Home

    Among the interesting conversations I have had concerning my Dec. 20 column laying out some positive dimensions for growth in Venice are encouraging ones with city council members John Moore and Vicki Taylor.

    Moore and Taylor believe that the city is likely to use the current period of slowdown in construction to consider future directions for the city’s growth. Moore points out that the city is being guided by a strategic planning session held in 2005, which led to some architectural and height overlay districts, among other dimensions of planning.

    A similar session is planned for March 2007, which could lead to consideration of items we encouraged, such as an overall design for the city including the emerging North Venice area, additional “overlay districts” (controlling height and type construction), the Seaboard district, the airport and the Business 41 commercial corridor.

    Moore confirmed information I had heard that a number of projects, including several high-cost condominiums approved on the island, are currently on hold.

    I understand the Villa Lago project property in the Laurel Road area is for sale. The Nokomis Avenue project on the island, replacing a nursing facility, which city planners and observers feel is one of the most attractive projects in design and scale, is also stalled.

    The gray cloud of slowdown has a silver lining in that the rapid growth demands of the past have led to piecemeal planning and approvals. With some reduced pressure, Taylor and Moore feel that city officials can review how they would like to proceed in the future.

    I have been asked by people interested in preserving what I call shorthand the “Nolen Vision” of Venice, why they meet resistance when they speak about activities in other cities, or types of controlled-growth planning.

    Comments were that responses from some city elected and appointed planners to such suggestions is, “We don’t want to be another (fill in the blank — e.g. Naples, Winter Park, etc.).” A suggestion about “New Urbanism” was met by a recital of pitfalls of such planning.

    What seems to be missing is an appreciation of learning from others’ experience — not to replicate each feature of another city or planning strategy, but to see what concepts might be useful for Venice. The goal should not be to fend off suggestions about models of planning, but to learn from them.

    The Venice Area Historical Society, chaired by Betty Intagliata, has recently presented two experts on Nolen and planning for future growth in Venice. VAHS has scheduled a conference, open to the public, Feb. 10: “New Directions in Planning and Urban Design.” Moore reports that council, planning commission and staff are interested in participation.

    That is encouraging, because I found many citizens to be responsive to previous speakers’ suggestions, but in a sampling of conversations with Mayor Fred Hammett and John Simmonds I felt, primarily defensiveness, not openness. I believe, however, a “moderate growth” majority on this council is possible.
    Council, planning commission and staff are also exploring the possibility of site visits to other cities. With Florida’s Sunshine Law a factor in holding informal meetings, a method to make such visits compatible with the law is under study by the city attorney. I hope it can be done. There is much that might be shared in each direction.

    Although there are certainly notable exceptions, I feel that some resistance to learning from other areas that has led to poorer decisions in the past results in part from the insularity and provincialism of some community leaders. It is, I think, a partial answer to the question posed about defensiveness.

    We have some key participants in developing public policy who have had very limited experience outside Venice and a few years elsewhere in Florida, generally in college.

    Such “roots” are valuable in appreciating community — for example, the multigenerational ties of well respected public officials like State Sen. Lisa Carlton and County Commissioner Jon Thaxton, have allowed them to demonstrate their commitment to preserving the environment and the Florida ecosystem.
    For others, however, some time spent learning from topflight talent in the practice of law, business or government in other areas of the country is sorely missing. This has led some to have a “world view” based on what their friends talk about at a local civic club and is tied to a mentality of “we know best what is right for Venice because we went to high school here.”

    But the world around us is changing.

    A conference on baby boomers held by Gulf Coast Community Foundation of Venice showed that their primary concern was growth. Joe Barbetta, a strong advocate of shaping growth to the needs of the larger community, not just developers, was elected to the county commission. Newcomer Ernie Zavodnyik made a strong showing in the city council election as a growth moderate.

    The public supports some county control over annexations, leading to the joint planning agreement between Venice and the county that is virtually complete.

    Now is a good time for our planning leaders to take a fresh look at the future.

  Ed Martin welcomes comments at:  Ed@insideveniceflorida.com

Webmaster

 Website Designed and Maintained by

Joe@McKee.net

Copyright © 2006 - 2007 Ed Martin, InsideveniceVeniceflorida.com