15 replies to this topic

[poonther]

Check out this study:

Florida's Growth

It's a PDF file.

Your thoughts?

Does this FL in 2060 excite you or depress you?

You do have to consider the source is 1000 Friends of FL which is an environmental group.  Nothing wrong w/that, just saying all studies can be a slanted towards a group's point so take some of it w/a grain of salt.

Great density maps.

[sunshine]

It kind of look scary with the colour, it looks like Florida its being take over by diseases. I hope the red area will be more compact than it shows.

[jpl02]

"Surprisingly, in part because of the county’s current patterns of high density development and remaining expanses of agricultural lands, Dade County is not projected to reach build out by 2060."

What are they smoking?? I find it very hard to believe that Dade won't be built out by then. I mean there is agricultural land, but it's not much (as compared to Palm Beach or elsewhere). I understand development is dense, but there is a limit. I think that by 2030 Dade will be built out, if not earlier!

[DaiDreamer5]

I'm surprised at the lack of development in the Panhandle.  I figured it would be rather built up by 2060 due to St. Joe and the like.

[poonther]

DaiDreamer5, on Dec 7 2006, 10:41 AM, said:

I'm surprised at the lack of development in the Panhandle.  I figured it would be rather built up by 2060 due to St. Joe and the like.

Funny you should mention St. Joe, they were one of the sponsors of this study.  I wonder if they wanted their areas to look much less dense to help them market their real estate as a "breath of fresh air and in a rural setting" in opposition to the rest of state being jam packed w/people.  You know so they can say:  Come get away from the over-crowding in our developments.  Because living up here in N FL, you and I know DD5, St. Joe is planning a bunch of developments up this way and I too was surprised that their areas looked a little less dense than what I expected.

Who knows if this is true, but I'm always suspicious about stuff like that.   


And jpl02 that line you pasted surprised the heck outta me too.  Dade will not be full, but they are saying Orange and Duval will be??

[DaiDreamer5]

poonther, on Dec 7 2006, 11:15 AM, said:

Funny you should mention St. Joe, they were one of the sponsors of this study.  I wonder if they wanted their areas to look much less dense to help them market their real estate as a "breath of fresh air and in a rural setting" in opposition to the rest of state being jam packed w/people.  You know so they can say:  Come get away from the over-crowding in our developments.  Because living up here in N FL, you and I know DD5, St. Joe is planning a bunch of developments up this way and I too was surprised that their areas looked a little less dense than what I expected.

Who knows if this is true, but I'm always suspicious about stuff like that.   
And jpl02 that line you pasted surprised the heck outta me too.  Dade will not be full, but they are saying Orange and Duval will be??

In my mind I always compared the build up in the Panhandle to the build up South Florida (Palm Beach County in particular) experience during the 70s.  From what my mother told me, there wasn't really much there when she first moved down here then.

[BHCav]

I'd take this with a dump truck load of salt.  I don't know anything on the subject but in 53 years the coast line itself may be completely different due to global warming, or cooling, whatever the case by then.  Also if Tallahassee continues this pace of growth (not saying it will), IMO it's imprint on the second map would be larger especially if I-185 does become a reality.  Also, though I have no proof nor any decent knowledge on the area, but it seems to me like Panama City will also grow larger than the second map indicates.  Not the sole reason for my reasoning, but the new interntional airport has the potential to have a huge impact on Bay county.

Edited by BHCav, 08 December 2006 - 04:38 PM.

[sunshine]

DaiDreamer5, on Dec 7 2006, 11:28 AM, said:

In my mind I always compared the build up in the Panhandle to the build up South Florida (Palm Beach County in particular) experience during the 70s.  From what my mother told me, there wasn't really much there when she first moved down here then.

It is not the same, back then there is no big city in Florida, but right now we have Orlando, Tampa, Miami and Jax. Panhandle would not experience the same boom as South Florida. It will be a modest one up there.
All cities should develop high density developments so we wont have so many red dots on the map. It just looks like we will be the California of 2006 when Florida reach 2060.

[poonther]

sunshine, on Dec 8 2006, 10:23 AM, said:

All cities should develop high density developments so we wont have so many red dots on the map. It just looks like we will be the California of 2006 when Florida reach 2060.

Amen to that!!  But in FL we just seem to a have a suburban mindset.  Seems we all want "40 acres and mule."  However I think NorCal is doing a better job w/density than we are in FL currently....of course things are drastically different in Southern Cal.

[JRS1]

I don't think the state will develope like that map shows;  it is way too exagerated.

[BHCav]

There's a deffinate slant on this.  I saw this on their website:
1000 Friends of Florida is a 501©(3) not-for-profit membership organization that was founded in 1986 to serve as Florida's growth management "watchdog."

Rest of the agenda

[JRS1]

poonther, on Dec 8 2006, 12:10 PM, said:

Amen to that!!  But in FL we just seem to a have a suburban mindset.  Seems we all want "40 acres and mule."  However I think NorCal is doing a better job w/density than we are in FL currently....of course things are drastically different in Southern Cal.

"Florida" is synonymous with "suburb."  that's the whole purpose why people left northern cities to move here;  now that cities are rediscovering their identities, we have this new push for higher density.

[poonther]

JRS1, on Dec 19 2006, 12:10 AM, said:

"Florida" is synonymous with "suburb."  that's the whole purpose why people left northern cities to move here;  now that cities are rediscovering their identities, we have this new push for higher density.

You are right about that.  And FL's rampant growth began just after WWII as did the rampant growth of the 'burbs, so the timing was just right for that type of development.  I just hope we don't kill all that we love about FL in this quest for the perfect suburban life.

[sunshine]

we will just be California without earthquake.

[moosestang]

If we could just learn to control our population, we wouldn't need all this development.  keep in mind that the 2060 map shows developed land, I don't think it was meant to show the amount of people that will be living in Florida in 2060.  It's supposed to show commercial development.

I'm sure there won't be a single parcel of land left to put a house on by that time.

[vbfl85]

you also have to assume that sea levels have not risen by that time.