U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Florida > Tampa Bay
 [Register]
Tampa Bay Tampa - St. Petersburg - Clearwater
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-26-2019, 04:45 AM
 
Location: Greater Orlampa CSA
4,498 posts, read 3,573,726 times
Reputation: 3161

Advertisements

^ Oh I agree haha. I was just referring to comments people were making re: thread being devolved lol but honestly I don't mind debate and disagreement as long as it's respectful in nature, which truth be told I think it mostly was.

I really do wonder. I mean, even from that documentary you posted, there are inner ring suburbs in Cleveland (basically, what was the brand new "sprawl" of 50-60 years ago), that are already in that state. And, that isn't just to pick on Cleveland, there are many cities, even many outside the Midwest experiencing similar issues. I'd be curious about links on homeowner occupancy rates, etc.

To your other point, I don't disagree on the wider need for regional transportation. but I also don't necessarily have any ideas that immediately come to mind. I'm sure there are solutions that exist though. I think a wider need/trend might be more of a polycentric region, perhaps on a much broader scale than it exists now. If things are indeed continuing to sprawl (which I can't disagree with), it should also be noted that many places are seeing the increased need/desirability to have some type of core area, even within the suburbs, etc. for commerce, culture, etc. to take place. Examples can be found of that with Temple Terrace attempting to create a downtown, Wesley Chapel, the strong downtown core area of Lakeland, and even Winter Haven (which actually for the past few years has been hosting the CityWorks Xpo for the past few years with the goal of strengthening cities of all sizes). Perhaps what urban development doesn't necessarily mean is everyone returning towards the core, but perhaps it means more remote work or flexible commutes/working spaces, and a redefinition of what retail is and how it is done (most would agree retail itself has become over saturated at this point from a physical space standpoint and is now shrinking), and that people can still access most facets of daily life within a shorter distance from their home.

I'm not necessarily an advocate of blighted/empty parking lots, but for instance, in the case of the DeSoto Square Mall for instance, I think it would be cool to somehow in 5-10 years see just a big park space, perhaps a community farm put in place over it.

That's a good point. What happens to say, The Villages, in say 2050-2060 once the "silver tsunami" is over or past it's peak?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-26-2019, 05:29 AM
 
101 posts, read 53,987 times
Reputation: 114
I couldn’t agree more that urban development does not mean everyone return to the core, but remote work space, flexible commutes definitively. And, I too am not certain about what transportation alternatives would look like because we are pretty much a driving culture. However, every time I pass the new monorail at TPA I ask why they didn’t extend that to the Westshore business district or to downtown.

I can see the same type of option along Bruce B Downs heading to Wesley Chapel, and another one heading up the Vets to Trinity, and so on.

As far as downtowns, some of those cities have tried to develop them, but the successful ones had some core to begin with. The thought of a contrived shopping area, “Crocker Park,” is not appealing at all. This of course raises the question, which you touched on,what is the future of retail? And yes, if it can happen to retail, it can certainly happen to a neighborhood, or development that was built to house a specific demographic. Add to this that the south, southeast, and southwest have been gaining population for a long time, while the rust belt has rusted. Could the trend reverse once property costs and taxes flip, and the north becomes the better bargain? That would certainly exacerbate the ending period of the silver tsunami.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2019, 01:30 PM
 
302 posts, read 283,548 times
Reputation: 274
Who decided to build that eyesore of a convention center on the water and in the heart of downtown? What a mistake that was. Too many mistakes to compensate for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2019, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Greater Orlampa CSA
4,498 posts, read 3,573,726 times
Reputation: 3161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip Mcnealy View Post
Who decided to build that eyesore of a convention center on the water and in the heart of downtown? What a mistake that was. Too many mistakes to compensate for.
I won’t deny that it wasn’t the most appealing decision from an aesthetic standpoint. But it doesn’t seem uncommon for major US cities to put convention centers in or next to the heart of things (ie Morial Center in New Orleans or even the Javits Center in New York), and fortunately, it is at least built so that the Riverwalk can extend around it. In a way, it allows a place for major events and conventions to be homestead in heart of downtown, and perhaps at times add more vitality to surrounding places. I’m not saying it’s a perfect decision, but it doesn’t seem like Tampa’s most egregious mistake.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2019, 04:42 PM
 
1,809 posts, read 538,857 times
Reputation: 3544
Quote:
Originally Posted by reasonablevoice View Post
I couldn’t agree more that urban development does not mean everyone return to the core, but remote work space, flexible commutes definitively. And, I too am not certain about what transportation alternatives would look like because we are pretty much a driving culture. However, every time I pass the new monorail at TPA I ask why they didn’t extend that to the Westshore business district or to downtown.

I can see the same type of option along Bruce B Downs heading to Wesley Chapel, and another one heading up the Vets to Trinity, and so on.

As far as downtowns, some of those cities have tried to develop them, but the successful ones had some core to begin with. The thought of a contrived shopping area, “Crocker Park,” is not appealing at all. This of course raises the question, which you touched on,what is the future of retail? And yes, if it can happen to retail, it can certainly happen to a neighborhood, or development that was built to house a specific demographic. Add to this that the south, southeast, and southwest have been gaining population for a long time, while the rust belt has rusted. Could the trend reverse once property costs and taxes flip, and the north becomes the better bargain? That would certainly exacerbate the ending period of the silver tsunami.
You are correct, the draw must be more than retail. There must be things to do other than shop. Our draw to center city is the Philadelphia Orchestra, Ballet, Multiple Theatres venues including Broadway on tour shows, Museums, the major events at the Convention Center, outdoor events. These are all centrally located creating a vibrancy to the area. Adult oriented arts and entertainment venues that will draw cafes and restaurants are needed for a town core supported by public transportation as parking space is limited.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2019, 08:29 AM
 
5 posts, read 2,544 times
Reputation: 31
Look, Tampa Bay isn't NYC/Manhattan, it's not Philly either.


The logical and trajectory of growth in the Tampa Bay area is, and continues to be suburban and ex-urban. The growth between Tampa MSA and the Orlando MSA will result in a blur or satellite connected communities that will contain Lakeland, winter Haven, and key portions of northern Manatee County.


Tampa has really never been "urban". That's simply a lie. The various pockets of demographics is too disparate to provide the "glue" for the development of some kind of NE high density urban core LIVING (entertainment might be another matter). Tampa (Bay) is an interesting example of geo-centric identifications...just look at St. Pete, Clearwater, Dunedin, New Tampa, Brandon, Riverview, and pockets such as WestChase or Safety Harbor. There is more activity now in Riverview (ex-urban) and around Ruskin et al than ever before. Every one is not clamoring to live off Bayshore, or SoHo - to the contrary. There are more people living in north Manatee County and commuting to Hillsborough than ever before.


Satellite and ex-urban smaller cities and towns along the eventual "merger"/confluence along the I-4 corridor will be the story in the next 10 years, not some "reverse migration" to ANY urban core, whether Tampa or ORLANDO.


A similar move is afoot as we speak on the east coast of Florida according to the Wall Street Journal. There is a transition of buying farther and farther out of core Miami, namely, in all places "Little Haiti" completely north of the core. Heretofore this was unimaginable and impractical.


Populations shall continue to be dispersed, not consolidated into "vertical space".....NOT in Tampa Bay for the foreseeable future, if ever. Just ask competent forecasters such as Walmart....and Publix....and WATCH where they buy and where and how they build. They aren't stupid. Follow the money. The trend is your friend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2019, 09:58 AM
 
1,809 posts, read 538,857 times
Reputation: 3544
Quote:
Originally Posted by ted spread View Post
Look, Tampa Bay isn't NYC/Manhattan, it's not Philly either.


The logical and trajectory of growth in the Tampa Bay area is, and continues to be suburban and ex-urban. The growth between Tampa MSA and the Orlando MSA will result in a blur or satellite connected communities that will contain Lakeland, winter Haven, and key portions of northern Manatee County.


Tampa has really never been "urban". That's simply a lie. The various pockets of demographics is too disparate to provide the "glue" for the development of some kind of NE high density urban core LIVING (entertainment might be another matter). Tampa (Bay) is an interesting example of geo-centric identifications...just look at St. Pete, Clearwater, Dunedin, New Tampa, Brandon, Riverview, and pockets such as WestChase or Safety Harbor. There is more activity now in Riverview (ex-urban) and around Ruskin et al than ever before. Every one is not clamoring to live off Bayshore, or SoHo - to the contrary. There are more people living in north Manatee County and commuting to Hillsborough than ever before.


Satellite and ex-urban smaller cities and towns along the eventual "merger"/confluence along the I-4 corridor will be the story in the next 10 years, not some "reverse migration" to ANY urban core, whether Tampa or ORLANDO.


A similar move is afoot as we speak on the east coast of Florida according to the Wall Street Journal. There is a transition of buying farther and farther out of core Miami, namely, in all places "Little Haiti" completely north of the core. Heretofore this was unimaginable and impractical.


Populations shall continue to be dispersed, not consolidated into "vertical space".....NOT in Tampa Bay for the foreseeable future, if ever. Just ask competent forecasters such as Walmart....and Publix....and WATCH where they buy and where and how they build. They aren't stupid. Follow the money. The trend is your friend.
I don't disagree with you and as I posted up thread, I questioned the demographics in Florida for a thriving core center. I was postulating that development beyond retail is needed for a strong core center.

My interest in this thread is future relocation patterns of retirees heading to Florida for warmer weather seeking some of the urban amenities of their location of origin. It seems interest in golfing is declining nationally (don't know specifically about Florida) so at some point in time will there need to be something else to replace it. WIth Florida's near monopoly on sunshine and warm weather, I think it will always be a mecca for retirees. The question is will the retiree of the future be satisfied with 55+ communities playing golf and suffleboard.

What is wrong with a NE retiree like myself currently paying $7000 annually in school taxes with no utilization who would be willing to accept a significant school tax burden in the form of property taxes for a vertical condo with an urbanish core?

Last edited by Maddie104; 04-27-2019 at 10:47 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2019, 10:49 AM
 
Location: Not the end of the Earth, but I can see it from here
3,947 posts, read 4,195,275 times
Reputation: 3726
Golf is a dying sport. The days of retirees moving to Florida and buying in to a golf community are rapidly fading.

I've got relatives that winter on the east coast of Florida. They had been renting in a golf community for a number of years, and would buy a property there if there wasn't a requirement for club membership, which, as one might expect, is rather substantial (nearly $20k/annually, I think they said.)

As the property owners died off the community found itself in a pinch, as the estates and offspring of the now deceased owners were finding that not only could they not unload the properties, they were on the hook for the memberships as well as they were linked to the property.

A few years ago, several of the now owners sued the community to sever the relationship with the club as a part of property ownership. They prevailed in court, and as a result, a portion of the community was now unburdened with the requirement for club ownership. I would point out that this was a very large community and was divided into sections, so the lawsuit only applied to the section where the litigants owned property. I believe this had something to do with HOA/bylaws, etc., being separate based on the section.

As a result property values initially dropped, allowing my relatives to buy a very nice condominium for a stupid cheap price. They have since sold it at a nice profit, as property values have rebounded as potential buyers see the value in living in such a community without an obligation to belong to the club.

The abundance of old rich people who came here with their monies and wanted to move into a golf community with some level of exclusivity are now disappearing. The demographic is such that there's little interest in communities like this, so I suspect we'll see these start to convert over to "regular" communities, or like some, reclamation of the golf course to nature.

A funny postscript:

The club at the relative's community has a public dining room. However, if you live in one of the sections that is no longer obligated to belong to the club, you're banned from the facility. I guess they showed them!

RM
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2019, 12:04 PM
 
1,809 posts, read 538,857 times
Reputation: 3544
Quote:
Originally Posted by MortonR View Post
Golf is a dying sport. The days of retirees moving to Florida and buying in to a golf community are rapidly fading.

I've got relatives that winter on the east coast of Florida. They had been renting in a golf community for a number of years, and would buy a property there if there wasn't a requirement for club membership, which, as one might expect, is rather substantial (nearly $20k/annually, I think they said.)

As the property owners died off the community found itself in a pinch, as the estates and offspring of the now deceased owners were finding that not only could they not unload the properties, they were on the hook for the memberships as well as they were linked to the property.

A few years ago, several of the now owners sued the community to sever the relationship with the club as a part of property ownership. They prevailed in court, and as a result, a portion of the community was now unburdened with the requirement for club ownership. I would point out that this was a very large community and was divided into sections, so the lawsuit only applied to the section where the litigants owned property. I believe this had something to do with HOA/bylaws, etc., being separate based on the section.

As a result property values initially dropped, allowing my relatives to buy a very nice condominium for a stupid cheap price. They have since sold it at a nice profit, as property values have rebounded as potential buyers see the value in living in such a community without an obligation to belong to the club.

The abundance of old rich people who came here with their monies and wanted to move into a golf community with some level of exclusivity are now disappearing. The demographic is such that there's little interest in communities like this, so I suspect we'll see these start to convert over to "regular" communities, or like some, reclamation of the golf course to nature.

A funny postscript:

The club at the relative's community has a public dining room. However, if you live in one of the sections that is no longer obligated to belong to the club, you're banned from the facility. I guess they showed them!

RM
This is my point. Years ago my husband and I looked into a golf community in Jupiter Florida during the recession where many of the properties were facing foreclosure. THe HOA fees and taxes could not justify the purchase as we would be snowbirds. (not to mention that HOA fees were increasing due to foreclosures). I also noticed all the employees of the HOA and it seems to me these communities were supporting the local community with jobs. So with the removal of HOA fees/golf memberships to what extend is the local community impacted.

When I read CL posts that criticize vertical urban development, snowbirds, etc. I wonder if they realize the extend of their tax burden being offset.. by these residents. Urbanlike development may attract wealthier residents who can relieve the tax burden on other residents by assuming a greater tax burden relative to utilization of schools, roads, land space. Many of these Florida threads have a common theme, LOC, low housing cost and taxes, good school districts, short commute. Growth at any cost is not sustainable and a retiree in my age and income bracket can afford a significant tax burden but want something in return -- a walkable community with urbanlike amenities.

I think Tampa has a lot of untapped potential given it's geography.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2019, 12:27 PM
 
5 posts, read 2,544 times
Reputation: 31
hmm "a walkable community with urban like amenities" ??

that's NOT happening or going to happen anytime soon if ever in Tampa Bay. Tampa Bay has no relevant history to buttress that eventuality - that'a pure folly for the true locals and longtime founders and inhabitants. Those notions may seem desirable to those who come HERE with their own set of experiences in high-denisty NE corridor cities but it will not be "re-created" in the Tampa Bay MSA, no matter how many newcomers become transplants arrive here with even a slight bit of effusive praise for "urban core", high density living. It might exist in very small pockets or certain parts of town, but there will be no such "urbanization" of the MSA. The MSA is far far too de-centralized and far-flung for that kind of transformation to occur. The history of the region doesn't lend itself to that kind of pervasive population shift, migration and culture change.


The reversal of the de-centralization trend isn't happening en masse. There is no foundational cultural underpinnings that support such a "movement". Few young families with children are pursuing the "dream" of high density living in the Tampa Bay MSA. What keeps a community "alive" ? it's the existence of more and more younger people with children.....not 65-70 year old empty nesters trying to stay well, or a bunch of underpaid single younger professionals or a minority of those "partnered up" couples walking fluffy and attending "social justice" rallies and DT festivals.


Look around - at the geography, the plethora of loosely knit smaller towns, cities, PUDs, and satellite newer quasi-townships and resort-style self-contained developments. In-migration from these areas is highly doubtful. Out of State newcomers may seek to re-create this lifestyle, but it's not endemic to Tampa Bay one bit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Florida > Tampa Bay
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top