However not everyone is happy about it. There is a "Just Say No To Starbucks" crowd who midly expressed thier opinion on the subject.
I don't know if this is the corporate logo of the naysayers or someone who wandered by and slapped their commentary on top of the "nabobs of negatism" mission statement.
The "No-no's" are probably upset that they have to find a new place to sell their jalopies.
ReplyDeleteIf the anti-corporate crowd here in Seminole Heights could come up with a reasonable means for "non-corporate" businesses to pony up $1 million to open their stores, I'd be happier than I'll be when this Starbucks opens their doors.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of used cars... have you noticed that the used cars parked on the Starbucks corner vary but the phone number on them does not? That's a business that ought to have a visit from the police.
I believe all of those used cars come from the 4 x 4 mechanic next door.
ReplyDeleteWhy are all of these guys complaining about Starbucks, but say nothing when Advance Auto opens yet another store here? How many auto stores do we need?
ReplyDeleteMaybe people dont like Starbucks because Starbucks represents a stale cultural banality and a sickening homogeny in a community. Starbucks is the kind of establishment that promotes a universal corporate aesthetic, lacking genuine character, creativity and aesthetic appeal. It cements the gentrification of the neighborhood I grew up in. It's also just plain boring. I understand about the development cost issue. It's unfortunate that only a multinational franchise can afford to set up shop on that corner. But will Starbucks serve as a "gateway drug" inspiring other corporate behemoths to displace locally owned businesses? Would you rather have a Taco Bus or a Taco Bell, Viva La Frida or Applebees? Personally, I dont look forward to a coffee shop full of pretentious yuppies sipping over priced lattes chatting on their cellphones. Delicious 75 cent cafe con leches are available not far away. I'll take that over a $3.50 frapadoodle any day.
ReplyDeleteIf I understand correctly, Starbucks has at least met some of the burden to address the aesthetic concerns so it will fit into the neighborhood. Perhaps the above Anonymous' idea of character, creativity, and aesthetic appeal is the chain link fences, and acres of asphalt currently, and lack of greenery that represents the status quo. While I am not entirely in favor of Starbucks(I love the Coffee Bean Cafe, but its hours are entirely inconvenient for me during the week), it is refreshing that a commercial enterprise other than automobile sales and other dirty light industrial/commercial is showing an interest in the neighborhood.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with the anti-starbuck-anonymous' general description of why Starbucks isn't the perfect business, I would like to hear about solutions. It's one thing to ask if I'd like corporate business to replace all the wonderful small businesses in the area-but when you tally up all those wonderful small businesses, you still have fingers left on one hand. Meanwhile the car lots want hundreds of thousands to sell a parcel with no building. Even if we could surmount the problems with overly-speculative lot prices, we still have the problem of having almost no suitable commercial structures that mom-and-pops could rent. That means they have to build. Which puts us back in the same situation as the corner Starbucks is going in on. It isn't that corner that's so pricey--in fact it was only $250K which is a BARGAIN compared to most car lots. The problem is the vast majority of lots require construction. $500K commercial buildings on top of $300K lots, add in the fixtures and only a Starbucks can do it.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, a new car lot just opened on the corner of Nebraska and Idlewild. Congrats to those neighbors. They've been saved from the horror of corporate banality.
P.S. To make discussion easier, you can choose "other" instead of "Anonymous" and create your own anonymous name. This makes it easier for others to respond to your ideas while still preserving your anonymity.
Oh no! Starbux in Seminole Heights?!? What's next- Walmart? Those corporations are sure sticking it to you guys. Maybe if they hired transvestite crack whores to pass out tiny bits of scones to the passers-by they would fit in with the established aesthetic of your neighborhood. The thing is you should have kept the yuppies out to begin with. It's amazing how these lefties with money move to these charming little neighborhoods and then systematically destroy everything that made the area unique. Weren't there car lots and garages in the area when you moved here? You all should have stayed in Hyde Park. Oh wait, you already drove the prices there through the roof. I'm glad I left. Why don't you just wet-zone every commercial space on Nebraska Ave. It did wonders for Ybor.
ReplyDeleteThe day I move back to Seminole Heights will be the day Joe Redner turns gay! What? Oh, uh... never mind.
I guess it's all about perspective. People often throw around the term gentrification...look it up sometime...More affluent people spend money in formerly undesireable neighborhoods driving up property values and by virtue of property taxes prices out people of lesser means. With Amendment 10, while people may not be afford to move in, people usually arent unduly burdened by property taxes and forced to move out. I know its not perfect, but take that up with your politicians. Rental property is an exception as landlords often do drive up rents in areas undergoing "gentrification", but rent control is one method of affecting that. Lobby for it if you want it. So folks with a little disposable income choose to improve property in neighborhoods that were "undesireable" . Is it a negative thing, guess it depends on perspective again.
ReplyDeleteWhere in it's history is the "appropriate" place to look for a neighborhood's proper makeup..Seminole Heights didnt start out as an inner-city haven for criminals, drug dealers and prostitutes, so why do those opposed to "gentrification" or urban renewal marry themselves to that time period for their example. My history may be a little incomplete but wasn't Seminole heights was an early suburb, where homes were established by middle-class folks. Not drug dealers or prostitutes. Granted early fire maps do show that the automotive businesses have been here nearly as long as the neighborhood. But prior to the 20's or so this was rural land, perhaps we should set that as the goal. Lets raze all the post-1920 homes, set up a few dairies..no wait lets go back to before the Western Europeans settled here, no lets even go back to before humans were around. I hope you get the point..
Here's another morsel to chew on. One element of Seminole Heights that is often espoused is its welcoming of gays and lesbians...Gays and lesbians often (unfairly imho) shoulder the blame for initiating the gentrification process. Can't have your cake and eat it too can you?
I'm starting to ramble so I will leave with this..The only thing that is inevitable is change so lead, follow, or stay out of the way.
In response to anonymoose:
ReplyDeleteI take it as a given that people here know the definition of gentrification. It is not being "thrown around" loosely or inaccuratly and the Starbucks corporation is closely associated with the urban phenomenon in cities around the country. "Look it up sometime"...and while your at it check out:http://www.ainfos.ca/02/feb/ainfos00639.html
Property taxes arn't an incredible concern for people who can't afford to buy a house. Although as they go up along with values (and home insurance) rents creep up as well (or in some instances skyrocket) furthering the chasm between the haves and have nots. To many people, companies like Starbucks have come to represent the gap. Yes, Seminole Heights was for many years a working class to middle class neighborhood. But the recent boom has priced many people out. As a recent article in the St. Pete Times states, housing is less affordable for working class families now than it has been in three decades. Nothing is wrong with wanting the drug dealers and prostitutes out of your neighborhood. But chasing poor people out and pretending it isn't happening is elitist and rather obnoxious. Yes neighborhoods change but the idea is to control the evolution to make things better for all citizens, not just the ones who can afford it.
Your reference to gay and lesbians is perplexing and irrelevent and your cliched final sentence has been the mantra of intellectually lazy conformists for ages.
"I say bomb the suburbs because the suburbs have been bombing us for at least the last 40 years. They have waged an economic, political and cultural war on life in the city. The city has responded by declaring war on itself." -Upski
He meant 'bomb' in the graffiti sense.
ReplyDeleteWhose definition of "better" do we use? While there may be some baseline somewhat universal standard of good and bad, improvement of an overall standard of living is always arguable. One person would have loud music be outlawed and another says that regulating how loudly one plays music is opression. So how do we define what is better for all citizens? Do we use the utilitarian model..greatest good for greatest number for the longest time? As imperfect as it is, we must work within our political system to achieve this control of evolution as you put it. And like it or not, money will always play a huge role in those decisions, but political activisim isn't limited to the rich. Loud voices can often overcome deep pockets if applied properly. My point was not to argue that the connotation of gentrification was the ideal solution. My point was that a little bit of financial investment in the community often reaps benefits for many.
ReplyDeleteMy comment regarding gays and lesbians was not clear I agree, I did admit I was starting to ramble, but I was trying to point out that one of the elements that bohemians often tout as a positive point about Seminole Heights(the neighborhood being gay and lesbian friendly) is often argued as being a precursor or even a catalyst to "gentrification."
I also see few stones being cast at the former residents who chose to sell out and improve their economic status. There will always be a chasm between the have's and have-not's. But how many have-not's are there that wouldn't prefer to have more if given the option? Rents will only rise to the level the market will allow, while property values can inflate to unsupportable levels through speculation. Many former residents of these neighborhoods have cashed out, but are they to blame for trying to better their lot in life? Would evolution to a more run-down neighborhood with decreasing property values be the preferred course?
As for my cliche final statement, the phrase might be overused, but the sentiment is genuine. Get out there and lead the evolution if you don't like it's direction, or follow and conform if youre not interested or too lazy, or just keep quiet and observe. Evolution will happen with or without your input.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI for one will never give money to a Starbucks. Especially in Tampa where delicious Cuban coffee (roasted right here in Ybor City) is easily available.
ReplyDeleteApart from its overwhelming and Godzilla-like presence, Starbucks coffee is gross - unless it's veiled in a frapadoodle melange of whippped cream and chunky nuglet toppings.
As far as what's best for Seminole Heights, that remains to be seen. A Starbuck's also moved into Ybor City and I don't think it's added to its present charm. I wonder if the people who frequent Ybor (7th. Ave. bars) now will have the same sentimental fondness for it the way the people who remember Three Birds, Blue Chair, The Rainbow Room, Pizza & Subs do after almost two decades?
On the other hand, places like Davis Islands - which, as it were, is pretty loaded - is a relatively good model of "community." Everyone there knows the name of the guy who owns the neighborhood ice cream/coffee joint Java & Cream(Dennis), the man who owns Davis Islands Pharmacy actually works the counter, Tate Brothers is not some multinational chain headquartered in Detroit or Seattle or Singapore. There are generations of families who have lived there. There are block parties dedicated to donating toys for needy children during the holidays. These are certainly conscious residents who have carefully navigated DI's path for decades. I love seeing Davis Boulevard lined with mom & pop shops, eateries, etc. It's refreshing to be on a little island bereft of Starbuck's, McDonalds, Wal-Mart, etc. Dale Mabry is more of an eyesore than any used car lot could ever be!
I'm sorry, but I have more of a chance meeting the guy who owns Sal's auto parts than the owner of Chili's. And that means a helluva lot when you want to ask Sal if you could use his parking lot for overflow parking at your next Thanksgiving kegger or if Sal could post up the sign of your lost dog or if Sal could keep an eye out for suspicious activity because of neighborhood burglaries. ETC.
Try putting in a request to Chili's for any of the above. Who the fock cares? The manager? He's on the clock. Sal has a vested interest.
So, if the question is would I prefer in my neighborhood a carbon copy, bloodless building that looks like 5 million other like buildings in the world owned by Coffee, Inc. or Sal's garage? Then the answer is no. Fuck no.
And if a pollutant like Starbuck's ever came into my community, I would protest. I would attend the meetings and say no. Because I can think beyond convenience. I want my son to go to places like Java and Cream or Florida Bakery and shake hands with the owner and know what it's like to feel good about giving money to a business.
It's not that strange of a notion. It's really not.
(Personally, inviting a Starbucks to my neighborhood would be like asking Hannibel Lechter to dinner -- he's not going to stop at his pawltry helping of veal, if you catch my drift.)
While I agree with Anonymoose in that it takes action and not passive complaints to effect change, it's a sad day when people consider a Starbuck's moving in to their neighborhood "evolution."
Thats Funny, I think you misrepresent the debate within Seminole Heights over Starbucks. While there are certainly a number of people that eagerly await their chance at a frapachino without driving out of the area, the majority of the discussion dealt with ways to encourage more resident-serving business in the area. Small-business took preference over corporate franchises. Perhaps it'll turn out to be a faustian bargain, but the choice wasn't between a quaint Sal's and a soulless Starbucks but between commercial blight and anything that resembled improvement. The area was so bad the neighbors had to lobby Publix not to pull out.
ReplyDeleteWhy would Dennis at Java & Cream open a store between a pawn shop and a hooker motel where the busiest retail hours were between 3 and 6am? The Tate brothers could open on Davis Island because there was already a safe, stable economy there. This isn't some crusade to turn Seminole Heights into Hyde Park--it's a drive to encourage any kind of resident serving business to locate in the neighborhood and provide needed and wanted services. The neighbors agonized over whether to champion Starbucks or not for precisely the reasons mentioned by yourself and Doctor Fate.
The hope, possibly born out of desperation, is that a successful business like Starbucks, a luxury item at the very least, would encourage other businesses to give the area serious consideration. If the neighborhood is lucky, more small business will come in like Dennis than corporate business like Starbucks.
So far, the best the anti-corporate crowd can do is say "no no no". If they really don't want a Starbucks or other large corporate chain in the neighborhood they could perhaps help come up with a way to get more mom-and-pops to locate here. They have chosen instead to rant and vandalize rather than engage in constructive debate and planning.
As Anonymoose quite aptly said, cliche or not: lead, follow, or get out of the way. Your team had the advantage and chose not to lead. So be it. Now you're getting two things--a Starbucks and another opportunity to join in a constructive manner. Take the opportunity. Please.
What a lovely dichotomy ... just above the rants on SBUX coming in is an 18 point instruction memo on how to handle a hooker in SH. Perhaps the devloper should have put a brothel in, for it seems more appropriate in this area and some of the residents anyway. Surely one could meet the madam, i.e. "owner", and all would be good in the world!
ReplyDeleteSo, let me see if I understand you Shawn - you're arguing that it is the anti-Starbucks group's responsibility to not only petition, pickett, etc. to prohibit this chain (there are countless ethical reasons people have for not patronizing Starbucks- more far-reaching than Seminole Heights)but to also provide small businesses to the area?
ReplyDeleteI don't think so. That's not only a totally unreasonable expectation but completely illogical.
What about people who are anti-Scientology, are they responsible for bringing in a nice Catholic church?
I'm not really sure what you're saying here about the "anti-corporate" crowd - all they can do is say no. Uh...yep. That and not patronize this coffee shop. Unless they happen to have loads of cash, connections, etc. The average guy however has a simple weapon: his voice and his dollar.
As far as Davis Island's businesses are concerned, the fact of the matter is that the residents (presently) DON'T WANT STARBUCK'S there. Don't you think Starbuck's would love to serve up their $5 cough-ees to the DI set?
If it were a choice between SH and DI - sorry, but I really think Starbuck's would pull out of Seminole Heights faster than you can say vini vidi vente.
Java & Cream is not much different from the Coffee Bean - EXCEPT for years and years of loyal customers. It's not a success because of a "stable economy" - but because people would rather pony up $1 for J&C's coffee than $3 for Starbucks. Simple. If you think SH can support an expensive Starbuck's, then it clearly can support a Coffee Bean.
The proof is in the pudding.
But, I'll tell you this, Shawn - a Starbuck's will never ever create what I think most people in SH want -- unless they want to make a profit and, in that case, make room for Target or Wal-Mart.
Also, where are the cops between these "high traffic hours" of 3 a.m. and 6 a.m.?
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure how a Starbucks will serve this crowd? Is Starbucks to hookers like garlic to vampire, or what?
Why was your "team" so focused on a Starbucks and not cleaning up the streets - you seem to know where these people are and what time they're out.
I lived in Downtown D.C. on 12th & M. There were enough hookers on my street to make Nebraska look like Momy & Me play time. After a couple years, the hookers slowly dwindled. The dealers were few and far between. And you know what happened? Not a Starbucks, that's for sure. The people got sick of it. They called the cops every time they saw a prostitute. They said no. They didn't bring in business - they didn't have the money!!!!!
They said no. If your problem is hookers and dealers, why isn't your "team" dealing with that? Stop using it as a scapegoat for friggin' Starbucks.
At least admit that you want a
Starbucks. Drink your frappalatte proudly. But do not condascend to me or anyone else that it's the anti-corporate team's fault or the hookers' fault or anyone else's for having that place in your neighborhood. That was your cause! Be proud. Of all the things happening in the world - in your neighborhood - poverty, prostitution, drugs - you spent your time on getting Starbucks! Bravo.
I will be doing a post shortly about the neighborhood's anti prostitution efforts that has successfully reduced the problem from a plaque to minor levels. Many neighbors, including Shawn, have been physically involved in a variety of ways of dealing with the issue. This has included neighborhood patrols, where in some of those neighbors have been assaulted, seeking changes in laws, greater police enforcement, setting up treatment programs and other activities.
ReplyDeleteFor whatever it is worth, I'll say it AGAIN:
ReplyDeleteStarbucks only selected this location because of its access to the HIGHWAY.
They did the traffic count, they are only interested in the SOUTHBOUND A.M. traffic (why they bought that corner, rather than the Valero on the east side- not so much coffee drinking during evening rush hour).
They are building a different building than they normally do, because it is ONLY about the drive through. (which is why the neighborhood should have made Starbucks build something exceptional (liek the ARC tried to tell them the law says they must do). Believing a corporation's developer's "threats" is very naive- they wanted that corner. they're going in that corner, even later than originally scheduled.
They don't give a rat's ass about Seminole Heights, or Davis Islands, or Hyde Park. They care about spreadsheets.
They are jumpy (too much of their own product?) about the in-roads Indigo and other drive through chains have done.
That is ALL folks!
Being surprised by some anti-corporate forces is kind of amusing. These people are everywhere- they might be residents, they probably aren't. Free speech.And, believe me, Starbucks is used to it. Again- they don't care.
If everyone could just get that straight, the blurry edges of some good conversation that's going on here would come into focus.
Thats Funny, I apologize for not being clearer. Please let me say this very simply: the neighborhood association had an opportunity to prevent Starbucks from comming in on that corner. The association heard voices pro and con relating to the Starbucks. There were a number of people, myself included, who aren't Starbucks zealots but also saw practical reasons why a Starbucks might be helpful. A single, reasonal, practical, voice describing how the association's goals might be met without championing the Starbucks could have swayed the association. Easily. But there was no attempt at comming up with an alternative on the part of the group that opposed Starbucks. The group in favor of Starbucks made a good case for how it might stimulate commercial revitalization.
ReplyDeleteMy argument is that picketing and other forms of "no no no" demonstration are empty if they do not also come up with workable solutions. The anti-starbucks crowd couldn't even manage to come up with alternative IDEAS and deliver them to a sympathetic neighborhood association with political clout and a long history of hard work and follow-through. It isn't enough to simply be against something.
And yeah, I know very well what goes on at 3am in Seminole Heights. Me and my neighbors spent years worth of weekends driving around in the wee hours spotting hookers and dealers. I've called police dispatch so much they know my voice. I'll let the host of this blog describe my efforts and those of my "team". Best to just know that the amazing drop in street crime in the area is directly tied to all our efforts across all Seminole Heights.
That was step number one. Step number two is where we are currently focused. I'm still open to hearing about ideas for ways we can encourage mom-and-pop revitalization in an area with few suitable structures and a lingering if no longer accurate reputation for prostitution. Anyone?
Sorry about the "anonymous" thing. It's me. I clicked the wrong radio button.
ReplyDeleteSay It Again Sam is 100% correct. Starbucks looked at and passed up our neighborhood, according the developer, three prior times. This time is different because they have a new business model for offramp facilities and we happen to have a sweet one they're interested in. This was all known up front. The developer was totally honest about it.
I'm not surprised there are anti-corporate sentiments out there. I'm sympathetic to them. My surprise was their unwillingness to work with the association to come up with alternative ideas. Starbucks is a means to an end. I just figured naysayers would be more practical. You know, provide the neighborhood with quality information, explain why Starbucks might not do what we think it will, and then help us formulate a plausible alternative. That whole rational adult conversation thing? It's easier to be shrill, I guess.
The good news is, there's still a chance. Anyone have some practical experience or knowledge they can share?
Without overstating the obvious too much, the biggest thing we can do to encourage, besides being more involved politically as you suggested, is spend money in the neighborhood. Only rarely do we spend our dining-out budget outside of SH. There are many reasons why people choose to establish businesses, but I'd suggest that none of them do so to go broke. Instead of picking up the phone to call Domino's, walk, ride or drive up to Stephannos for some awesome pizza. Instead of hauling your butt to Ybor or SoHo for a round of brew, belly up to bar at the Front Porch. Don't feel like cooking breakfast on the weekend, Nicko's or Coffee Bean Cafe are both "eggs"cellent. I could go on but it boils down to this. A commitment to support those that have attempted to make a go of it in SH can only encourage others. Vacant or non-existant storefronts aren't much of an incentive to risk starting or relocating a small business here, but success breeds success. While the anti-corporate sentiment may be well-intentioned, grafitti on the Starbuck's sign could potentially be just enough reason for a small business person to choose another place to set up shop.
ReplyDeleteGive me a break. Independent minded small business people arnt going to fret over a silly altered starbucks sign. Starbucks is the antithesis of small business. The graffiti served it's purpose anyway. This is a healthy debate.
ReplyDeleteMy comments about Starbucks and its protesters were fairly general. I don't know the ins and out of the neighborhood association meetings in SH, so I won't even begin to speak to that.
ReplyDeleteI used to live in SH. Hell, my dad grew up there. My grandfather lived and died there. I have many friends (a majority) who live there - in the good, the bad and the ugly areas. Several of them have been there for ten years or more.
The only thing I'm defending is a person's right to protest a business if he or she wants to - regardless of their lack of ideas or cooperation with a given neighborhood association.
I, personally, would never give a cent to Starbucks. But I don't buy Nikes, either. These are my ethics and I will defend them. You're of course free to do whatever you choose - because we're in a somewhat free country, see.
As far as my statement on the crime in SH, I was responding to a comment Shawn made:
"Why would Dennis at Java & Cream open a store between a pawn shop and a hooker motel where the busiest retail hours were between 3 and 6am?"
Well, now I'm just confused. Has the illegal activity been reduced or is it still a major problem? It seemed to me, from the statement, that it's still a big problem that needs to be solved.
In a perfect world, all groups (lefts, rights and in-betweens) would communicate and create a whole community together. Obviously, this is not happening in SH for whatever reason.
In a nutshell, I support the right to free speech. I support the hell out of a person's right to protest a Starbuck's in their neighborhood -- regardless of their involvement in a neighborhood association meeting.
And lastly...why would anyone want a place like this where they live:
"They don't give a rat's ass about Seminole Heights, or Davis Islands, or Hyde Park. They care about spreadsheets.
They are jumpy (too much of their own product?) about the in-roads Indigo and other drive through chains have done.
That is ALL folks!"
AND
"Being surprised by some anti-corporate forces is kind of amusing. These people are everywhere- they might be residents, they probably aren't. Free speech.And, believe me, Starbucks is used to it. Again- they don't care."
My sincere best wishes to all the SH residents. I hope this can be sorted out one way or another while maintaining respect for each and every community member.
"Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation, are men who want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its many waters." -- Frederick Douglass
ReplyDeleteNo one's right to protest is at question here. What I question is someone's motives if they pass up reasonable discourse and an opportunity to get their way for protest.
ReplyDeleteProtest for the sake of protest? WHY?
(And no one has a right to vandalism.)
People want the Starbucks for a variety of reasons. I believe the majority of neighorhood activists supported the Starbucks out of a hope it would mark the area as "safe for business."
SH has a great sense of community. The neighborhood associations (3 of them) are very active. Sub-neighborhoods host large numbers of events all year long that draw large crowds. There are published newsletters, web sites, and blogs. This neighborhood is more "together" than any I've lived in since adulthood.
I think there's a great deal of frustration in the anti-Starbucks crowd on this one. Many of them are quite capable of eloquant communication and often contribute fantastic ideas to solve other neighborhood issues. (And here I speak of OSHNA as I've never attended a SESH or SSH meeting.) The frustration is that the particular hurdles to mom-and-pops in our area are unusually tall and there really isn't an easy or "bohemian" solution. Starbucks represents the sort of solutions one comes up with when there really are none--stab-in-the-dark. "Anything is better than..." was a common refrain on this one.
Given the amount of discussion on the issue in the area, I'm tempted to think most of the current protesting going on are from people living outside of Seminole Heights. People unfamiliar with the debate that went on and with the particular issues the area faces are probably more prone to make incorrect assumptions. ;-)
I don't think the "artist" can take credit for this debate. These issues have been around well before the offended sign was erected. Besides graffiti isn't protected speech, it's vandalism. And by printing "NO NO NO" on paper and plastering it to a sign not your own.
ReplyDeletea)defaces someone else's property
b)creates litter as the NO's flake off and are blown around.
c)contributes to more deforestation(unless the "activist" was contientious enough to use recycled paper) and global warming.
I did not intend to imply that a small business owner would drive by the sign and say nope, not here. But deciding whether to and where to start a small business is quite obviously the culmination of many factors, and something as small as a single incident as this(the controversy, the litter created, or just the eyesore of a "tagged" sign) might be just enough to sway a person's mind one way or another. Arguably it might also create an inviting anti-corporate atmosphere for a mom-and-pop striving to make a go..but given all the stress and uncertainty of making a business succeed..which is more likely.
Protesting for the sake of protesting? Open your eyes. I live off Central, and I never even heard about these meetings. Maybe I'm part of a different group than you, but I wasn't part of any debate. I didn't even know a Starbucks was going up until recenlty/ You can count my vote as NO to starbuck's too.
ReplyDeleteI think it is a shame that Starbucks isn't welcomed. In response to "That's Funny", I would like to say as someone who ended up in SH from Ybor City via DC, I really don't understand what is lost in adding the millionth Starbucks to a community. In fact, I checked with Starbucks and there are about 20 Starbucks in and around her 12th & M location in the District with the nearest one about two blocks from 12th and M. Small world isn't it? Maybe the Starbucks didn't come while she lived there, but their current presence certainly seals that DC hood's relevance as a 'good place to live'. I've been there, and it is a great neighborhood.
ReplyDeleteAs far as Ybor is concerned, the City of Tampa has taken it upon itself, good or bad to reinvent the strip. 'Centro Ybor' was an ambitious attempt to modernize the decrepit state of Ybor. Yes, I love the hodge-podge character that is Ybor, and while I don't see why they had to re-allow street traffic on Friday and Saturday nights or make it some cuddly family teddy bear, I can see the positive effect of a Starbucks. Just look at the old DC 12 & M location.
The case has already been made in this comments forum about some of the other negative aspects of our dear neighborhood. I must say, the frequency of various auto stores, buy-here-pay-here lots, and cheap hotels do take away from aesthetic properties of SH. However, that is part of the appeal to some... you drive down Florida and Nebraska and see all this shit, then make a left or right and WHAM! you are in a great neighborhood. It is a pleasant surprise.
Right now, I'm going to keep brewing my coffee at the house. I'll still walk to the Coffee Bean to get myself one of their awesome Cuban coffees from time to time. They are just as much as a Starbucks mind you, and cost just as little to make. If it's a late night study session, I'll just go to Indigo Coffee on MLK. In a few months, when the fancy strikes me, I'll swing by and fornicate with Starbucks with a shitty Café Mocha. Spread the love, if you will. Since we do live in America, an acknowledged consumer society, the mental justification of yet another Starbucks really isn't such a sin. This sophisticated snobbery of progress is detrimental to our community. There are plenty of other things to place "NO" placards around here in Tampa.
Then paste some up by all means.
ReplyDeletei believe the "artist" IS entitled to take credit for this current debate. If noone altered that billboard, noone would be taking a picture of it and putting it on the internet and getting all huffy puffy about it. right?
Graffiti might not be "protected speech" but as Attorney General Gonzalez has so bravely pointed out: "the constitution is an outdated document." He said it, not me.
As for the charge that the miniscule amount of biodegradable paper that was utilized to alter the sign being responsible for destroying the rain forest I say: Your really reaching man!
The waste products from your starbucks packaging will be littering the neighborhood long after that plastic coated billboard is buried in a landfill. Besides, there was a gentleman's bet on whether or not some anal neighborhood dweeb would remove the "No" paper from the sign before they would flake off. I won. I just hope you recycled them!!
And regarding the vandalism charge, I leave you with this quote:
"As awareness of how the media environment we occupy affects and directs our inner life grows, some resist...The skillfully reworked billboard...directs the public viewer to a consideration of the original corporate strategy. The studio for the cultural jammer is the world at large."
Finally, and just as importantly, culture jammers are Groucho Marxists, ever mindful of the fun to be had in the joyful demolition of oppressive ideologies. As the inveterate prankster and former Dead Kennedy singer Jello Biafra once observed, "There's a big difference between 'simple crime' like holding up a 7-11, and 'creative crime' as a form of expression...Creative crime is...uplifting to the soul...What better way to survive our anthill society than by abusing the very mass media that sedates the public?...A prank a day keeps the dog leash away!"
Disclosure:
ReplyDeleteThe "artist" is in fact a current resident of Seminole Heights. Grew up in Seminole Heights, and even played baseball at the Seminole Heights Little League in the early 1980s. Damn good first baseman too.
Doubtful that the "Nos" were removed by anyone other than the developer's minions. Lets review some facts regarding Starbuck's leading the gentrification movement...disclaimer...only looking at the Tampa area, there are papers written about this in other communities. Where are the Starbucks currently located and when did they open? Lets see South Tampa has a few, but SoHo was undergoing gentrification before Starbucks came, and not a Wal-Mart to be found. Palma Ceia has been haughty as far back as I remember and still no Wal-Mart, Target or other evil empire. Dale Mabry S..well that place's look has changed little since at least the 80's, restaurants and gas stations galore. A couple of franchises co-located with Tarjay's but then ya wanna get into the whole chicken and egg arguement? Oh wait...imagine this..there's a Starbucks on Davis Island..guess Walmart will be taking over the Maternity Ward in TGH next...Oh and there's a Starbucks right there in the student ghetto area of SuitCase City...that area has certainly gentrified in the 5 years or so since Starbucks opened. Carollwood, suburb and retail hell almost since day one.. and a whole bunch near WestShore..Starbucks may have some corporate evils..I really don't see its presence in SH leading the charge for mass bigbox development. Starbucks might be a symptom but it's rarely if ever the cause, any more than a headache causes a brain tumor. For the record..I haven't been into a Walmart in several years now..I disagree with their ideology and voice my opinion when appropriate and the best way I do it is by spending my dollars elsewhere..if you don't like Starbucks dont go..I'd much rather see small businesses come to SH, but since the Bean closes at 3 and Indigo by 8 well then I guess Starbucks will get my 4 bucks when I get that hankering in the later hours.
ReplyDeleteAs for the comment about not knowing about Starbucks coming to SH..when I was told I was transferring back to Tampa I started looking for a home and doing some research.. I heard about Starbucks at least a year ago now. Staying informed about your community is your responsibility if you wish to help guide it's course..being proactive is always better than being reactive. You would have affected more change by relaying those "No's" during the hearings and meetings before Starbucks was permitted, than you ever will now, it's coming.
The Annual Home tours are going to forward the gentrification process way more than a Starbucks popping up along the Interstate ever will..are we going to picket those next?
ReplyDelete"Protesting for the sake of protesting? Open your eyes. I live off Central, and I never even heard about these meetings. Maybe I'm part of a different group than you, but I wasn't part of any debate. I didn't even know a Starbucks was going up until recenlty/ You can count my vote as NO to starbuck's too."
ReplyDeleteYou have the choice of joining your neighborhood association and receiving the quarterly newsletters. This would have informed you of the deliberations. There is also the website, www.oldseminoleheights.com, which doesn't require membership. Additionally, the OSHNA newsletter is stacked and available for free in the Nebraska Publix lobby. OSHNA also mails out the newsletter to roughly 25% of the areas non-members on a regular basis. At some point, you have or will receive one.
The neighborhood associations are constantly reviewing requests for variances, liquor licenses, etc. If you live in Seminole Heights and do not take the small amounts of time needed to keep up to date on the issues before your association (there are three), only you are to blame when something like this surprises you. Reading one short newsletter every three months is a small price to pay, is it not?
Please consider getting involved.
Something to consider: Where in Seminole Heights can you find a lot large enough for a true "big box" store like Walmart? One of the issues this area faces in commercial revitalization is our urban lot-sizes. (I personally think this is a good thing.) When Walgreens wanted to join several lots together by swallowing up a street, and alley, and possibly some homes behind, the neighborhood put a stop to that quickly. So if you cannot tear down homes, where can a business that requires large amounts of land go? No where, of course. We are not at risk for that type of development.
ReplyDeleteFor those who want more info on the progression of the Starbucks in Seminole Heights see my latest post:
ReplyDeletehttp://seminoleheights.blogspot.com/2006/01/all-of-my-starbucks-posts.html
Graffiti, defacing private property, etc. is a crime and if I were the builder I would prosecute it as such. And, since some of these bloggers know who it is, then I would think that they would be assecories. Moreover, for some of these bloggers to get off on a crime, is this the type of community we really want to be and portray. We have worked hard to reduce crime, not champion it. Quite frankly, I am sick that I live with some of you.
ReplyDeleteRosa Parks "got off" on a crime. so did Thoreau, MLK Jr., Howard Zinn, and anyone whose ever committed civil disobediance or ripped that tag off their mattress. You, sir or madame, are a buffoon.
ReplyDeleteRosa Parks didn't vandalize someone else's property. If everyone with a valid gripe chose violent or destructive forms of civil disobedience there wouldn't be much community support for it, would there?
ReplyDeleteAre you seriously comparing Rosa Parks' actions to those of a vandal?
So Nabob, let me see if I have this straight - Say you owned a volkswagon. Since I am jewish and my grandfather was murdered in the holocaust, I decide to place "NO" stickers all over your german made car. You catch me in the act, but, recogizing and respecting my legitimate right to protest and engage in civil disobediance, you just laugh it off and let me go on my merry way. Is that how it works?
ReplyDeleteFrankly, I dont see the analogy.
ReplyDeleteJust read in the Trib that part of the revitalization of the Kennedy Blvd area includes a Starbucks being planned for construction on one of the old used car lots. Get your biodegradable banners ready.
ReplyDeleteJust spoke with a friend who worked for Starbucks roastery in Seattle - she said they bought bottom of the barrel beans, burnt them to hell and convinced Americans that's the way coffee should taste.
ReplyDeletePeople are so brand conscious they would probably drink a cup of cow piss if you slapped a Starbucks label on it.
This is America. One big mall. No sense of social responsibility. Why not look past your generation and think about what you're supporting, what you're creating - the big picture! And I ain't talking about no lot in some part of Tampa, either.
According to this CNN.COM article someone attempted to blow up a Starbucks in San Francisco.
ReplyDeleteApparently, some people feel so strongly about Starbucks that mere vandalism isn't enough.
Most of these posts are pathetic. Those nice little mom and pop businesses that you dream about and for which you have your bowels in a knot over can't take hold lost in a sea of car lots. Try starting a business on most of the commercial areas...unless you auto related no one will notice you. To those that gripe..put your money where your mouth is. Oh I forgot you have no money. If you do and want to throw it down the drain...please tell me where so I can collect it. This ain't Mayberry. And it just may take a few corporate giants to lessen the risk for those mom and pops to have a viable shot at surviving. I have heard the bitching for years about neighborhood friendly business and pedestrian friendly. Yet these same people drive 4 blocks to Publix or Nicko's or Feado's or any number of other points. Cut the hypocritical BS
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry but did I read these correctly? Using the Holocaust and Rosa Park’s to talk about the opening of a Starbucks? Maybe I’m mistaken but that seems a tad overzealous.
ReplyDeleteIts doing well now but I don’t exactly remember the Front Porch being packed when it opened. Rigo’s, Viva La Frida and Ansleys seem to have disappeared. What did you angry folks do to help them? Don’t get me wrong I do think Starbucks sucks but well so does the Dutch Motel. How many registered sex offenders stay there?
I agree with Rachel. Plus, Starbucks isn't putting anyone out of business by moving in. There isn't a local coffee shop nearby. That lot has been an eyesore since I moved into the are in 2002.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing, Starbucks offers benefits for part time employees. How many business (local or corporate) do that? Not many.
Lat time I checked there were corperate gas stations and banks on Davis Island. Lets not romanticize this into some dumb ass hippie comune fantasy aight?
ReplyDeleteThere are more SUVs in the driveways over there than anywhere other that Harbour Island.