership in America has Collapsed,” is typical.  Some look at Millennials as the no-shows in the market.  Millennials have their reasons.  So do a lot of others right now.  There’s still that American dream.  All cozy in your own home.  But it’s not everyone’s dream.  This hour On Point:  Home ownership in America.

– Tom Ashbrook

Guests

Susan Wachter, professor of real estate and finance at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School. (@Susan_Wachter)

Derek Thompson, senior editor at The Atlantic. (@DKThomp)

From Tom’s Reading List

The Atlantic: Homeownership in America Has Collapsed—Don’t Blame Millennials — ” In the last 20 years, homeownership has fallen less for young people than for any other age group under 64. Today’s historically low homeownership rate isn’t the result of the cheapest generation abandoning the housing market. It’s their older cousins, Generation-X, who are really running for the exit.”

New York Times: More Renters, Less Risk for Wall St. – “Tightening mortgage rules would no doubt make it more difficult to buy and sell homes. It would lead to more renters and fewer homeowners. That might be worth it, though. Germany is doing fine with a homeownership rate of 45 percent, compared with about 65 percent in the United States, which is actually down from a peak of near 70 percent in 2004.”

National Journal: Four Ways to Help Millennials Break into the Tight Housing Market — “When the housing sector slows down or stalls (see: The Great Recession), it drags down the health of the overall economy. The debate now among economists and industry advocates, like Stevens, is whether millennials will eventually enter the housing market as they age, or whether there’s been a permanent shift that has young people no longer interested in buying homes as prolifically as their parents did.”

Mullet and Wild Pig

 A Celebration and Tasting of Wild-Caught Local Proteins 

and...

A Walking Tour of walkable Pine Avenue 

-- an urban restoration

Please join Cathy Antunes and Andy Mele for a lunch of fresh mullet fillets prepared three ways, and Manatee County wild pig, USDA certified.

Noon at The Sandbar Restaurant, 100 Spring Ave., Anna Maria (from Sarasota it can take 45 minutes or longer, so best to carpool).

Cost should run $10.00 - 15.00.  It'll be worth it!      RSVP andymele@mac.com

Exit the Mall: Enter the Design District

A Bet on Miami Signals Luxury Retail’s Urban Shift 

Investors Turn Focus to Outside the Mall Environment

Buckminster Fuller’s “Fly's Eye” dome in Palm Court in Miami’s Design District. LALA PEREIRA/MIAMI DESIGN DISTRICT ASSOCIATES

By
ARIAN CAMPO-FLORES and
ROBBIE WHELAN
Oct. 28, 2014 12:52 p.m. ET

MIAMI— General Growth Properties Inc. and Ashkenazy Acquisition Corp. are paying $280 million for a 20% stake in the company that owns much of this city’s Design District, betting on the emerging luxury-retail neighborhood as some 50 brands prepare to open new stores.

The deal with Miami Design District Associates, announced Tuesday, comes at a time when malls are growing slowly and luxury shops on busy urban streets like Fifth Avenue in Manhattan or Michigan Avenue in Chicago—sometimes called “high street” retail—remain bright spots in the retail industry.

Luxury brands such as Valentino, Tiffany and Roberto Cavalli increasingly have been looking for more than one location in many urban markets in the U.S., and “don’t necessarily want to grow in a mall environment,” said Andrew Goldberg, a vice chairman with brokerage CBRE’s retail practice. “They’re most comfortable in a high-street market.”

Open-air luxury-retail projects are popping up in other cities as well. Last month, a developer opened the first phase of the $1 billion Buckhead Atlanta project, with leases signed by Jimmy Choo, Dior and Christian Louboutin near new luxury apartments. This past spring, retailers including Hermès, Cartier and Tom Ford signed leases to open shops at the River Oaks District, a walkable outdoor shopping center expected to open next year about a mile from Houston’s Galleria mall.

General Growth, the nation’s second-largest mall owner, has been especially bullish since the downturn about buying urban storefronts, betting that luxury tenants are poised to grow faster outside of mall settings. Chief Executive Sandeep Mathrani said on an investor call Tuesday he could envision increasing the portion of the company’s assets in urban property to 15% in the next five years, up from 5% today.

The Design District presents “a very rare opportunity where you can buy an entire downtown and curate it the way you would a brand new mall,” he said.

MDDA, which owns about 70% of the Design District north of downtown, is transforming a 10-square-block area into an upscale retail, culinary and cultural destination. The company is a partnership between developer Craig Robins, one of the pioneers in remaking South Beach, and L Real Estate, a private-equity fund in which luxury powerhouse LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA is a minority investor.

Miami’s luxury-retail market has expanded steadily for decades but has picked up in the past two years, fueled by foreign buyers who have snapped up posh condos downtown and an influx of wealthy tourists from Latin America and elsewhere.



A mural in Miami’s Design District, which has become a magnet for art and cuisine. MIAMI DESIGN DISTRICT ASSOCIATES

“Miami is an international market draw now,” said Faith Hope Consolo, chairman of the retail group of Douglas Elliman Real Estate. “When a retailer is expanding, the second place they go after New York now is Miami.”

Density can save open space but 2050 plan privatizes it

From a 2050 Plan comment thread:

Maynard Hiss The 2050 residential dwelling unit densities are at .2 - .4 units per acre or 64 - 128 units per sq mile. The downtown core areas have densities Downtown Residential Overlay District (DROD) densities can average 50 dwelling units per acre, but can go as high as 200 dwelling units per acre. The average of 50 dwelling units per acre would be the equivalent to 32000 per sq mile, however, a much smaller area is covered by the district than a sq mile. In other words one sq mile of 2050 dwelling units may sit on less than an acre of downtown Sarasota, saving 639 acres of open space.

The ironic thing is, there are lots of open space requirements for the 2050 area low density in the rural area where all land is privatized and monopolized by the development or home owners association, and no one else is allowed to use it. For example, a developer must set aside 600 acres of open space for 400 units, but is not required to give public access to the area. Many of the functions in the 2050 developments including most types of agriculture and water conservation are not protected, and natural areas are fragmented. 

Whereas in the highest density urban areas in the city of Sarasota where people use land most effectively there are no real requirements to assure high quality public open space to support the downtown high and medium density or even low density development. Note the high density developments share not only their open space with the 2050 low density residents they also share it with everyone else in the county and region and millions of tourist and their land guzzling cars.

Furthermore the open space in the downtown is often separated from the developments by a wall of 5 or more lanes of traffic, and the space itself is little more than a huge parking lot, which fragments the open space into tiny pieces of grass. Open space in the downtown is often not open space but instead covered with public cultural buildings such as auditoriums, art centers, garden clubs, orchestra halls, performing arts centers, all of which are not allowed in the 2050 public open spaces.

Florida regulators helpless to manage sprawl

Cathy Antunes:

In a letter to the DEO, 1000 Friends of Florida stated Sarasota County’s 2050 changes do not conform with Florida statutes 163.3177(1)(a)9, 163.3177(1)(b) and 163.3177(1)(f). 

My conversation with DEO about 1000 Friends of Florida’s legal objections confirmed the agency’s inability to intercede, not because 1000 Friends of Florida’s objections were incorrect but because the DEO has no power to enforce standards against sprawl. 

While The Greater Sarasota Chamber of Commerce and County Commission point to the DEO’s approval of 2050 plan changes as proof of their innocuous nature, they fail to acknowledge how the DEO cannot enforce standards against economically and environmentally degrading sprawl development.. . . 

Careful land-use planning sets the table for community prosperity, but recently approved 2050 changes are inconsistent with legal standards designed to prevent sprawl and ensure our quality of life.

Nelson on the forces behind our housing choices

Arthur C. Nelson teaches planners. His work, it is said, offers a comprehensive view of how the American Dream is changing and why.

This brief set of slides outlines his thesis that the American people will grow rapidly between now and 2050. Nelson estimates the nation will reach 500 million by that year. As the population grows, it will seek more attached housing, and more apartments. More seniors, fewer children, more demand for transportation that will get people to urban centers. Less demand for suburbs.

Here's a brief summary of his thesis that age and demographics will change how people choose housing:

We also know that the propensity of people to buy homes increases as they age, and then it begins to tail off. People will buy homes to build families, then that propensity falls off until about they’re in their late sixties and early seventies, when more people begin selling off their homes instead of buying homes. That is one of the messages I have in my report. This age group between 35 and 60 is the most likely age group to buy homes. They have the means (money), they have the motive (space for the family), and they have the opportunity with new subdivisions and housing opportunities.

. . . changing demographics in combination with changes in home mortgage finance will reduce the rate of homeownership in California by up to 5 percent from 2010 levels and perhaps by as much as 10 percent over the long term. A 5 percent reduction represents a market condition where three-quarters of the demand for new housing in the state’s largest metropolitan planning organization (MPO) areas will be for rental housing. This demand should lead to an increase in existing residential units being used to house multiple or intergenerational households as well as to a variety of hybrid or new housing formats, such as accessory dwelling units or new nontraditional multifamily housing options.

Bad Sarasota County Math

Cathy Antunes on the fiction created by the Sarasota County Planning Department:

Remember the scene from the movie “My Cousin Vinny”, where Vinny is asking the witness if the laws of physics cease to exist on his stove?  Sarasota County residents should be asking the County Commission and Planning Department why they believe the laws of supply and demand cease to exist in Sarasota County.  

Susan Holik: "Builders run the show"

Reposted from the SH-T:

Monday's letters

Published: Monday, October 27, 2014 at 1:00 a.m.

Last Modified: Friday, October 24, 2014 at 6:28 p.m.

Builders run the show

Dismay doesn't begin to describe my reaction to attending my first Sarasota County Commission "hearing" on the 2050 resource management plan. Builders sought a green light to develop rural land east of Interstate 75 without constraint.

All interested individuals were invited to comment but, given the board's discernible disinterest, may as well have saved their collective breath.

My husband and I moved to Sarasota a year ago, seduced by its brand: a vibrant, walkable core with great cultural and educational resources and spectacular natural resources. We can walk to stores, movies, the library and restaurants, and shop the farmers' markets for locally grown produce. We were less familiar with Sarasota's local political realities.

Speaker after speaker expressed concern over sprawl, congestion, environmental harm, cost to taxpayers and overbuilding, potentially setting off another destructive bubble. They suggested that builders should instead focus on infill, where infrastructure already exists, no additional environmental havoc can be wreaked and studies demonstrate all generations prefer to live.

The 2050 plan requires "fiscal neutrality," i.e., growth revenue pays for infrastructure costs. Instead, the builders proposed that their designated expert determine the formula for calculating "neutrality." Significantly, neutrality will be determined at the outset and will not be monitored. Affordable housing required under 2050 will be offset against infrastructure costs.

In other words, we don't know the formula but the board is unconcerned: The builders will determine the formula -- and don't need to track it anyway. The taxpayers will take care of it.

Susan Holik

Sarasota

Comment:

Daniel Herriges ·  Top Commenter · Curriculum Developmentat C2 Education Centers

Susan Holik, you're dead-on about 2050. Depressing, isn't it? I would add that the kind of sprawl that folks like Pat Neal seem to be itching to build is essentially incapable of paying for its own infrastructure costs. It's too low-density, hence too many feet of new road, sewer pipe, etc. per taxpaying resident (all of which has to be maintained over time once it's there). This is why the developer community has been so adamant about changes to 2050 that amount to a subsidy for them: they cannot make a profit building single-family subdivisions without (implicit or explicit) taxpayer subsidies. The math pencils out better with infill, but the obstacles there are greater regulatory burdens, NIMBY property owners, and, I sense, an outdated mindset among the developers themselves that sprawl subdivisions where you're completely dependent on your car to get anywhere of interest are the future and the city is the past. How 1980s of them. Never mind that actual, nationwide market trends show the opposite.

End of the revolution

Lasting scars

Re-posted from the SH-T:

After 2050 plan revamp, lingering rancor and potential fallout

Photo taken by Zac Anderson on Monday October 20 Activists gather outside the Sarasota County administration building Monday morning to protest changes to the 2050 growth management plan.

Zac Anderson

By Zac Anderson
zac.anderson@heraldtribune.com

Published: Saturday, October 25, 2014 at 8:01 p.m.

Last Modified: Saturday, October 25, 2014 at 8:01 p.m.

One speaker called it a “betrayal.” Another said Sarasota County commissioners were engaged in a “staggering violation of ethical public service.” A third said it appeared “the fix” was in.

While some degree of conflict seems inevitable, debate over the county's 2050 growth management plan has been especially rancorous. And it could leave lasting scars.

Some predict the 2050 overhaul — it largely came to a close last week after commissioners approved a final batch of revisions — will have political ramifications, while others hope the community can find a better way to talk about such issues going forward.

With demographic experts predicting more than 46,000 people will move to the county over the next decade, more clashes over development are unavoidable in a community that has long struggled with how to manage growth.

Such tensions will animate local politics for years to come and could grow more pronounced as some of the development allowed under 2050 begins.

The changes made over the last two years to the county's rural growth plan will make it easier to develop large swaths of land in eastern Sarasota County.

Landowners have been closely monitoring the revision process, and some are likely to move ahead now that the regulations are becoming less restrictive.

But they are also sure to encounter continued resistance from environmentalists and growth control advocates, who are bitter over how the 2050 debate unfolded.

Indeed, few issues have more sharply divided the community in recent years.

Kerry Kirschner, a former Sarasota mayor and executive director of the pro-business Argus Foundation, said he was struck by the “nastiness and lack of collegiality” in the 2050 public hearings.

A number of speakers at last Wednesday's hearing on the third and final round of changes to the plan accused county commissioners of being in the pocket of developers who donate to their campaigns.

Others predicted widespread environmental destruction and rampant overdevelopment.

Kirschner said many of the comments were over the top.

“I think it's distrust and, quite honestly, fear. So many people have moved here from someplace else and many moved here because they didn't like the environment in which they were living,” he said. For instance, he said, one man who spoke Wednesday said he came from Houston and did not want Sarasota County to develop in a similar manner.

“God bless him, I don't want to live in Houston either,” Kirschner joked, before adding that he believes such fears are misplaced.

But while Sarasota County may be a long way from becoming Houston, critics of the 2050 overhaul say they remain justified in feeling angry and frustrated.

Sarasota architect and growth control advocate Bill Zoller said he was surprised that the final 2050 hearing was “as genteel as it was” considering that “everybody felt completely discounted, disregarded and abused.”

Zoller noted that the county began the process of revising 2050 — adopted more than a decade ago as a compromise that allowed more intense development on rural lands but mandated higher standards — by holding a series of meetings with developers to get their complaints about the plan. That process excluded the public and started “on the completely wrong foot with a tin ear.”

The meetings that followed contained few chances for the public to truly influence the debate, he said.

Those concerned about the 2050 revisions also took issue with a controversial report, commissioned by the county, that blasted the plan. And they protested the dismissal of former county administrator Randall Reid, who was viewed as taking a more deliberate approach to reviewing 2050.

“They left our side completely alienated, absolutely alienated, but they didn't care,” Zoller said.

Those hard feelings could carry over into future conflicts as some of the new 2050 projects break ground.

After a lull during the recession, interest in developing rural properties governed by the 2050 plan is starting to pick up. And the Fruitville Road corridor may see the most immediate impacts.

The Villages of Lakewood Ranch South — which covers 5,500 acres between Fruitville Road and University Parkway east of Interstate 75 — is approved for 5,144 homes and a number of smaller projects are in the works for the area.

Among those testifying at Wednesday's 2050 hearing were three people who own land along Fruitville, all of whom supported the plan revisions and seemed interested in developing their land.

Also attending was Sarasota attorney Jim Turner, whose family owns the expansive Hi Hat Ranch between Fruitville and State Road 72 east of the interstate.

Turner has been a strong advocate for overhauling 2050.

“As to when or if Hi Hat would proceed, that remains to be seen,” Turner said. “We certainly don't have anything on the drawing board.”

A series of large housing projects in what is mostly a rural area could further inflame anti-development sentiment.

“Eventually one hopes it will translate into political changes,” Zoller said.

Charles Hines — who voted for most of the nine revisions to 2050 approved Wednesday and has been a steadfast supporter of overhauling the plan — is the only commissioner among the current five who is not term-limited and could stand for re-election.

Hines said that he focused on crafting a workable plan that can accommodate Sarasota County's projected growth in a responsible manner, not politics.

“The political stuff, save that for a year, year-and-a-half from now,” Hines said. “We make decisions every day and you try to do what's right for the community and some people are going to be happy and some people are going to be upset.”

Clashes over growth are nothing new in Sarasota County: The building boom that reached its apex in 2006 sparked citizen initiatives led by Zoller to amend the county's charter and put the brakes on development.

Three growth-related amendments were approved from 2007 to 2008 by wide margins.

They gave the county final approval over developments in land annexed by local cities, required a super majority commission vote for changes to the county's comprehensive plan that increase development density or intensity and required a unanimous vote to move the county's urban service boundary.

But public opinion started to shift shortly after the amendments were passed. The Great Recession wiped away thousands of high-paying construction jobs in the region.

County leaders came under pressure to stimulate the economy, and one strategy was to loosen development regulations.

In recent years the county commission has slashed road impact fees and taken other steps to encourage growth, culminating in the overhaul of the 2050 plan. But public opinion may be shifting again.

Only 11 percent of county residents surveyed in a recent poll cited jobs and the economy as their top concern, down from 18 percent last year. Growth-related issues were the top priority for 37 percent of residents, up from 20 percent in 2013.

Sarasota Audubon Society conservation chairman Wade Matthews cited the figures during Wednesday's hearing in arguing that commissioners were not listening to the public. Concerns about growth could play a big role in future county elections, Matthews predicted.

“The trend is on our side again,” he said. “How it will play out remains to be seen.”

Those who wrote.

We thank all those who wrote in reasoned opposition to the Sarasota County Commission's hijacking of the 2050 Plan. Many wrote, a few kindly shared their work with us:

Charles Pattison, 1000 Friends of Florida 

Cathy Antunes, Activist, founder, 2050 Action Network 

 Lillian Iannarone

Jono Miller, Activist, Adviser  

John Wesley White, former Sarasota County Administrator

Becky Ayech, former Sarasota County Planning Commission member 

Tom Matrullo, journalist, neighborhood activist 

Dan Lobeck, attorney, activist 

More letters 

Anne Kaplan, former head of CONA Sarasota
Bill Zoller, architect, activist
Andre Mele, activist, Waterkeepers.org
Donna Cubit-Swoyer, activist
Mollie Cardamone, former mayor, Sarasota
Vickie Nighswander, candidate for Charter Review
Tina Rowbottom, Englewood resident

Even more letters. . .

Alex Morris
Rob Kaercher
Joy Sica Naylor, Englewood resident

Back to the Cities

From a New York Times article mentioned by Joan Lovell at yesterday's 2050 hearing - Vishaan Chakrabarti, an architect, looks at major shifts in economics and demographics, and concludes that the suburbs are overfunded and possibly doomed:

After nearly 100 years in which suburban growth outpaced urban, millennials are reversing the trend. Once only a fraction of young college graduates wanted to move to cities; now about two-thirds do. 

In the past, many of those who moved to cities in their 20s moved to the suburbs in their 30s, where schools were good, crime was low and family-oriented amenities were plentiful. But those factors are changing in cities, too. Crime has remained low, while public schools and parks have been getting better in many places. 

Meanwhile, the economic challenges of starting a life in the suburbs have grown. Mortgages and car loans are harder to get for millennials, especially as they deal with onerous college debt. Though rents are increasing, it’s easier to rent an apartment in the city and take a bus or subway to work (millennials are also delaying the decision to have kids, which makes compact urban living easier). 

Environmentally, the traumas of Hurricane Katrina and the Deepwater Horizon spill, the geopolitics of imported energy and the perils of domestic energy extraction all argue for a lifestyle that is more resource-efficient, particularly for parents focused on teaching their children to be aware of the world around them. 

The same can be said for social values. Cities were once cast as dying places in contrast to the glowing suburban future; today, the future, inasmuch as it is tied in with issues like cultural diversity and marriage equality, is centered in the urban core.

This market is not about to buy in East Sarasota County

No Picket Fence: Younger Adults Opting to Rent

from the NYT: 

. . . as the economy slowly improves and job growth picks up steam, the millions of 20- and 30-somethings who shared living quarters with friends or nestled in their parents’ basements to ride out the economic shock waves from the Great Recession are beginning to branch out on their own. But they are still largely shut out of the mortgage market.

“A lot of people 10 to 15 years ago who were able or willing to get a mortgage, now they can’t,” said Ian Shepherdson, chief economist for Pantheon Macroeconomics. “They’re caught in an awful Catch-22 trying to get a down payment” now that they’re spending on rent. 

While construction of single-family homes is only halfway back to its prerecession levels, construction of multifamily units — which include both condos and rentals — is at its highest level in 25 years. Apartment construction is exceeding its prerecession peaks in some markets, including Austin, Tex.; the Washington metropolitan area; and San Jose, Calif., according to a recent report from the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard.

Sarasota County approves changes to 2050 over public opposition

3rd round of 2050 changes wins commission's OK

By Zac Anderson

Published: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 at 10:47 p.m.

Last Modified: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 at 10:47 p.m.

The third and final round of changes to Sarasota County's 2050 growth management plan received overwhelming support Wednesday from county commissioners, who brushed aside concerns about environmental harm, sprawl and the cost to taxpayers and predicted the plan would now work more smoothly.. . . .

The 2050 revisions approved Wednesday will allow “hamlet” developments far from the county's urban core to be more densely clustered, decrease the amount of commercial space required in 2050 “villages” and offer incentives for complying with the affordable housing mandate in the plan. They also eliminate requirements that developers looking to build more than one village in a certain region wait 15 years between projects, and that new housing projects be denied if there is already sufficient inventory to meet demand.

More

The County heard from some 50 speakers, the majority came to express concerns about the developer-backed changes to the Plan:

“This isn't a plan for 2050, it's a plan for 1950,” said Longboat Key resident Larry Grossman in arguing the revisions would continue the sprawling, “low density, auto-dependent” development patterns that began a generation ago.

Last minute reminder: Hearing 1:30 pm today!

This is a very important hearing.  Public attendance and input are important.  Please come at 1:30 pm (or whenever you can this afternoon) to attend and give public input.  Citizens are wearing white shirts to signify opposition to these changes.

• 1660 Ringling Blvd  
• County Commission Chambers
• 1:30 pm 

The public will have 5 minutes each for public input, as this is a public hearing. You can simply say "I am opposed to these changes." Be sure to sign a speaker's card and hand it in to the Commission secretary.

The 2050 plan should be strengthened, not weakened.  These changes are making our Urban Service Boundary meaningless. See you there!  -- Cathy

Fragmenting "strategic areas of statewide significance"

Maynard Hiss:

"These are the suitability surfaces for the Florida Ecological Greenways Network. Note the large parcel that is part of the Florida Forever Projects that is west of Myakka River State Park. It is interesting to note all the strategic areas that have been identified as areas of Florida Significance that the 2050 plan identifies as rural residential subdivisions. 

The Sarasota County public passes a big bond issue to protect the strategic conservation lands and the state has identified the strategic areas of the County of statewide significance. And the planning department proposes to destroy it by fragmenting it with rural residential." More here.

Alex Morris on 2050

To the DEO and Sarasota County Commissioners: 

I object to changing Sarasota County’s 2050 Plan. The proposed changes profit a few rent-seeking developers who make major political contributions. Subverting the plan as proposed will harm County citizens’ living standards and quality by sprawling homes into agricultural lands, meanwhile foisting infrastructure costs onto middle and low-income people lacking influence. The amendments will eventually cut employment and economic growth needed for improving residents’ standard of living. 

 Sarasota County Commissioners absolutely refuse to perform due diligence by analyzing the economic costs, benefits and major issues of major economic strategy and fiscal neutrality. Absent this prerequisite, state agencies cannot conscientiously review the County’s proposals. The Board even fires staff daring to suggest prudent business practices, witness its recent Administrator. The corruption of County processes is demonstrated by the way the changes are being rammed through, with little pretense given to public interests. Meanwhile, implicit tax increases are continuing, such as for 2014 property taxes. Please help stop this waste by sending the proposed changes back for revision. 

Alex Morris 

Member, Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Government

See more letters opposing the 2050 Changes:

• 1000 Friends of Florida Letter Opposing Changes to...
• Antunes Letter: 2050 Action Network
• More Letters: 2050 Action Network Opposition
• Even More Letters Against the Changes to the 2050 Plan

"A handful of people driving the bus"

A few statements from Monday's press conference about the joint effort to oppose the County's plan to change the 2050 Plan.

Breaking news - new changes to the changes

The County has just circulated a document that contains several changes to the 2050 Amendments to be voted on on Wednesday.

Use this link to the document. Revisions in yellow.

Alternately, see the 2050 Comp Plan page on Facebook, where a copy of the pdf can be downloaded.

"Our quality of life is at risk" - Cathy Antunes

On Wednesday the County Commission will be voting on amendments to the Sarasota 2050 plan. The original 2050 standards for rural land outside the Urban Service Boundary (USB) were the result of a robust collaboration with community leaders and development interests. Since 2050 was adopted over ten years ago, understanding of best land use practices has improved dramatically. The 2050 changes fail to incorporate these new insights, nor are they the result of community collaboration. Rather, the changes are the result of County meetings with a handful of landowner/developers focused on facilitating development of their rural land.

The proposed 2050 changes ignore the reality of supply and demand. In the unincorporated County, Sarasota’s total potential housing supply (unbuilt) in 2010 was 45,000 units. Since then at least 9,000 units have been added. Add over 10,000 units in the City of Sarasota and 70,000 units in North Port, bringing total potential housing to 134,000 units. Those numbers don’t include the City of Venice and Longboat Key. Sarasota County’s projected ten year housing demand is 16,400 units. With potential units over 134,000 units and a projected demand of 16,400 units , our supply vs demand ratio is over 800%. Cities known for wise planning (like Portland, Oregon) move their USB when they don’t have enough potential housing to meet 10 year demand. With a supply vs demand ratio of 800%, why would the County make it easier to develop rural parcels by weakening 2050 standards? Is the practical result of these undisciplined amendments a de facto elimination of Sarasota’s Urban Service Boundary?

Proposed 2050 changes to walkable design standards enable inefficient subdivision development. Joe Minicozzi studied Sarasota County’s property tax base and found it took subdivision housing 42 years to pay off its infrastructure needs - longer than the life of the infrastructure! Charles Marohn is another planning thought leader who has documented how subdivision style development provides a short term cash benefit to municipal budgets for about eight years, until the long term costs of infrastructure maintenance and public services start kicking in, sinking municipal budgets. This important data is missing from County policy.

Walkable development leads to real value and healthy municipal budgets. Walkability isn’t the mere presence of sidewalks. Walkability provides a lifestyle which enables residents to work, shop, go to school and live in an area with zero to minimal need for a car. Minicozzi found Sarasota’s walkable, mixed use development delivered a much higher tax yield per acre - one that paid off it’s infrastructure costs in as little as three years. Changes to Sarasota 2050 plan eliminate design standards which deliver a truly walkable neighborhood.

Real estate studies show walkable communities are in demand. A1999 study by the Urban Land Institute of four new pedestrian-friendly communities determined that homebuyers were willing to pay a $20,000 premium for homes in them compared to similar houses in surrounding areas. A 2012 Milken Institute study shows strong correlation between walkable urbanism, educated residents, and local GDP. According to their findings “The six highest-ranked walkable urban metropolitan areas have an average GDP per capita of $60,400 . GPD per capita in walkable urban metros is 38 percent higher than the average GDP per capita ($43,900) in the 10 low-ranked walkable urban metros. Incorporating this information into our local planning policy is critical to our economic vitality. Creating walkability where we already have infrastructure, inside our USB, is an obvious economic game changer for Sarasota County. Why are our local leaders focusing on building rural lands instead?

Proposed 2050 changes do not include appropriate analysis of their impact on wildlife habitat, transportation (accidents, evacuation, congestion),and agriculture. Sarasota County’s Land Management Master Plan is out of date. According to the County website, it was due to be updated in 2010. This document is the roadmap for stewardship of our natural resources. Why has it been allowed to languish?

According to 1000 Friends of Florida, 2050 changes do not comply with Florida Law (statutes 163.3177(1)(a)9, 163.3177(1)(b) and 163.3177(1)(f)). These changes benefit a handful of landowners, but those who chose a rural lifestyle and those who work, live and own property west of I75, will ultimately be subsidizing overdevelopment at odds with their own economic well being. 

Enough is enough. Attend the County Commission vote this Wednesday at 1:30 pm, 1660 Ringling Blvd in County Commission Chambers. 

Our quality of life is at risk. Oppose these Ill-conceived policy changes.

Cathy Antunes serves on the boards of the Council of Neighborhood Associations and Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Government. She is organizing the 2050 Action Network, a growing network of civic groups advocating for the preservation and enhancement of Sarasota’s natural resources, economic diversification and quality of life.

-- Reposted from the SH-T