An Obituary for Florida Growth Management

[FayeforCure]

June 3, 2011

An obituary for Florida Growth Management
By Times Wire
Growth management, an imperfect but noble effort to protect Florida from selfishness and greed, died Thursday (June 2, 2011). The cause of death was legislation passed by a Legislature lacking perspective and signed into law by Rick Scott, a new governor ignorant of the state's history and indifferent about its future. . Growth Management was 26 years old. The agency that oversaw it, the now-vanquished Department of Community Affairs, is survived by a handful of relatives not up to carrying on the mission: water management districts decimated by spending cuts; regional planning councils and similar agencies with little authority; and county commissions with neither the will nor the vision to stand up to developers.

Born in 1985, Growth Management was supported in its youth by governors and legislators from both political parties who looked beyond the next election and were determined to keep Florida from strangling itself. The state had been growing wildly for decades, with local governments unwilling to say no to sprawling subdivisions, strip shopping centers and other commercial developments of all shapes and sizes. Huge chunks of undeveloped land disappeared almost overnight, traffic jams became routine, and overcrowded schools became suburban fixtures. Floridians feared their slice of paradise was being lost.

Growth Management was an ambitious attempt to bring some sanity to the mad rush to pave over Florida. It required cities and counties to plan for growth, determine where and how much development would be permitted, and forecast how roads, utilities and other services would be paid for to accommodate it all. Most important, the 1985 law gave the state the authority to approve or reject those plans. And under a concept called concurrency, developers eventually were forced to help pay for new roads, schools and parks to accommodate the growth their projects generated. In the late '80s and early '90s, Growth Management was a given. The question was how to pay for it. Florida never resolved that question, and now the state has given up on the very idea of managing growth.

A proud legacy

Before its demise, Growth Management claimed many successes. Taxpayers did not get stuck with the entire bill for public expenses created by private development. Communities planned better. Many developments moved forward after being redesigned, such as the West­shore area in Tampa. The state appropriately overruled counties that embraced such shortsighted schemes as allowing development closer to the Everglades in Miami-Dade County, dredging a state aquatic preserve to accommodate a marina and hotel in Taylor County, and building hundreds of condos on a mobile home park site on a barrier island in Palm Beach County.

Yet the empty shopping centers, backlog of housing and clogged roads are clear evidence that Growth Management did not choke off development. In fact, over the last four years the Department of Community Affairs approved changes to county plans to allow for more than 1 million new residential units and 2.7 billion square feet of commercial development. With the economic recession and the collapse of the housing market, much of that capacity has yet to be built.

Growth Management had powerful enemies: developers who did not want to pay their fair share; legislators who railed against government regulation; local officials who were too cozy with builders and land-use lawyers. Tom Pelham, who served as secretary of the Department of Community Affairs under two Republican governors and deserves a medal for his commitment to saving Florida, was all but hung in effigy. In the final years, Pelham was the first to acknowledge regulations could be overhauled to more fairly assess road costs and better steer development to urban areas. Rather than fix Growth Management, opponents seized on the economic recession as an opportunity to kill it.

The painful end

Growth Management had been on life support for months as legislators, developers and business groups shamefully repackaged a visionary effort to save Florida into a demon to be slain. Gov. Charlie Crist signaled the beginning of the end in 2009 when he signed the precursor to this year's death sentence. Scott demonized Growth Management as he campaigned for governor last year, and he joined state lawmakers this year in claiming less regulation will create more jobs. They said virtually nothing about creating a quality of life - clean water, clear roads, good schools, nice parks - needed to attract and keep businesses and workers.

A last-ditch plea for a reprieve by former Democratic Gov. Bob Graham, who signed the 1985 legislation into law, and Republican environmentalist Nat Reed failed to sway Scott. Now the state has given up virtually all of its oversight of development and its authority to require developers to help pay for roads, schools and parks. Local governments can pretty much do as they please. Florida has turned the clock back three decades.

Growth Management died quietly. There were no bill-signing ceremonies or front-page headlines to mark its passing. But for Floridians who care about the future of their state, the loss is devastating.




--
***

http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/an-obituary-for-florida-growth-management/1173456

[Dashing Dan]

It worked for a while but by the end, not so much. 

Now that the old law is gone, let's work on something better to take its place, starting with our own mobility plan here in Jacksonville.

[billy]

How about performance or form based zoning?

[Dashing Dan]

I like performance based zoning, and I think that the city should look into it. 

[dougskiles]

I am familiar with form based code but not performance based.  Are they basically the same?  One of the goals of San Marco by Design is to establish a form based code for the north part of San Marco.  I am very optimistic that Mayor-elect Brown's administration will work to a more progressive growth management policy.  The rest of Florida may go up in flames, but that doesn't mean we have to in Jacksonville.

[Dashing Dan]

I misspoke. I think Jacksonville should look at a form based code, not at performance zoning.

[north miami]

Current events simply "Inevitable",as per the Growth Image Narrative,but by no means The Ending,an obituary.

Death notices only need be served on the past five decades "Growth".

[dougskiles]

What Are Form-Based Codes?

Definition of a Form-Based Code
 
Form-based codes foster predictable built results and a high-quality public realm by using physical form (rather than separation of uses) as the organizing principle for the code. They are regulations, not mere guidelines, adopted into city or county law. Form-based codes offer a powerful alternative to conventional zoning.
 
Form-based codes address the relationship between building facades and the public realm, the form and mass of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and types of streets and blocks. The regulations and standards in form-based codes are presented in both words and clearly drawn diagrams and other visuals. They are keyed to a regulating plan that designates the appropriate form and scale (and therefore, character) of development, rather than only distinctions in land-use types.
 
This approach contrasts with conventional zoning's focus on the micromanagement and segregation of land uses, and the control of development intensity through abstract and uncoordinated parameters (e.g., FAR, dwellings per acre, setbacks, parking ratios, traffic LOS), to the neglect of an integrated built form. Not to be confused with design guidelines or general statements of policy, form-based codes are regulatory, not advisory. They are drafted to implement a community plan. They try to achieve a community vision based on time-tested forms of urbanism. Ultimately, a form-based code is a tool; the quality of development outcomes depends on the quality and objectives of the community plan that a code implements.

http://www.formbasedcodes.org/what-are-form-based-codes

[thelakelander]

I agree with the sentiment that we should consider switching to a Form-based code, at least for the urban core. For example, why are we allowing the demolition of 100 year old brick buildings for a suburban Family Dollar metal box and parking lot at the intersection of Myrtle & Kings Rd?  That's a highly visible urban core node in the heart of Jacksonville's most dense and transit dependent neighborhood. Historic preservation aside, everything in areas like that should be built with the buildings having an urban street edge.  Form-Based Codes would ensure new development being designed to be walkable with historic urban core neighborhoods like Durkeeville. Better design also save developers of projects like this a ton of money with the mobility plan and fee.

[Dashing Dan]

Maybe form based code in the core and performance zoning in the fringe?  That might work.