Fix it now

Alex Pickett interviewed Taryn Sabia, the co-founder of Tampa’s Urban Charrette, for this week’s print edition.  Sabia, 29, and fellow architect Adam Fritz have held a series of workshops on how to improve Tampa’s urban design, transit systems and overall sustainability. These workshops, or “charrettes,” have brought together a broad range of stakeholders, including Tampa city councilmembers Linda Saul-Sena and John Dingfelder, the Hillsborough County Planning Commission, University of South Florida professors, Tampa Bay Builders Association members and developers like Daren Booth (of The Heights project) and Greg Minder (of SkyPoint). Read the entire interview here.

CL: How do you get the masses excited about sustainability and urban design?

Sabia: We try to show examples where great projects have been done in other places. Giving people a visual definition of what density is, because density is a very difficult concept to understand. … You want people to see that if you put density in particular places — and you do it purposely and if it’s designed well — then great things can happen. You can start to have vibrant centers for your neighborhood. Your neighborhood is actually protected, because you’re putting density where it belongs. You’re grouping density in areas to support retail, shops and restaurants. You need a certain amount of density in order to support a certain amount of retail. If it’s done well, it can be a really wonderful thing for neighborhoods. It’s something that attracts people from other places but also gives the neighborhood itself an area where people can meet, gather, do things and not have to drive a half hour outside of their neighborhood to get the things they need.

Does this mean you want to stack us all in little apartments downtown?

The idea is that we don’t make everyone do that, but that we provide choices. We’re not suggesting that everyone has to live in small apartments and not have their suburban homes. It’s not about one or the other; it’s about accommodating all of them and connecting all of them, so people aren’t so separated.

It’s also about managing our growth for the future. Because, inevitably, density is coming. People are coming, and large numbers of them. We need to think about how we’re going to deal with that.

What should we focus on first?

Transit is absolutely at the forefront. TBARTA [Tampa Bay Area Regional Transportation Authority] has just started doing public workshops. … It is so vital that people get out and speak, let their voice be heard and write letters to the TBARTA board and city council members. … People look and say, “Well, that is the 2050 plan.” But it’s not. We could have these things in 10 years if we push and fight for them. Let our elected officials know that we not only support it, that we support it now.

Read the entire interview here.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

What is the easiest way to assuage a community’s concerns over a lack of economic development? Hand out free money, apparently. But money is not free, and the cost to our local communities is far worse than the perceived benefits.

In all the meetings I’ve seen for economic development, businesses sum up their needs from government simply: GET OUT OF THE WAY. They don’t need a handout; they just need government to stop holding their heads under the water. Unfortunately for businesses, this desire to let the free market operate does not create increased government power and influence; it does not require people to appear before the city council or administration on bended knee; it does not require an increased bureaucracy, or more taxes. This no-cost option merely allows for basic American competitiveness.

Despite these pleas Tampa economic development always takes the same tenor: regulate the heck out of everyone, driving up costs in both time and money, and then dribble back about 10 percent in the form of loans or, worse, grants. It is this economic waste that has crippled many of our neediest communities, but the pattern continues.

In these communities, an oft-repeated pattern emerges. Citizens reach a point where they have had enough. They feel as if the city has abandoned them, and they get together form a community group and slam into the bureaucracy. Eventually the powers that be extend a piece branch and offers to do economic analysis, followed by a plan. It is somewhere in this line of thought were thing go awry, plans drag out and we start to see government take a disruptive role. It does so in the most subtle of ways, starting with “let’s work together” as they actively encourage the community group to apply for grants and to run civic programs. While many say this is the city empowering local residents, what results is a corrupting of the organization, with the community group’s bread buttered by the bureaucratic mess.

It is important to understand that these community groups had nothing but the best of intentions, like many idealists when they first go to work for government. But the lure of power and money make simple fixes unattractive.

Here is the simplest example: A city creates, let’s say, a facade program aimed at encouraging businesses to fix up the outside of their structures. The incentive comes in the form of grants or loans to accomplish this. Local civic groups are quickly drafted to develop the criteria for how the facades should look or who qualifies for the loans/grants. And, of course, administering the program and getting a cut of the money they are disbursing for “overhead and administrative costs.”

The city takes a cut using the same rationale. All of a sudden, $100,000 in taxes aimed at improving a community’s aesthetics is now $80,000. (Of course, this is exactly what happened in 2004-2005 in West Tampa using federal grant money, which comes from our taxes. You can download an excruciatingly dull description of the program from 2004 planning documents in this .pdf file; just search for the term “facade” and you will find the description.)

Now let’s say a business proposes cutting regulations instead. Well, there is no money in that for the city. It would lose money on permit fees. It would need less staff to review permits and perform inspections or to administer programs. At the same time, the community group can’t collect money for programs that requires no administration, so this no-cost idea is quickly killed.

Under this scenario, the community suffers as well. In line for the government program dollars, the groups that administer these programs feel that if they stand up to the city to change the rules or make things work better the programs will be eliminated. Once-vocal community groups quickly are silenced.

Editor’s note: Spencer Kass is one of our regular guest bloggers who writes about urban and Tampa city government issues. He is a principal in Landmarc Realty in West Tampa.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

A first step: Changing city codes is no easy task — just ask St. Pete city planners who overhauled a large portion of St. Pete’s zoning codes last year — but it is possible. In fact, Tampa city officials have already heard residents’ calls for change. Last year, city planners selected Seminole Heights for a pilot project on “form-based codes” that will rely on community input for the future look of the area. A series of public meetings will be held nearly every month for the next year (check out the schedule here); interested citizens from other neighborhoods should attend.

Resources
The Urban Charrette, a group of young design and architecture professionals seeking a better design-driven urban area, urbancharrette.org or e-mail info@urbancharrette.org

Bookmark It