Growth feeds Growth

 After the housing developers come the commercial developers: 

Commercial developers are looking at lands along Clark Road east of I-75 for commercial strip malls - gas stations, convenience stores, etc.

As part of their preparation, they are tracking planned housing - already approved - in the area. 

Near the intersection of Proctor (Trillium) and Clark (Skye Ranch, Hi Hat) they are excited to find the approved, planned build-out of some 25,000 homes:

Here's a closer view of the estimated new housing from Turner Family's Hi Hat and Skye Ranch, as well as Pat Neal's properties south of Clark:

Townhomes under construction at Skye Ranch

Adding up the total housing units in the area, the commercial developer provides a set of projected totals for housing:

One site targeted for a WaWa or other gas station and stores is at the Northeast corner of Proctor and Clark:

The strip mall proposal at Proctor/Clark appears to be part of preliminary commercial plans. They must be submitted to the County, then be presented to nearby neighborhoods before proceeding to the Planning Commission before being approved by the Board of Sarasota County Commissioners.

Growth in Sarasota County and voter power

Growth in Sarasota 

County staff produced the information below to advise the Board about what large developments it has approved in North, Central, and South county. The document is not dated, and appears to be out of date. 

Some large housing projects the Board has approved in principle, such as Hi Hat Ranch, projecting 13,000 dwelling units, are not included. Then there's Wellen Park in South County, which projects 23,000 units totaling 60,000 residents. What other large developments, destined to be approved, are not included?

Add in Hi Hat and the total for North County alone is about 23,000 units. With Wellen, the county total comes to about 

79,000 dwelling units

What's not included are small developments, new developments, and developments yet to approach the Board for approval.

Most residents of the County never see this information, because it's not published for us, but maintained in-house for internal use.

Under Single Member District voting, you would be able to request this information for your district from your Commissioner, and ask him or her questions - such as, what will this do to our traffic? How much will the new services cost? What portion of these costs are paid for by the developers? 

And your Commissioner would have to provide you with real answers.

That's now how it is now. Under At-Large voting, you can ask all the questions you want of the 5 County Commissioners. They will just stare at you. They do not have to provide you with information, they often do not respond to emails from constituents, and rely on people to forget about the development issues in their district by the time the next election rolls around.

Single Member Districts count more than many imagine.

North County

Add Hi Hat Ranch: 13,000 units.

Central County

South County

                                    Add Wellen Park: 23,000 units

There's a way to slow this rampant growth. It's to make each Commissioner accountable to the voters of his or her district. In 2018, voters across all five districts approved Single Member District Voting. Now the Board is doing all it can to revoke the citizen Charter Amendment -- to avoid direct accountability to the people of their districts, whom they are supposed to represent.

Don't Let the Board Dumb Down Your Vote!

Retain Single Member Districts

"Sprawl at its worst" - Lobeck on Hi Hat

 

Hi-Hat Villages: Sprawl at its Worst

Attend the Public Hearing 

Wednesday, Sept. 8  1:30 pm

Sarasota County Admin. Bldg., 1660 Ringling Blvd., Sarasota

Email the County Commissioners

The Hi-Hat Villages Master Development Plan and Comprehensive Plan amendment return for a final public hearing and vote of the Sarasota County Commission this Wednesday,  September 8 at 1:30 pm at the County Administration Building, 1660 Ringling Blvd. in downtown Sarasota.  This extreme urban sprawl, with no plan to handle the massive traffic pouring west from the development, deserves an outpouring of opposition from the community.

On June 9, the Sarasota County Commission voted unanimously -- with no discussion of the issues -- to give initial approval to the massive Hi-Hat Villages development far east of I-75, on the vast lands between Fruitville and Clark Roads.  That followed 20 speakers against it, expressing often detailed objections, and no speakers in favor other than the developer representatives, and County staff.

County Planner Todd Dary even opened his presentation to the Commission and the public with an outright lie -- it can't fairly be called anything else -- about who will pay for the millions of dollars in needed road improvements to handle the traffic from the development.  Referring to the proposed Master Development Plan, Dary stated, "It makes clear that roadway costs will be the responsibility of the Master Developer, not the County." 

To the contrary, the Plan makes the developer responsible for just a portion of the massive road improvement costs. The Plan even then goes on to excuse the developer from its share of the costs if it instead commits to “other traffic mitigating measures” such as "the promotion of telecommuting, ride sharing or transit” acceptable to Sarasota County and “that are intended to eliminate the impact from Hi Hat Ranch development on the deficiently operating facility(ies).”  (Paragraph 11.A.6.b -- See more below on that). 

Unlike the strong and specific objections stated by scores of speakers, Mr. Dary stated, "Staff has no outstanding issues of concerns."

After a cursory state review, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Master Development Plan now returns for a final adoption public hearing on Wednesday, September 8.

In addition to the traffic and other issues detailed below, a major objection is the change of 1,200 acres -- shown in lavender within the oval in the graphic below -- from a "Hamlet" designation of one unit per acre to "Village" at 5 to 6 units per acre, the same as the rest of the development, shown as blue in the graphic. [emphasis added]

 

Although the developer says that it is just expanding the area in which it will spread its densities, at no total increase, nothing would prevent a future application to increase it further once that capacity is added.  And in any event, the change would include moving the Countryside Line further east, increasing urban densities and traffic that are disruptive to the rural lifestyle now enjoyed by residents in that area.

Alarmingly, the developer bases its request for that density increase on a desire for "flexibility to respond to market demands."  If that's all it takes for a developer to justify urban sprawl, then there is effectively no limit to developers getting whatever they want, despite the impacts on the rest of us.

A longtime defender of rural living, Becky Ayech of the Miakka Community Club, has organized a campaign to urge residents throughout the County to email Commissioners objecting to this pernicious plan.  More information about that effort is at Becky's Campaign Against Sprawl.

After reading the additional information below, please attend the Wednesday hearing, speak if you can and in any event please consider adding your voice to this effort by emailing the Commissioners with your concerns at the email addresses in the link above or at:  Sarasota County Commissioners

******

• Sarasota County is barreling towards rampant, uncontrolled urban sprawl east of I-75.

• Traffic congestion, tax hikes and other ills are inevitable unless there is a pause for better planning.

• The latest threat is the proposed Hi Hat Ranch Villages development east of the Bee Ridge Extension all the way between Fruitville and Clark Roads.   This massive urbanization of urban lands is for 13,511 houses, 450,000 square feet of commercial and office development, school facilities and a regional sports complex.

• There are several issues with the proposed Master Development Order and Comprehensive Plan Amendment, which include moving the "Countryside Line" further east to allow more density on 1,200 acres south of Fruitville Road, and impacts on area wells.

• But perhaps most alarming is the County's total lack of planning for the road impacts of this and other huge developments being allowed, all at the same time, east of I-75, under the Sarasota 2050 Plan.

• Proposed Transportation Condition 11.B.7 in the Hi Hat Master Development Order provides that each rezoning in the development shall evaluate the need for widening or building only four road segments.  They are two segments of Bee Ridge Road, a new North/South Roadway B on the east side of the development, and Fruitville Road between that roadway and Lorraine Road. 

• That is despite the fact that the Traffic Study has identified sixteen road segments which will need improvements to handle the traffic from the Hi-Hat Ranch development, including the need to widen Clark Road.  

• Further, Transportation Condition 11.A.6 of the proposed Hi Hat Master Development Order provides that no Development Orders throughout the development shall be approved if certain biennial monitoring of traffic impacts shows a roadway becoming congested below the adopted level of service unless one of two alternatives conditions are met. 

• The first alternative is that “funding commitments” are made sufficient to resolve the deficiency (with the developer paying its proportional share for the new capacity and the taxpayers paying the rest).

• The second alternative -- now get ready for this, because it is actually in there -- is that the Development Order gets approved if it includes “other traffic mitigating measures” including “the promotion of telecommuting, ride sharing or transit” acceptable to Sarasota County and “that are intended to eliminate the impact from Hi Hat Ranch development on the deficiently operating facility(ies).”

• That loophole is astonishing.  If the developer commits to promote ridesharing and telecommuting (perhaps with flyers given to purchasers), and “intends” -- intends -- that to be enough to take care of the traffic, and if County staff signs off on that, the developer is good to go gridlocking County roads in reality.   (“Whoops, sorry about that, but we really, really intended our promotion of ridesharing to keep the roads drivable.”)

• Policy VOS 2.9 of the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan (in the Sarasota 2050 provisions) requires that each Village development “shall provide adequate infrastructure that meets or exceeds the level of service standard adopted by the County and be Fiscally Neutral or Fiscally Beneficial.”

• Instead, the Conditions proposed for approval on Tuesday are woefully inadequate to comply with that requirement. 

• And the County has not even done a study showing who is going to pay for all the road improvements that will be needed and are in part planned east of I-75 that the County Commission is in the course of approving.

• Recently, the County Commission even approved an amendment to the Future Thoroughfare Plan requested by developer Pat Neal to increase east County road expenses by rerouting a planned southerly extension of Lorraine Road from hugging the Interstate south of Clark Road to instead swing out to the east, through two nature preserves, for what staff acknowledged was to "open up more land for development."

• Ben Franklin and others said that a failure to plan is a plan to fail.

• More planning is needed in and for the Hi Hat Master Development Order, for the protection of the people both east of I-75 and all motorists and taxpayers, before it deserves any chance to be approved.

• Please attend the final public hearing on Wednesday September 8 and tell the Commissioners to put the interests of drivers and taxpayers ahead of just the interests of the big developers.

• And whether or not you can attend, please email the Commissioners to ask them to vote "No" on this bad move, at:

• Email the County Commissioners

Thank you,

Dan Lobeck
For Control Growth Now

Here Is the Control Growth Now Website

Some background on Hi Hat and Old Miakka

Some history behind the Miakka Community Club and its opposition to Hi Hat Ranch's proposal to change Hamlet to Village overlay on its 10,000-acre property in Northeast Sarasota - from a resident, Jane Best Grandbouche:

The Miakka Community Club incorporated in 1945.  This is the same year the Turner family purchased Hi Hat Ranch.

The motto of the Club is “Conservation and Preservation of the Rural Area.” During the intervening years, the Club has worked to ensure that ranchers like Hi Hat had the opportunity to ranch. Hi Hat Ranch’s ability to be stewards of the land was supported by the Miakka Community’s continued vigilance in conserving and preserving the rural areas.

The Miakka Community Club (MCC) participated in ALL of the various meetings with the Urban Land Institute (ULI) including as a member of ULI’s Focus Group.

The Miakka Community Club also participated with written and oral testimony during both the transmittal stage and the final adoption stage.

As explained in all of these meetings and hearings, the Resource Management Areas (RMAs) define how the County would develop until the year 2050.  It is now 2021.  We are not half way there.  

You will not find in either the Comprehensive Plan or the Unified Development Code any reference to having Hamlets changing to Villages.  This idea wasn’t even contemplated or discussed.  Just as there was no reason to contemplate changing Hamlets to Villages then, there is no reason now.

If the Board wants there to be that opportunity, then that idea should be given public debate and due process.

The 1,200 acres Hi Hat is seeking to urbanize by changing the Hamlet overlay to Village overlay is productive agricultural land.  Since the Hamlet is a voluntary overlay, it is not necessitated that a Hamlet be developed there. Hi Hat Ranch could sell that productive agricultural land to someone else who wants to be in agriculture.  As farm land in the west and east dwindle, our produce needs to be grown somewhere.

The County recognizes the importance of agriculture as noted in FLU2.2.1 and FLU Policy 2.2.2 (a).

The County has a program to purchase agricultural development rights (DR Policy 1), so the Turners would get money for the development rights and then they could sell the land for agriculture production.

There is no valid reason to change the Hamlet overlay to Village overlay.

Please call and/or write the County Commissioners on this most important proposal. And please show up for the meeting September 8th. Once they paved over our rural area, it is gone forever. 

DENY CPA-2019-D

Becky Ayech: Write to the Board Now

The formal application for the Hi Hat Ranch change said that the modification will provide “flexibility to respond to market demands and the needs of tenants, and residents" Sarasota News Leader

This commission has put community preservation behind short-term profits.  David Guest, Letter to the Editor, Herald Tribune.

What Sarasota County officials did the other day with the Hi Hat Ranch was "devastating," says Becky Ayech. The Commission threw out the planning principles designed to bring order and common sense to developers' supersized plans. 

The Board's action will affect us all, says Ayech. She's asking us to tell the Board that it's unacceptable.

Three quick steps (more background below):

======================================================

1. Copy the Commissoners' addresses into your email:

amaio@scgov.net

mmoran@scgov.net

ncdetert@scgov.net

rcutsinger@scgov.net

cziegler@scgov.net

commissioners@scgov.net

2. Tell the Board that abandoning rational plans for the sake of market trends is an abdication of their responsibility. Use her words or your own:

Commissioners: 

As a resident and taxpayer of Sarasota County, I ask that you use Facts and Supporting Data to determine a Comprehensive Plan Amendment -- NOT MARKET TRENDS. 

DENY CPA-2019-D

or,

Commissioners, 

None of the “Directions for the Future” contained in the principles to guide Sarasota County's long range planning and sustainability initiatives include “flexibility to respond to market demands."  

DENY CPA-2019-D

or,

        Commissioners, 

        In sound planning practice, 

Either: Facts and supporting data matter and market trends do not, 

Or: Market trends dictate planning and FACTS DON'T MATTER. 

DENY CPA-2019-D

 

3. Share a copy of your email with Becky at miakka1945@gmail.com

========================================================

Image from Sarasota News Leader

Thank you for helping. 

Clearly, a plan to put 13,000 homes on 10,000-acre Hi Hat Ranch will irrevocably alter the character of rural Northeast Sarasota County. But what Ayech is concerned matters to all, countywide: What the Board is doing to the practice of planning itself could be even more devastating. 

Here's how she put it the other day:

HI HAT RANCH. The BOCC voted to transmit to the State the comp plan amendment that changed the 1,200 acre Hi Hat Hamlet, with a limit of 1 unit per acre to Village with a limit of 5-6 units per acre. Again, thanks to those who sent emails and spoke.

The MOST EGREGIOUS act was allowing our Comp Plan (our Vision for the Future) to be dictated by market demands instead of facts and supporting data. Translated, that means whatever density will make the most money is the density the County will give to the developer. FORGET PLANNING PRINCIPLES. IN FACT, JUST FORGET ANY PLANNING FOR OUR FUTURE. This not only affects us, but everyone throughout the County. So, before, there was some comfort provided by the Comprehensive Plan, now THERE IS NONE.

So, where do we go from here? There is more to be written.
The Comp Plan Amendment goes to the State for review. Our attorney is determining if the public can ask to have different agencies review the Amendment. Currently, they must be asked to do a review. 

The Comp Plan will come back to the BOCC for a final vote. The June 9 meeting was for transmitting the Amendment to the State. This will be for adoption of the Amendment. 

We need to be a political force. We will need broad base support throughout the County like we had before. You need to reach out to all those folks you did in the past and ask them to help. Again, this decision affects EVERYONE. When this comes back to the Commission, we need to pack the room. We need to overwhelm the Commissioners with emails.

Email the Commissioners and ask that Facts and Supporting Data be used to determine a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, NOT MARKET TRENDS. DENY CPA-2019-D

Hi Hat hearing to be postponed after procedural errors were identified by a citizen

A Public Hearing for a giant development in North Sarasota that had been scheduled for March 23, 2021, will be postponed after several rather glaring errors in the procedures used to publish the hearing and to allow for public participation were spotted by a former county attorney.

East Sarasota attorney Susan Schoettle-Gumm wrote to Jim Turner, the land use lawyer and family member of the owners of Hi Hat Ranch, citing certain violations of required procedures. Turner soon replied that he would request that the hearing be postponed in order to address the issues. 

One concern was the amount of time allowed for public awareness. Hi Hat Ranch is a complex project involving 12,000 acres and perhaps 30 years of developmental actions. Citizens were surprised when they saw they had been given just four days - from Friday afternoon, March 19, to noon on Monday, March 22, to receive, read and digest, and formally comment and testify. Elsewhere counties typically provide necessary documents two or more weeks in advance of public hearings.  

The errors included four violations of county requirements:

1. Noticing the proposed amendment as both a privately initiated amendment and a public initiated amendment in both the legal notice and the postcard. 

2. The Hearing has to be within 60 days of the Planning Commission's decision (the PC is Sarasota's Land Planning Agency) and today, March 23, is the 61st day.

3. The staff report and supporting documents had to be made available to the public two Fridays before the hearing. on the proposed development  The County only made them available on Friday, March 19 -- 5 days before the scheduled hearing.

4. The hearing Agenda listed two items, but only allowed one opportunity for Public input.

The exchange between Schoettle-Gumm and Turner was cordial. After receiving her email, Turner replied: 

While I believe most of the procedural issues you have raised are not fatal to the process , I have made the decision to postpone the Board hearing scheduled for tomorrow to ensure these issues are addressed. We will appear before the Board at the scheduled time, explain the situation and then reschedule.

A full copy of Schoettle's letter is here, and an image of the key points is below.

March 22 letter from Schoettle-Gumm to Jim Turner

Citizens who have followed or participated in many public hearings have suggested that the "public" component of Public Hearings has diminished. Citizens often prepare detailed analyses and are allowed 5 minutes - sometimes just 3 minutes - to present their findings. 

Bending requirements such as merging two distinct matters into a single opportunity for public comment could ignore significant issues and relevant data."Another example of how this County cares nothing about following the rules—breaking several, not just one," was one longtime activist's comment.

More on the Hi Hat Proposed Development here and here.

Flying Blind: Citizen Comment for Hi Hat Public Hearing

Anyone wishing to testify regarding the Hi Hat public hearing can do so until Noon Monday, March 22 at this link. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters (not words).

Below is a complete comment submitted to the Board of Sarasota County Commissioners regarding the March 23rd hearing on Hi Hat, a 10,000-acre proposed development. Submitted on Sunday, March 21, 2021 by Tom Matrullo, co-founder of Citizens for Sarasota County. An excerpt of this comment was submitted to meet the 1,500-character limit.

To the members of the Board of Sarasota County Commissioners:

As you address the giant Turner family Hi Hat Ranch project on March 23, 2021, it’s important that you consider the concerns raised by the Miakka Community Club. These include thoughtful, informed observations about water, the ecosystem, the environment, roads and traffic, all warranting close attention. Surely you have read Ms. Ayech's letter; for ease of reference it is linked here.

 

It’s necessary to consider the larger context here as well. It’s virtually impossible to do this, however, as the data necessary to fully grasp this context is not compiled in a manner that allows you -- or the public you serve -- to accurately see the future your actions are bringing about.

 

Hi Hat Map

Have you driven through the Hi Hat lands recently? It’s not simply a rural area of great natural beauty; it's also a vast segment of the county that lies between major roads -- Fruitville to the North, Clark to the South, and Bee Ridge (when extended eastward). There is also a major FPL Power line extending northward through the property from Clark to Fruitville.

When a project of the scale and complexity of Hi Hat Ranch comes to you, the impacts are manifold; they are likely to permanently alter the character of East Sarasota County.

 

Here’s my major concern: If you wish to hold a formal hearing that includes the participation of an informed public, it is incumbent upon you and essential to the process that the public of Sarasota County be in possession of crystal clear information, in plain English, of the context -- the proportions of the bigger picture.

 

What would such a picture include? At minimum it would communicate a dynamic image through time of the unfolding development of Sarasota County -- those residential, commercial, and industrial developments that are planned, approved and underway; those that are completed, and those natural  assets which as yet are undisturbed. Proportions expressing, for example:

 

• The number of dwellings approved for construction in each of the five districts, and in the county as a whole;

• The acreage of land already committed to future development in proportion to the total developable land mass, and to the total lands reserved for public uses and for conservation; 

• The miles of future roads, their numbers of lanes, clearly mapped as needed to adequately serve that future population;

• An accurate, detailed and realistic accounting of all costs of these roads;

• An accurate, detailed and realistic accounting of all costs for those public services necessitated by private developments -- police, fire, emergency, hospital, schools, evacuation routes, hurricane shelters and all others;

• An accurate, detailed and realistic assessment of how many dwelling units are destined for the many large scale developments such as Skye Ranch, Wellen Park, Sarasota National, Grand Park, Grand Palm and Pat Neal's many other Grand projects, Palmer Ranch, SIPOC, the Fruitville Initiative, the Villages of Manasota Beach, Waterside at Lakewood Ranch and many more, as listed in the Planning Department document below.

 

 

Without this data-rich picture, we who live here are blind. 

 

Furthermore it has now been demonstrated that key planning maps (RMA1 and RMA 3) have not been updated in decades, despite repeated requests from residents and County promises to make them current.(1) Is this proper custodianship of the public realm?

 

In the absence of a shared public vision, a “public hearing” -- in which the people of Sarasota are purported to participate -- borders on charade. 

 

So here’s my key question: Do you yourselves have access to the aforementioned detailed current and realistic accounting, or not? If you do, then why have you not done your utmost to share it clearly and openly with the people you were elected to represent? If you do not yourselves possess this information, then how can you claim to understand in any clear, rigorous and informed way the many impactful consequences that lie ahead? 

 

Over recent decades, public planning in Florida has jettisoned the essential elements of integral vision, thanks in great measure to the abdication of constructive regional and state attention and review. Random, piecemeal process has taken the place of a comprehensive approach candidly shared with all. Without that picture, the future of Sarasota is unknown. 

 

In this time of crippled comprehensive provision for our future needs and quality of life, each of you has a special responsibility to charge developers with moulding projects that contribute to our quality of life -- not just for their tens of thousands of future customers, but for all who live and work here. Without such a thorough, thought-out vision, we the people are adrift, experiencing the chronic nightmare of Sarasota County’s relentless blind growth.

(1)Herald Tribune, March 21, 2021, Residents call on Sarasota County to update rural planning maps before it’s too late.

 

 (2) See Rhodes, Robert M. (2020) "Florida’s Growth Management Odyssey: Revolution, Evolution, Devolution, Resolution," Journal of Comparative Urban Law and Policy: Vol. 4 : Iss. 1 , Article 11, 56-69.

"That final loophole is astonishing" -- Lobeck on Hi Hat Master Plan

Letter sent March 19 from attorney Dan Lobeck to the Board, offering salient reasons why the Master Plan for Hi Hat Ranch, which will be addressed Tuesday March 22, fails to be sufficient in many ways. The text has been redacted to put the focus on Mr. Lobeck's last point, regarding road sufficiency and traffic:

Hi Hat Ranch

Honorable County Commissioners:

I and my firm represent Saddle Creek Owners Association, Inc., which operates the Saddle Creek Subdivision directly adjoining the proposed Hi-Hat Ranch Village development (and sharing a border about a mile long), which is before you for public hearing this Tuesday, March 23 .

We greatly appreciate the outreach, communications and cooperation of Jim Turner in the review and preparation of the proposed Master Development Plan.  In particular, we appreciate the relocation of the proposed Regional Sports Complex away from Saddle Creek, to a more suitable location north and east of the original site near Saddle Creek.

<A section relating to future high school, sporting areas, and another section on ground water have been elided> 

Transportation

Access to Saddle Creek is from Clark Road.  We are alarmed that the Transportation Conditions in the Master Development Order fail to address the need to maintain adequate capacity on Clark Road to handle the huge increase in traffic from the proposed Hi-Hat development, and to make the developer pay for needed road improvements for that purpose, as a Condition in the Master Development Order and as required by the Sarasota 2050 policies of the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan.   The same problem exists as to impacts of the development on many other east County roads.

Proposed Transportation Condition 11.B.7 provides that each rezoning in the development shall evaluate the need for widening or building only four road segments: two segments of Bee Ridge Road, North/South Roadway B, and Fruitville Road between that roadway and Lorraine Road.  That is despite the fact that the Traffic Study has identified sixteen road segments which will need improvements to handle the traffic from the Hi-Hat Ranch development, including the need to widen Clark Road from two lanes to four in the vicinity of Saddle Creek and elsewhere. 

Further, Transportation Condition 11.A.6 provides that no Development Orders throughout the development shall be approved if certain biennial monitoring of traffic impacts show a roadway becoming congested below the adopted level of service unless “funding commitments” are made sufficient to resolve the deficiency (with the developer paying its proportional share for the new capacity and the taxpayers paying the rest) or – now get ready for this, because it is actually in there -- if the Development Order includes “other traffic mitigating measures” including “the promotion of telecommuting, ride sharing or transit” acceptable to Sarasota County and “that are intended to eliminate the impact from Hi Hat Ranch development on the deficiently operating facility(ies).”

That final loophole is astonishing.  If the developer commits to promote ridesharing and telecommuting (perhaps with flyers given to purchasers), and “intends” -- intends -- that to be enough to take care of the traffic, and if County staff signs off on that, the developer is good to go gridlocking County roads in reality.   (“Whoops, sorry about that, but we really, really intended our promotion of ridesharing to keep the roads drivable.”)

Policy VOS 2.9 of the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan (in the Sarasota 2050 provisions) requires that each Village development “shall provide adequate infrastructure that meets or exceeds the level of service standard adopted by the County and be Fiscally Neutral or Fiscally Beneficial.”

Instead, the Conditions now before you are woefully inadequate to comply with that requirement.  And the County has not even done a study showing who is going to pay for all the road improvements that will be needed and are in part planned east of I-75 that the County Commission is in the course of approving. 

Ben Franklin and others said that a failure to plan is a plan to fail.

More planning is needed in and for this Master Development Order, for the protection of the people of Saddle Creek and very many more, before it deserves to be approved. 

Thank you very much for your considerations.

  

Dan Lobeck, Esq.

Florida Bar Board Certified in

Condominium and Planned Development Law

Law Offices of Lobeck & Hanson, P.A.

2033 Main Street, Suite 403

Sarasota, FL  34237

Telephone:  (941) 955-5622

Facsimile:   (941) 951-1469

www.lobeckhanson.com

To the Planning Commission regarding development in Sarasota County

UPDATE: This Hi Hat proposal received a unanimous recommendation from the Sarasota County Planning Commission (PC) on January 21, 2021. The 8-0 vote means the project will go on to the Board of County Commissioners for official consideration.

The Planning Commission meeting is now available here.

A number of Sarasotans wrote the PC to advocate for much more detailed analysis and consideration before giving any recommendation to approve this giant plan. Below is one of many.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Planning Commission:

As you address the giant Turner family project that comes before you this evening, I ask that you consider the concerns raised by a spokesperson for the Miakka Community Club. There are thoughtful, informed observations about Water, the Ecosystem and Environment, and traffic that warrant close attention. Surely you have read Ms. Ayech's letter, but for ease of reference it is posted here for public awareness:

http://sarasotavision2050.blogspot.com/2021/01/hi-hat-project-could-change-whole.html

But I urge you to consider the larger context as well.

When a project of this scale and complexity comes to you, the impacts to be considered are manifold, and in this case, will alter the character of East Sarasota County permanently. This warrants a further observation:

Have you driven through the Hi Hat ranchland recently? It is not simply a rural area of great natural beauty; it's also a vast segment of the county that connects major roads - Fruitville to the North, and Clark to the South. Bee Ridge Road will likely be extended eastward to enable future residents to come and go. There is also a major FPL Power line extending north through the property from Clark to Fruitville..

While the Turner project might seem at first glance to have considered many aspects of this complex plan, there are surely elements of public value that can additionally be addressed. For example, there's the possibility of extending walking, horseback, and bicycling trails north from Clark to Fruitville, which then could link northward to Lakewood Ranch, and southward possibly to the Legacy Trail. This would add great value as a human and natural corridor - but often is not the sort of thing normally found in plans for housing developments and commercial centers.

One further point as to context: The public of Sarasota County really has no clear information regarding the number of homes already approved for construction, or the percentage of undeveloped land that is committed to future residential or commercial development. Given the rampant developer activity already approved by the Board of Sarasota County Commissioners - whether at Skye Ranch, or any of Pat Neal's many projects, or those of Mr. Beruff, or Mr. Kompothecras, or Wellen Park, or many more - we who live here are therefore unable to gauge in any clear, rigorous and informed way what impacts are coming. Unfortunately recent practice has abandoned comprehensive planning. Random, piecemeal plans of developers now take the place of a comprehensive vision shared with and benefitting all.The public would benefit from an overall mapping of exactly what's planned and what's approved -- without such information, the future nature and reality of Sarasota is in fact largely unknown. 

Given the absence of regional as well as of state oversight for local planning, I urge each of you to deeply consider what you can contribute to help developers with giant aspirations to make their projects the best - not only for thousands of future buyers who don't live here now, but also -- and especially -- for the people who live here, work here, and experience anxiety about the visionless direction of growth in Sarasota County.

Sincerely,

Tom Matrullo

Citizens for Sarasota County (CSC) is a coalition founded in 2014 to promote ethical, responsive government that preserves and enhances Sarasota's unique natural environment and cultural heritage while building a sound local economy based on effective stewardship and innovation. 

CSC

===

Blog

Facebook

Twitter

YouTube Channel 

Hi Hat Project could change "the whole ecosystem"

UPDATE: This Hi Hat proposal received a unanimous recommendation from the Sarasota County Planning Commission on January 21, 2021. The vote was 8-0, the project will now go on to the Board of County Commissioners for official consideration.

The Planning Commission meeting is now available here.

======

Perhaps the largest development project Sarasota County will see in a long time - Hi Hat Ranch - comes before the Planning Commission Thursday Jan. 21. According to Miakka Community advocate Becky Ayech, not only is this plan vague and counter-rational, it' will also change "THE WHOLE ECOSYSTEM."

The project takes in 10,000 acres stretching from Fruitville Road to Clark Road. Proposal calls for 13,000 residences with a 30-year build-out.

Hi Hat Ranch

Below are resources for comments to the PC from Ayech of the Miakka Community Group - feel free to write to the planning commissioners using any of the information below.

==

PLEASE USE ANY OF THESE COMMENTS.  REMEMBER, this is quasi-judicial, so only facts, not opinions.

PLEASE ACT IMMEDIATELY

For example: my water quality has greatly diminished since I moved into my home..HI Hat cannot use their irrigation wells for back up lawn watering.  my well is my only source of all my water needs.

RE; HI HAT RANCH DOCC and MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Good day Planning Commissioners,

The Applicant, Hi Hat Ranch has provided you with a plethora of information.

Unfortunately, one criterial piece of information is missing and many of the guarantees hinge upon that information.

While many maps were provided, the map showing where the Villages are going to be located is not clear at all.  I understand there may be 3 or 4 Villages, but I could not find a map that so indicates the locations.

Much of the information provided is relative to the timing of the Villages, specifically infrastructure, discussing the incremental development of utilities

The Applicant has indicated that the first Village would be located at the Hi Hat Ranch offices.  This location is akin to a hole in the doughnut.  The road to the offices is located on Fruitville Road, 2.1 miles from the Ranch’s western boundary.   It would be safe to say this would most likely be the same distance from Bee Ridge Road.  This would necessitate running utilities’ lines either from the Bee Ridge Road facilities or from the extension of utilities out to the Hamlet known as Lakepark Estates.  This would be ‘leaping’ over lands where it would make more planning sense to begin the Villages and then move easterly.

Therefore, the responses provided discussing these phasing approaches is meritless.

The MDP MUST show the location of at least the first Village

WATER QUALITY

The Applicant has provided information on monitoring and testing the SURFACE water quality, but is offering nothing for ground water protection.

The Applicant has several wells for the agricultural operation (see attached Water Use Permit).  The Applicant is purporting to use these ag wells as back up wells for lawn irrigation, if the back up lakes and stormwater ponds fail and that is only after the reclaimed water is not available.

The agricultural wells MUST NOT be used as the third way to water lawns.  Existing legal users that are in the Hi Hat Ranch area only have their domestic wells to meet ALL their needs.

Many of the wells on Hi Hat are drilled deep and cased shallow, allowing upward migration of poor-quality water, when then moves laterally into domestic wells.  (See attached minutes from the Southwest Florida Water management District Governing Board {SWFWMD] meeting. And well construction records from Sarasota Health Department)

The Ranch is located in the SWFWMD’s Southern Use Water Caution Area (SWUCA) where ground water withdrawals are not only causing upward migration of poor-quality water but also saltwater intrusion.  The proper plugging and abandonment of these wells would help the existing legal domestic well users and the Florida Aquifer and the Arcadian Aquifer.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

The Applicant stated that the aggregate mining will continue, not only for financial reasons, but because the development will need the fill.

There are NO NATURAL LAKES on the property.  While ultimately, they will provide nice lake front property, this changes the whole ecosystem.  Species that are currently not on the property will be drawn to the large water source.  These may include predator species that would kill exiting species.  The flora and fauna would change as well and again the existing flora and fauna support a myriad of species which may not be able to utilize the deep water.

Recognition MUST be given to the potential species changes and plans MUST be provided to show how this change would be mitigated.

The Applicant states they will create new wetlands by scraping off the top soil and importing the appropriate wetland soils. Healthy, thriving wetlands need a hydrological regime. 

The Applicant did not provide data and information on sites where this type of creation was successful not data showing how many have failed.  There wasn’t any information provided to show how the hydrological needs of the wetlands would be met.  In phosphate mining, as an example, wetlands the mitigate are held to a hydrological regime that is artificially maintained by the phosphate company until they are released as ‘successful’ by DEP. 

The Applicant must show how they are going to accomplish this wetland scrape land and create a new wetland scheme.

TRAFFIC

During the Workshop and then in a smaller meeting, the Applicant lamented the ugliness of the approach to the Mai Entrance to the Villages from extending Bee Ridge Road, forcing residents to pass the County’s Water Treatment Plant, the Hazardous Waste Collection Facility, the Animal Shelter and Rothenbach Park.  He stated the roadway in this area would have to be realigned and that the Applicant would have to build a bridge across Cow Pen Slough.

An alternative road, with a beautiful country (at least for now) view would be to use the existing road leading into the Ranch from Fruitville Road.  This would add additional congestion to an already over taxed, constrained scenic road.

Again, this is why at least the first Village should be located on the western boundary of the Ranch and should so be indicated on the map.

DO NOT ADOPT THE MASTER PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT ORDER FOR HI HAT RANCH UNTIL THESE ISSUES HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED.

Thank you.

Respectfully submitted,

Becky Ayech
President
Miakka Community Club

====================================

 More from the Herald Tribune

More from this blog on Hi Hat

Four Housing Projects that will overrun Northeast Sarasota

====================================

The emails of the Planning Commissioners: 

Andrew.Stultz@sarasotaadvisory.net, Colin.Pember@sarasotaadvisory.net, 

Kevin.Cooper@sarasotaadvisory.net, Laura.Benson@sarasotaadvisory.net,  Justin.Taylor@sarasotaadvisory.net, 

Neil.Rainford@sarasotaadvisory.net,  Frank.Strelec@sarasotaadvisory.net, Teresa.Mast@sarasotaadvisory.net, 

Drew.Peters@sarasotaadvisory.net