Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

TD

Nimbys keep Tallahassee Small

Recommended Posts

Read the article today about Nimbys not wanting development all around town.... what are these people doing? preventing growth in tallahassee, and our commission is allowing it. They are defeating developments, so we will always be a one horse town.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


You know something, these NIMBYs are working my last nerve. If these fools don't want Tallahassee to grow, get the hell out and move to a rural community. Problem solved. These people are parasites, they suck the life out of the growth potential that Tallahassee has. It's like the commission has no backbone, they buck under NIMBY pressure every time. They talk a big game about how Tallahassee should prosper and expand, but when a few NIMBY idiots come on the scene and raise sand, the commission runs like little girls. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the article today about Nimbys not wanting development all around town.... what are these people doing? preventing growth in tallahassee, and our commission is allowing it. They are defeating developments, so we will always be a one horse town.

I think this is more of an issue of neighborhood preservation than not in my backyard. They don't want thier neighborhoods over run by renters and businesses (which don't make the best neighbors most of the time).

This was one of the main issues brought up at the community meeting I attended. People want to raise their families in a safe neighborhood, not to have thier children be hit by drunken college students.

There are plenty of other areas to built in. There is no need to build in pre existing neighborhoods.

Though I have to admit, that guy in the picture complaining about how his backyard isn't shaded anymore is silly. The trees could have been cut down even if a single family homeowner moved in next door. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NIMBYs just want attention because they never got any from their parents during their growing up, that's what I think. It's all fine and dandy to want a good neighborhood to raise your family in, but at the same time developers are all about the $$$$. They're only looking out for themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NIMBYs just want attention because they never got any from their parents during their growing up, that's what I think. It's all fine and dandy to want a good neighborhood to raise your family in, but at the same time developers are all about the $$$$. They're only looking out for themselves.

I dont blame them for looking out for themselves. They are entitled to their property and to protect it. If they see something that may threaten their way of life, then they should fight against it. I know Tallahassee is in the stage of wanting as many developments as possible, but you cant turn your back on the people who have been here for many years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NIMBYs just want attention because they never got any from their parents during their growing up, that's what I think.

What makes you think this?

At any rate, I have mixed feelings on this subject. I sympathize with both parties, and it looks like both sides are trying to get the government to step in and decide the matter, which is not the best route in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the voters of this community spoke loud and clear when they elected a Pro-Growth City commission, and elected to tax ourselves to expand our infrastructure and pump more money into our local schools. This is definately a community that wants to grow and there's the since that we are waiting on that BIG THING that going to put us on the map and make us more than just a "family friendly" city. I do see NIMBY residents as a minority in this community now, and while I don't feel they should be ignored, I do often feel their concerns are self-centered and fail to recognize the big picture. They play more to fear than promise of something better... and I think that's what turns me off most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the voters of this community spoke loud and clear when they elected a Pro-Growth City commission, and elected to tax ourselves to expand our infrastructure and pump more money into our local schools. This is definately a community that wants to grow and there's the since that we are waiting on that BIG THING that going to put us on the map and make us more than just a "family friendly" city. I do see NIMBY residents as a minority in this community now, and while I don't feel they should be ignored, I do often feel their concerns are self-centered and fail to recognize the big picture. They play more to fear than promise of something better... and I think that's what turns me off most.

I agree and am glad they voted for pro-growth, I certainly am too. But because the majority votes for growth doesnt meant you shun the minority. When your able to balance the two, that is SMART growth, and everyone is at least somewhat happy. Of course their being selfish, its their property thats being threatened. Would any of you start crying NIMBY if governmental eminent domain was threatened in your properties/neighborhood?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree and am glad they voted for pro-growth, I certainly am too. But because the majority votes for growth doesnt meant you shun the minority. When your able to balance the two, that is SMART growth, and everyone is at least somewhat happy. Of course their being selfish, its their property thats being threatened. Would any of you start crying NIMBY if governmental eminent domain was threatened in your properties/neighborhood?

I agree. Besides almost letting a few oppurtunities (Project North) pass them by, I think Tallahassee is doing a fair job with controlling growth. If you don't control the growth you'll end up like South Florida where it costs a quarter of a million to get a 2br house.

Though, as I mentioned before, this article is more about neighborhood preservation than NIMBY. There are certian areas that aren't suited for high density housing. That stuff should stay downtown and around the colleges. Not in Myers Park and similar areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes you think this?

At any rate, I have mixed feelings on this subject. I sympathize with both parties, and it looks like both sides are trying to get the government to step in and decide the matter, which is not the best route in my mind.

Everytime a NIMBY situation comes up, I automatically dismiss the idea as pointless whining. I could see if NIMBYs had a point with facing complaints, but 9 times out of 10, when NIMBYs throw a tantrum there's usually no reasoning involved. Go_Gators-I get what you're saying, but fast forward just a minute. Say NIMBYs did everything they could to prevent their neighborhood from being demolished but developers were still given the green light to go and develop; some of what the developers are trying to develop could be for the best interest of the current neighborhood residents, but the NIMBYs aren't having it, they only see it as a neighborhood takeover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everytime a NIMBY situation comes up, I automatically dismiss the idea as pointless whining. I could see if NIMBYs had a point with facing complaints, but 9 times out of 10, when NIMBYs throw a tantrum there's usually no reasoning involved.

Again, I'm not really taking either side here, but it did strike me from the article that they were actually making reasonable justifications for their complaints. However, my original question to you related to your claim that their reaction was somehow connected to their not receiving enough attention from their parents as children. That strikes me as an unnecessary, baseless claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go_Gators-I get what you're saying, but fast forward just a minute. Say NIMBYs did everything they could to prevent their neighborhood from being demolished but developers were still given the green light to go and develop; some of what the developers are trying to develop could be for the best interest of the current neighborhood residents, but the NIMBYs aren't having it, they only see it as a neighborhood takeover.

If that were the case, the developers should do all they can to work with and get feedback from the current residents of the neighborhood. This way, all voices are being heard, and maybe new ideas that all approve of could be brought forth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some of Tally's NIMBY problems are based on fear and ignorance and then these people just hide behind the "smart growth" banner. Smart growth I agree w/totally and the zoning and other types of controls that are used to achieve this objective. However this does not mean no growth IMO.

I think that with Myer's Park being an in-town neighborhood and w/our growing city the densities have to go up there a little. I mean we are talking about a neighborhood that is w/in walking distance of downtown. I'm not suggesting a 40 story condo tower, but low-rise high end condos are perfectly acceptable for this area and what is being proposed for the golf course area would be a perfect fit. I do agree that college housing is not acceptable for this area, but that problem is a result of many topics we've discussed here before.

I read this article and these people are not complaining about such drastic matters as eminent domain. They seem to be just complaining about their own fear of change. Yes, they've been there for years and yes they have a right to voice their opinions, but are their complaints based in good sound facts or just fear?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Golly Poonther, you've got a way to put things. I'd second your feelings. Because to me, it seems all of the NIMBY complaints that I've witnessed have been a elaborate way of saying "We like things the way they are". That, I feel, is a problem this community is trying to overcome.

Cascades Park will become a magnetic jewel soon and likely attract developers to build office and condo towers all around the park. Meyer's Park will likely fall in the shadow of these new buildings, futhermore, nothing is wrong with allowing more density for people to live closer to our activity centers. To me its foolish to think things won't change. And as far as low-rise density is concerned, as Poonther stated, its a perfect fit for the area.

EG has a good point, there's just no pleasing some people. Its rather troubling when people move into an area and try to close the door behind themselves. Sure they've been around a while, but what gives them the right to keep others from enjoying the same beauity, peace, and location they've enjoyed all these years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Essentially nothing does except the local government. Both sides want to use governmental power to enforce their vision for the area, so my sympathies with both sides go only so far. Yet, to me the "We like things the way they are" philosophy is just as valid as the "Bring on the change" philosophy.

When you say, "That, I feel, is a problem this community is trying to overcome," who are we talking about? The community includes those who see growth differently. I mean, isn't it possible that the majority of the community would disagree with the majority viewpoint on this forum? I have no reason to think that, but I'm just throwing the idea out there for consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet, to me the "We like things the way they are" philosophy is just as valid as the "Bring on the change" philosophy.

Yeah in a vacuum that point would be valid, but a city to me is a living thing that changes all the time. Name me one city of any size that remained exactly the same and prospered???? Now implementing rigid controlled growth like places in Cape Cod or parts of California is fine, but even those places have grown.

I do agree that those out on Hwy 20 and Woodville would probably disagree w/the viewpoint of this board. :)

One thing is constant in life and that is change. Those who try and stop some types of change are just fearful or ignorant or hey even both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Are you implying that all change is inherently good? I also disagree with your premise that a city is a living thing. When you say city, are you talking about the people, the constructed things, or the government? Each of those things has distinct functions, and should not be viewed as one monolithic thing. I also think there are more than just the people in Woodville and on Highway 20 that would disagree with the viewpoint of this board. When I was a Tallahasseean I didn't live in either of those places, yet my viewpoint is often at odds with the viewpoint of this board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Are you implying that all change is inherently good? I also disagree with your premise that a city is a living thing. When you say city, are you talking about the people, the constructed things, or the government? Each of those things has distinct functions, and should not be viewed as one monolithic thing. I also think there are more than just the people in Woodville and on Highway 20 that would disagree with the viewpoint of this board. When I was a Tallahasseean I didn't live in either of those places, yet my viewpoint is often at odds with the viewpoint of this board.

Of course all change isn't good, but it is a constant. Just because the majority doesn't believe in or like something doesn't make it wrong...look back at history...they thought the world was flat, minorities and women were second class etc etc and now all that has changed. And most of that resistance to change was fueled by fear and ignorance.

I definitely feel that all cities w/everything combined that you mentioned are a living thing, not like humans or animals, but in a "vibe" type of way. Cities are always in a constant flux of change..or at least cities that are "alive."

Of course there are more people than in Woodville or Hwy 20 that would disagree w/this board..there are rednecks all over town. :D Just kidding just kidding like I was when I made the wisecrack about W'ville/Hwy 20 hence the smiley face.

As far as this topic goes about the NIMBY crying over in Myers Park, they can built appropriate low-rise condos there over looking the golf course or that many people can move out into a new neighborhood way out of town still only 10 feet from their neighbors and destroy even more of our environment. I am of the thought that most of what is inside Cap. Circle is developed and that we should increase the density as much as we can WITHIN REASON in this area while of course preserving communial green spaces for all to enjoy, like the new Casades Park. This would cut down on destroying all the environment in Leon and surrounding counties and it would help w/mass trans. and more. Of course this is only my opinion.

Relient J you know I respect your input and enjoy your comments even though we seem to disagree w/everything so don't take this as a mean jab, but sometimes I think you just want us to keep Tally as you remember it from your childhood and before you left. Like you want us to preserve it in a bottle (i.e. Taltran name change, Big Bend, FSU stuff) I would understand if you felt that way, but it just can't be that way. Tally has to move and grow to survive. Now it can do it in well planned well regulated ways or it can do it hap-hazardly that is what must be decided at this point in time.

I am still wondering if there is a city of size in America that has remained exactly the same like some NIMBY's in Tally would like and still has prospered????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because the majority doesn't believe in or like something doesn't make it wrong...

I agree with that statement wholeheartedly.

I definitely feel that all cities w/everything combined that you mentioned are a living thing, not like humans or animals, but in a "vibe" type of way. Cities are always in a constant flux of change..or at least cities that are "alive."

I wouldn't characterize it that way, but I see what you're saying.

Relient J you know I respect your input and enjoy your comments even though we seem to disagree w/everything so don't take this as a mean jab, but sometimes I think you just want us to keep Tally as you remember it from your childhood and before you left. Like you want us to preserve it in a bottle (i.e. Taltran name change, Big Bend, FSU stuff) I would understand if you felt that way, but it just can't be that way. Tally has to move and grow to survive. Now it can do it in well planned well regulated ways or it can do it hap-hazardly that is what must be decided at this point in time.

I take no offense at your characterization of me, but I would disagree with it. I think NewStar made a good case for the need for a name change when he mentioned that there are plans for the service to extend beyond the borders of Tallahassee. My main problem with the name StarMetro is that I genuinely think it sounds cheesy. :) I didn't like the Capital Coast proposal becuase it sounded too generic. I'm not sure what FSU stuff you're referring to. Do you mean that I opposed their claim on the property on which The Symphony is set to rise? Also, I don't at all think my statements on this forum have demonstrated that I am anti-change or in favor of keeping Tallahassee in a bottle. I have been excited along with the rest of you about all of the new towers going up in the city. In fact, I'm pretty sure I mentioned in at least one thread that it seemed to me that all of the exciting stuff started to happen right as I left!

That said, I do stick up for those that don't want certain developments near their homes for a couple of main reasons: One, I think some of the things that have been said about them have been unfair, and as none of them are here to stick up for themselves, I've defended them. Two, I believe that their concerns are just as legitmate as the ones expressed here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good, well thought out and polite rebuttal there Relient J. Sorry if I called you out on some points and made you feel defensive. I'll try to refrain from that in future, but you handled it like a pro. You are right I forgot you said a lot of pro growth post in the past. I'm glad you pointed that out. I think sometimes we all get "pigedon-holed" as just one type of voice. I'm sure I'm known as the crazy palm tree guy.

I'm glad you pointed out why you disagreed w/StarMetro and the changing of Big Bend for those reasons reminded me again that you are not just fearful of change. I'm not real sure what I had on my mind about FSU either..maybe it was the Symphony..but anyway you've proved your point.

I think by the name and nature of this board "Urban Planet" that you'll find most of the folks in each city's threads to be more pro-growth. I don't think that's just a Tally thing and I know that's not what you were implying.

Now again on the case of the NIMBY's that this article in the Democrat interviewed, we are talking about condos on the golf course. I just want you to know that I'm not all for pavement and destroying Tally's character. I think this proposal fits and I find the NIMBY's defense just speaking out in fear. But if this same proposal were for a large student housing complex in the same place, I'd be the first one to scream my head off about it. That is absolutely something Tally has to work on and address. I think they blew it over in the Pensacola Street area w/their vote. That residental area has been sunk and they are still holding on to that sinking ship. But of course that's for another thread.

Bottom line for me is that when you live in an in-town neighborhood there are certain things you must give up for the greater good of the community and forty acres and a mule is one of them. I guess I'm just more sensitive about it b/c I live in that type of neighborhood. I've got a "half-way" house (I know that's not the PC name) on my block, but they are great quiet neighbors. An old-folks tower that looks down almost on my street, an apt. complex behind my house and a high school of litterbugs in front of me. I know that's not for everyone, but for me that is what I give into to live "in the city." It actually makes for a great diverse neighborhood, but again that's not for everyone. So what I'm saying is that I'm not asking these folks over in Myers Park to give into anything that I'm not already giving in to myself.

Tally has great charm and character. I forget that sometimes b/c I get so use to it. I don't want it to be another South FL. I moved away from that area for a reason. But on the other hand, we can't protect every rock, twig and bldg. that was built prior to 1995 either. We have to plan and draw the lines somewhere. There are things worth fighting for and there are times when you know for the greater good it's best to give up the battle. In this case, I think there's a greater good than those fears of the NIMBY's in the article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ We're cool, poonther. You and I do disagree on a lot of things, but I know we both respect each other. And again, I'm not really on either side regarding the main issue of this thread. I think both sides make good points.

On the issue of growth, I tend to be for it to a point. I tend to be dubious of certain types of government involvement in it. It's funny, if you cruise over to the Nashville forum you'll find that I favor types of growth that really get on the nerves of some of the posters there, namely office parks. :)

The last neighborhood I lived in in Tallahassee off Park Ave. was a mixture of post-WWII single family homes, a couple of apartment complexes, a few brand new homes from K2 Urban Corp. (built after I moved out), within walking distance of law offices and seeing distance from the capitol. I loved it! I dig where you're coming from on the in-city life. My wife and I currently live in yet another post-WWII neighborhood within our current city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah in a vacuum that point would be valid, but a city to me is a living thing that changes all the time. Name me one city of any size that remained exactly the same and prospered???? Now implementing rigid controlled growth like places in Cape Cod or parts of California is fine, but even those places have grown.

I do agree that those out on Hwy 20 and Woodville would probably disagree w/the viewpoint of this board. :)

One thing is constant in life and that is change. Those who try and stop some types of change are just fearful or ignorant or hey even both.

Hey! I used to stay in Woodville, until I got tired of driving 11 miles to and from there on a daily basis, so I moved back into the city :shades:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say that was the most civil exchange of differing ideas that I've seen on these boards thus far. I've learned alot from you two, Poonther, and RelientJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey RJ you must have lived near Park and Crest or Park and Broward??? I love the infill housing that K2 put up in that area. Heck I tend to like all that K2 has done...I just wish they'd break ground soon on their condo at Park and Meridian.

I live in a Post-WWI house built in 1929. When it rains really hard I still find all sorts of odd stuff in the yard like old bottles and of course coal which is all they had to heat the house. We looked at about 15 houses when looking to buy, but the very second we walked in this house, we knew it had to be ours even though we never considered a house this old before. I still think an old owner roams around the house sometimes, not that I've seen her, but many others that have stayed w/us have mentioned this w/out us ever saying a word about it and they all seem to feel it's a protective non-harming type female presence too, again w/out us ever mentioning it.

Thanks for the kind words TJ! I think RJ and I do a much better job than the politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the vibe of a living city.... that is sexy, and imo, precise.

I am anti sprawl, not nimby, not anti growth. I just think sprawl is anti co-existing with nature. I think high density living is a must for our state to manage growth.

That was a nice debate to read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.