Board to Citizens: You Don't Matter (Update)

The County Commission sits in session on April 6. County Administrator Jonathan Lewis (foreground, left) and County Attorney Rick Elbrecht face the board members. News Leader image.

UPDATE: On Wednesday, April 7, the County Commission took less than 3 minutes to unanimously delete the citizens' right to initiate Comp Plan amendments. It did this in a "public hearing" that neither laid out the purpose of expunging citizen input, nor any reason for it. 

There was no discussion other than to render the suppression retroactive to Jan. 1, 2021, at the suggestion of Commissioner Moran, which effectively eliminated citizen Comp Plan Amendments in the past as well as any that might have come in the future. Partial video below: 

See also this story from the 4.6.21 Herald Tribune: 

Sarasota County Commission agrees to do away with citizen-initiated land use reviews. 

=======

On Tuesday, April 6, 2021, the Board of County Commissioners will pretend to deliberate on an ordinance that will, if approved, exclude citizens from initiating Comprehensive Plan Amendments (CPAs).

Here's the language of the Ordinance, and the proposed deletion of our citizens' right to influence thinking about future land use:

Deletion of citizen right to initiate a Comp Plan Amendment

The Board asked Michele Norton of Planning and Development why the provision was ever added to Sarasota's Code. She said she didn't know. And with that, the discussion concluded. The County Administrator has done his homework and finds that the deletion of citizens' rights will have no impact no one. At least, no one who matters.

According to this County paperwork, removing  the citizens' right 

to address future land use makes no difference

Much of the discussion to date has revolved around one perspective: The idea that a person who does not own land can propose consideration of how certain land can be used. *

Developers and their minions do this all the time. Bo Medred got a text amendment passed that changed the law on lands he certainly didn't own. He got the Board to approve a change in how distant from a home a dump can be. Not just James Gabbert's dump, but any dump lying within certain areas of Sarasota County can now be much closer to a home, thanks to the Medred-Gabbert amendment. 

Mr. Medred had no interest in any areas other than where Mr. Gabbert desired to build a demolition plant - right next to the Celery Fields. But he framed it so as to seem as if it were a disinterested modification of the county's land use law. And it passed both the Planning Commission and the Board, paving the way for cosier dumps.

Yet when Ms. Ayech, to protect a way of life of her Miakka Community that is far older than the County itself, sought to propose a change via a Comp Plan Amendment, here's the result -- taking away our right, and pretending it makes no difference.

After Tuesday, there will be even less public input, less public power to influence or speak to future land development in Sarasota County, than there has been heretofore.

In short, there is no public conversation about the future of Sarasota County. It's decided by a private chat among a few developers and the people sitting in the seats that Pat Neal, Gary Kompthecras, Randy Benderson, Rex Jensen, Carlos Beruff and a bunch of dark money bought for them. 

According to the County Administrator's memo, banishing citizens from land use amendments will move us toward the goal of making this "a great place to live."

Campaign Contributions 2020

*There are certainly many other perspectives that an open and public-minded Board might consider. A citizen might propose a CPA in order to correct certain errors in county methods or procedures. See, for example,

Residents throughout Sarasota petition to update flawed planning maps.

See the Sarasota News Leader story of April 8, 2021 about the Board action, with more background on citizen Comp Plan Amendments - a state mandated guarantee to residents of Florida instituted in 1977.

Citizen comments on this issue here and here. 

Old Miakka is taking Gabbert's land - says Gabbert

 In Sarasota County, your investment capital is safe. Your community, not so much. Just ask the people of Old Miakka after developers like Jim Gabbert got through threatening Sarasota at today's hearing.

James Gabbert

James Gabbert was one of several developers who own land in East County to come out to the September 23 Board hearing on Old Miakka's effort to preserve its rural way of life.

Gabbert demonstrated that all that matters to him is money. As the purest form of Capitalist, land is not a place to him - not the site of memories and tradition, quiet evenings and a million stars, not the scene of family, friendship, hard work and good times. 

As with the Celery Fields, Mr. Gabbert proved that land = money. And if turning that land into money destroys the way of life of a 170-year-old community, ah well. If putting a Demolition Dump on it takes the priceless quality of the Celery Fields, too bad. 

Land is money, Gabbert is a Developer/Investor/Capitalist - pure and simple. As he explains here:

The Board agreed with Gabbert, William Merrill III, amid a bevy of landowners who said they intended to develop their land, but hadn't done a thing about it so far. Still, waving the Bert Harris Act,* they threatened to sue the County for millions "lost," which they woulda-coulda-shoulda been investing before now. 

Detert made the motion, Maio, Ziegler and Hines voted for it, Mike Moran was absent. They protected the developers' investment -- to the eventual destruction of Old Miakka.

======

*David G. Guest, a land use consultant and former regional manager of Earthjustice, Inc., testified to the absence of relevance of the Bert Harris Act at the hearing. He said in part: 

. . . the Bert Harris Act allows claims for losses of reasonable  nonspeculative future uses, which then can be the subject of reasonable investments  that create expectations. The land at issue has no Hamlets on it and has never had a  single proposal to rezone it for a Hamlet Development Master Plan. His full statement is here.

======

Robinson vs. Robinson

In a recent opinion piece in the Herald-Tribune, Christine Robinson, former County Commissioner and executive director of the Argus Foundation, argued that the future of properties zoned for ILW -- Industrial, Light Manufacturing, Warehouse -- is threatened by residential and recreational development.

Citing the Legacy Trail and the community's efforts to protect the Celery Fields as examples of land use initiatives that "hamper" ILW-zoned properties, Robinson wrote:

"Every year, we lose industrial light warehouse properties, both currently designated and those planned to be designated. Residential dwellings are being approved on or next to industrial lands. This is hampering owners’ ability to use those industrial properties for what they have been intended." May 14, 2018 HT guest column.

Robinson correctly notes that the Board of Sarasota County Commissioners has voted to approve locating residential near industrial, and that it has also approved converting existing ILW properties to residential. She strongly contends that existing ILW uses need to be "protected" from the "mission creep" of housing, parks and open space amenities.

What's striking about Robinson's championing of ILW properties is that as a Sarasota County Commissioner, she was at the forefront of the movement to convert ILW to residential use. In some cases, the conversion was approved over the objections of the neighbors.

In short, Argus director Robinson's concerns about issues of land use infringement did not prevent County Commissioner Robinson from voting for the precise rezoning changes she says have damaged the public trust.

The public record shows that Commissioner Robinson voted to approve converting commercial, office, and industrial uses to residential. In warning of the dangers to industry and to public trust, Robinson is taking issue with her own voting record. Here are three public hearings at which Commissioner Robinson voted to rezone ILW to residential:

25 May 2016: Adopted Rezone No. 15-23

On May 25, 2016, Robinson voted to adopt Rezone No. 15-23 "to redesignate approximately 21 acres of the Palmer Ranch Increment IV Development of Regional Impact (DRI), Parcels A8 and A9, from commercial/office and industrial uses to residential uses for the development of 140 multi-family dwelling units."

Commissioner Robinson voted to convert 21 acres of ILW to residential.

27 Oct 2015: Adopted Rezone No. 14-36.

Robinson voted on October 27, 2015 to adopt Rezone No. 14-36 "to redesignate an approximate 20 acre portion of Parcel A7 within the Palmer Park of Commerce, from commercial/office and industrial uses to residential uses for the development of 260 multi-family dwelling units." see page 1 of staff report.

• highlighted copy of the staff report 

• see page 13 for the definitive redesignation statement. 

Commissioner Robinson voted to convert 20 acres of ILW to residential over the neighbors' objections. See 27 August 2015 hearing for additional information.

9 July 2014: Adopted Rezone Petition 13-27

On July 9, 2014, Robinson voted to adopt Rezone Petition 13-27 "to redesignate approximately 68 acres, known as Parcels A2 and A6 within the Palmer Park of Commerce, from commercial/office and industrial uses to residential uses for the development of 180 single-family residential dwelling units." 

• see pages 1,2, 35, 46, & 54 of the staff report. 

Commissioner Robinson voted to convert 68 acres of ILW to residential over the neighbors' objections.

Summing up: In three votes, Commissioner Robinson voted to remove over 100 acres from lands set aside for light industrial, office, and warehouse use and let developers build houses and apartments there instead. Robinson's record on the Commission is at odds with her posture as director of the county's influential Argus lobby.

The public conversation about planning and land use is important and complex, and it needs the perspective of business leaders as well as voices from the whole spectrum of the community. But to truly benefit our community, every perspective deserves to be presented with informed transparency.

Organic rising: A planner's take on land use & planning

Work with Legacy Trail and Celery Fields, not against them

Herald Tribune, 6.7.18
By Daniel Herriges, Guest Columnist

In a May 14 guest column, Argus Foundation Executive Director (and former Sarasota County commissioner) Christine Robinson wrote that industrial businesses near the planned extension of the Legacy Trail could see their future jeopardized by the trail’s completion. Robinson urges that the county act pre-emptively to protect these properties from “mission creep.”

Robinson’s warning is misguided. The question she fails to answer is: What mission?

The mission of the Legacy Trail is, presumably, to create a major new amenity for Sarasota County residents — one which will simultaneously become one of the region’s largest parks and a vital corridor for non-motorized transportation.

The potential benefits are tremendous, as similar endeavors around the country illustrate.

Why not embrace the happy accident that this rail corridor — whose builders certainly never envisioned the Legacy Trail — represents? Once-industrial and derelict waterfronts in Portland, Baltimore, Chicago and more are now parks and tourist attractions.. . . 

Another local happy accident is the Celery Fields. Robinson spent much of her column discussing last summer’s contentious decision not to allow a recycling facility on surplus, county-owned land adjacent to the beloved birding destination. But she draws precisely the wrong lessons from it.

Robinson’s premise that an injustice was done in the Celery Fields case rests on decades-old planning documents which describe the area as future industrial and a “major employment center.”

But to insist that the ideal fate, the highest and best use, for public land abutting the Celery Fields in 2017 was to fulfill its destiny as “industrial” evinces a remarkable lack of imagination. Or perhaps just mistaking land-use planning, which is the means to a variety of ends, for an end in itself.

This is a common malady: an overly prescriptive, “SimCity” approach to planning. In 1938, the American Institute of Planners stated as the purpose of the discipline “determination of the comprehensive arrangement of land uses and land occupancy and the regulation thereof.” In other words, “We’re gonna tell you what goes where.”

Most modern-day planners don’t view that as an ideal. Instead, we recognize the value of happy accidents. Nearly all great places arise organically, because someone did something on their land that made others want to be near. That has happened with the Celery Fields. And it is happening in the Packinghouse District, a cluster of very successful, distinctive local businesses just across I-75 from the Celery Fields.

Robinson is correct that industry, a source of living-wage jobs not tied to tourism, is important to our economic health. The County Commission could direct staff to study barriers to industrial development: Are we losing these jobs for lack of suitable land? If so, we should tackle this problem head-on. Modern manufacturing is often quiet and non-polluting, and potentially compatible in many locations from which it is currently excluded.

The role of land-use planning is to promote the public interest, not to insulate incumbent land owners and businesses from change. 

Daniel Herriges is an urban planner and a regular contributor to Strong Towns, a nonprofit organization which supports a model of development that allows cities to become financially strong and resilient. He lives in Sarasota.

-- Further Reading -- 

Robinson: Industrial and commercial properties need protection from Legacy Trail mission creep

Jono Miller: Miller: Argus concerns over Legacy Trail not based on facts

Bob Clark: Irony in Argus executive warning of ‘mission creep’ 

Reminder: Proposals for the Fresh Start Initiative are due March 1

This is a Reminder that proposals for the Fresh Start Initiative are due March 1. We have heard from a number of people who have shared great ideas, and we look forward to having a selection of thoughtful proposals.

Please make sure your proposal includes the following:

Contact Info: Name, Phone, Email

Description: This is key. Please include as much of the following as you can:

Public parcels 1, 2, and 3

Parcel: Which parcel are you considering: #1 or #2?
Facilities: Will your facility provide parking? Restrooms?
Dimensions: Details of size of structures, or of space devoted to uses.
Disposition of land: Sale, lease, or county control?

Use: What is the primary purpose you envision? More than one purpose?

Users: Who are the primary users you anticipate will make use of it? Have you been in touch with any prospective user groups? How are you sure of demand?

Revenue: Will the County receive any revenue - whether through sale, lease, fees, activity charges, tourist tax, property tax, employment, etc.

Traffic: What sort of traffic - cars? bicycles? big trucks? Primary times of day?

Goals: Will the use meet the needs of nearby residents? The general public? Tourists?

Compatibility: How would your proposal work within the existing uses of the Celery Fields Area? What kinds of uses would you like to see on the other public parcels at Apex and Palmer?

Economics: Will the proposed use pay for itself? If not, how will it be supported?

Legacy: In addition to needs and values, are there other aspects of the character and legacy of Sarasota that your proposal would enhance?

VISUALS: Diagrams, photos, hand-drawn images, video - best if in digital form, as we will use a projector for our workshops.

What is the Fresh Start Initiative?

Fresh Start is a grassroots citizens' experiment that seeks good ideas for our public lands -- ideas that have been endorsed by the community because they will add value to the Celery Fields area.

The initiative gained traction after the entire community witnessed a concerted effort to change land use and zoning rules to allow heavy industrial activity (a 16-acre open air demolition waste processing  and transfer facility) on public lands near a priceless bird sanctuary, recreation area and eco-tourism destination. Full Timeline here.

Fresh Start is about finding sensible, community-based proposals for these parcels near the Celery Fields. But the issues that make this necessary go beyond these specific public lands. The entire public planning process needs a makeover, including:

Notification: How often do we learn too late that a developer has received approval for a plan that neighbors didn't hear about?

Consultation: The county requires public workshops, but these partly depend on poor notification policies. Also, a developer can say anything at these meetings. The community can express its approval or disapproval, but the actual notes on the workshop are provided by the developer.

Integration: The County's 2050 Plan calls for coordinated comprehensive planning. If this were practiced even a little, a developer's plan for a waste processing facility could not have gotten to first base.

How can we do this better? For each of these steps of the planning process, it's time to ask: What changes to or innovations in practice and procedure would benefit both the people of Sarasota and the County? 

Vision: Sarasota land use has long been decided on a battleground where the interests of ambitious developers, county residents, and a slow-moving government bureaucracy have struggled against each other, rather than seeking a shared vision of our community worthy of a larger shared vision. A shared vision of answerable growth -- that is, growth that can responsibly articulate its logic, need, relationship to the larger organic whole in which it plays its part.

        External factors -- boom/bust market dynamics and the bi-polar winds of political change -- have not made the effort to reach a comprehensive vision any easier, and the Fresh Start Initiative does not pretend to have an easy solution. 

Is this a teachable moment for Sarasota?

        This effort to bring the county and the community into a fruitful dialog on some 24 acres of public land is a practical example of the problems the County faces on a grand scale. The hope is we can learn something from this single example that might constructively be applied to processes and procedures for future land use issues.

What about Bob?

Robert Waechter is a major player in Sarasota County power politics. The articles below from 2013 published in the Sarasota News Leader point to his connections with Katherine Harris and Emmet Mitchell IV -- both of whom worked to limit voter registration and opportunity in Florida. 

They also describe the crime that has not prevented him from continuing to be a major influencer of decisions that affect Sarasota policy and politics.

Waechter owns several warehouses immediately south of public parcel #2 -- a 10-acre parcel that is owned by the Public, part of "The Quads" near the Celery Fields. He has consistently and persistently lobbied the Board to industrialize our public lands. He would love to see industry on our public lands.

His arguments include stating that the Celery Fields mound was a brown field so polluted that only industry was compatible with it.

He has also claimed that so many large trucks use Apex Road and Palmer Blvd. that the area is too dangerous for community uses like a playground or park.

The Board at times seems almost intimidated by Waechter. Here's a shot of his warehouses:

Waechter's "brown field"

Waechter has long had a determined interest in the Charter Review Board. He has tried to have it changed to an appointed, rather than elected Board. He's tried to have it meet ad hoc, rather than according to a public schedule.

Waechter at the Charter Review Board

Letter to the Editor Nov. 28, 2017

County should postpone sale of lands next to Celery Fields

The Sarasota County Commission will discuss at 1:30 pm today the sale of surplus lands as part of a “budget reduction” process — including three public parcels adjacent to the Celery Fields. 

Our entire community loves the Celery Fields bird sanctuary and recreation area. The shock that people felt earlier this year when they learned of a plan to put a heavy-industrial waste facility next to the Celery Fields ran deep.

Sarasota County has a rare opportunity to shape and nurture a critical area to which many changes are coming. If the county sells to the first comer, it’s choosing to act spasmodically and without forethought.
Fast sales to industrial developers will doom higher prospects that hold greater economic promise as the planned Fruitville Initiative breaks ground. If the county pursues a quick sale, it abdicates its obligation as steward of public lands to plan rationally, intentionally and comprehensively for the long term. 

More than 50 homeowners associations have endorsed an initiative called Fresh Start. It asks the county to hold off on the sale of these public lands temporarily while working in concert with the community to establish a consensus vision worthy of the economic and environmental interests of all. 

We urge the board to pause, reflect, and act wisely.

Tom Matrullo, on behalf of Fresh Start Initiative, Sarasota

Public Workshops on County Planning Updates

The senseless proposal for an industrial waste facility at the Celery Fields revealed some disturbing facts about  how planning has been failing the people of Sarasota County.

E.g., Sarasota's land use map is out of date, its multiple codes do not mesh, and County planners apparently are not required to consult the community, or notify anyone of major changes to, or sales of, public lands.

The County is working on updating - and will have public meetings beginning Sept. 20th. 

Lots of info and a survey here.

All three public "workshops" are in Nokomis:

Public Workshops

Location:

Nokomis Community Center, Main Hall

234 Nippino Trail 

Nokomis, FL 34275

Dates:

September 20th – Public Workshop No. 1
October 18th – Public Workshop No. 2
November 7th – Public Workshop No. 3

Time:
6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible.

Roundtable on Celery Fields

Great Round Table with Alan Cohn on WWSB last evening. Entire show is below - a few highlights:

Rob Wright holding up County document showing that properties at "The Quad" - the parcels at Apex Rd. and Palmer Blvd. - were included as part of the Celery Fields as environmental lands. These are the very lands the County now has put out to bid and rezone for industrial use. This appears at 10 min, 21 seconds in the video below.

County Map shows Apex/Palmer quadrant as part of Celery Fields - total compatibility.

See also Cathy Antunes' comments at 12:50 on the failure of the County to update its Critical Area Plan for 25 years on this land. I.e., NO PART of the county's land use - surplusing, bidding, C.A.P., rezoning -- indicates proper care and stewardship of these lands.

See also: 

15:30 "Who's defining the value of an area?" asks Cathy Antunes. Special interests vs. public interests.

16:20 - Jon Thaxton: - The Comprehensive Plan is designed to adjudicate these issues.

16:35 - Notification - Rob Wright, former county employee: "The first thing you do is notify stakeholders" of what is planned before executing the plan.

18:20 - Compatibility. Wright notes that Gabbert's plan is totally incompatible with existing uses of surrounding lands.

19:50 - Thaxton - It's less campaign contributions than commissioners' philosophies on growth, and especially the Comprehensive Plan: "What do the policies direct them to do with this decision they must make?"

Letter to County: Urgent Request to remove surplus property

In an effort to protect the Celery Fields from further industrial encroachment, this letter was sent to the elected officials, planners and advisers of Sarasota County:

March 6, 2017

To: Sarasota County Commissioners Caragiulo, Detert, Maio, Moran and Hines;

    County Administrator Harmer;

    Director of Planning and Development Services Osterhoudt;

    Planning Commission members Bispham, Hawkins, Benson, Cooper, Cutsinger, Morris, Neuden, Pember, Stultz and Ebaugh.

Cc: Sarasota Citizens and Press

From: Adrien Lucas and Tom Matrullo

Re: Sale of Surplus Lands near Celery Fields - Urgent Request to remove surplus property, SE Corner of Palmer Blvd. and Apex Road, immediately from Surplus Land county website and retract plan to sell our land.

On Friday, March 4, the Sarasota News Leader reported that Matt Osterhoudt had hired the consulting firm of Calvin, Giordano & Associates Inc. to assist in consolidating the County’s land development and zoning regulations by updating and combining these documents into a single document that is planned to be user-friendly. (See Appendix A below)

On February 14, 2017, Sarasota County issued an Invitation to Negotiate the sale and development of the property at the SE Corner of Palmer Blvd. and Apex Road.  

In light of recent strong public reaction to proceedings involving adjacent public lands, and in view of a growing perception of a serious dysfunction in how the County is handling “Surplus” lands, we ask that the February 14, 2017 Invitation to Negotiate the sale and development of the property at the SE Corner of Palmer Blvd. and Apex Road immediately be rescinded.

Background:

News that that four parcels of public land at Apex Rd. and Palmer Blvd. have been put out to bid, three of which now are going through the rezoning process (Restaurant Depot, and two parcels, one sold, one under contract to TST Ventures), recently caught the public by surprise, provoking strong consternation and outrage.

All the public knew was that two entities -- one linked to an elected official, the other of uncertain ownership -- had entered upon agreements to rezone three parcels to industrial use -- lands whose surrounding environmental, social, residential, commercial, and transportation contexts had radically changed in the 25 years since these lands were last updated as MEC.

Sarasota County’s Surplus Land Listings web page states: “Real Property that serves no future use for the county may be declared surplus and sold.”

Contrary to Sarasota County’s description of “real property” declared surplus, we find the notion that the lands surrounding Our Celery Fields that County Administrator has put up for sale do in fact serve a very much-needed future use for the county.  

Three major problems immediately became clear:

1. No one at the County seemed to have considered the impact of 25 years of development upon the lands in question.
2. No one apparently saw reason to notify anyone beyond 750 feet of these public lands about the pending contractual arrangements, despite the fact that these lands were (a) public, and (b) adjacent to three significant public assets: The Fruitville Initiative, the Celery Fields, and the historic and commercial Packinghouse District neighborhood.
3. The January 2017 Ordinance No. 2016-087 relating to the disposition of real property entitled “Sarasota County Surplus Land Code” does not support the mission Sarasota County publicly proclaims for zoning: “Zoning’s fundamental purpose is to protect a community’s health, safety and welfare.”

With urgency we request and recommend the following:

Given that Mr. Osterhoudt has just now launched a laudable initiative to integrate planning and zoning regulations into a single, “user-friendly” document, we believe it would be simply common sense to stop the clock on these surplus land proceedings, and rescind the 2.14.17 Invitation to Negotiate. This action would give the public and the County the opportunity to devise new ways of integrating public input and judgment into the oversight and administration of public lands.

It should be clear that there is growing outrage at the astonishing incompatibility of these proposed new uses and the nature of assets highly valued by the community. To proceed with some new entity upon the bidding and rezoning of yet another parcel -- the SE quadrant of Apex and Palmer -- would only compound the existing public relations quagmire in a most user-UNfriendly manner.

This particular parcel is not under contract yet. By taking our recommendation to stop the clock and rescind the 2.14.17 ITN, the County would demonstrate its willingness to acknowledge and begin to implement Mr. Osterhoudt’s stated intent (Appendix A) to shepherd this process “to the full engagement effort” with community members.

One final point: It has recently come to our attention that, due to the proximity of the ITN, dated 2/14/17, on SE Corner of Palmer Blvd. and Apex Road, the County may be breaking a Federal law in relation to protections afforded endangered birds that might nest in grasses surrounding the pond next to this property. Also, that particular property has a storm ditch we believe feeds into Phillippi Creek. We have received reports of findings of unexpected species such as Snook and Blue Crab in that waterway. This estuary most likely deserves protection status and as the new information suggests, close study of the waterway is surely warranted.

The above is a capsule summary of concerns, findings, and research assembled by a growing working group of citizens deeply concerned by the County’s approach to managing public lands. We are heartened by the announced initiative to bring the community into the planning and zoning process. We believe it would be a clear sign of good faith to start now, by stopping the clock on the ITN of 2.14.17.

If you feel the need for more information, we would be willing and very interested to discuss the process used by the County to identify, manage and sell surplus lands.

Respectfully,

Adrien Lucas

Tom Matrullo

Appendix A

Per the Sarasota News Leader:

Osterhoudt likened the first step of the project to “a discovery phase,” during which the consulting firm will research all the necessary codes and other material and meet with a variety of groups to develop “an annotated outline of identified issues, a refined outreach plan and a draft of the proposed [Unified Development Code] structural outline,” according to a slide he showed the commissioners.

The second phase will call for a consulting firm to move “to the full engagement effort” with community members; that will include surveys, meetings and public workshops.

The third and final phase will encompass the formal public hearing process before the Planning Commission and the County Commission, Osterhoudt said.

The timeline he showed the board calls for three preliminary public meetings:

• April 6, when the Planning Commission will meet at 6:30 p.m. in the Commission Chambers at the County Administration Center located at 1660 Ringling Blvd. in downtown Sarasota.
• April 10, when the Board of Zoning Appeals will hold a session at 6 p.m. at the County Administration Center in Sarasota.
• April 19, when the county’s Development Service Advisory Committee will meet at 2:30 p.m. at 1001 Sarasota Center Blvd.

The schedule calls for county staff to receive the first draft of the proposed Unified Development Code in December. If all goes as planned, the document will be adopted and published in September 2018, Osterhoudt noted.

Staff already has created a web portal on the county’s website, Osterhoudt explained, so members of the public can provide comments and read monthly reports on the progress of the work. The webpage may be accessed easily by clicking on “Unified Development Code Project” under the Initiatives heading in the lower left-hand corner of the county’s website, he added.

Urban Sprawl Week in Sarasota

Via Dan Lobeck:

Important Hearings Wed. and Fri.

Sarasota County Comp Plan "Update"

This week the Sarasota County Commission will hold its hearings on proposals to severely weaken controls on developers.

Wednesday June 8, 1:30 pm 

Friday June 10, 9 am 

County Administration Center, 1660 Ringling Blvd.

The proposals are in an “Update” of the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan.

The changes have been proposed by County staff but made worse by the developer-packed Planning Commission.

The Wednesday hearing is on changes to the Environment Chapter and various others. The Friday hearing is on the Chapters for Land Use, Economic Development, Mobility and Public Utilities.

Among the bad amendments to the Environment Chapter is one which would eliminate a requirement for developers to cluster away from native habitat, and would instead merely “encourage” it.

• The Land Use amendments would entirely repeal the current square footage size limits on commercial centers, allow residential density in some cases of 100 units per acre, while repealing provisions for affordable housing, and further encourage urban sprawl. 

• The Mobility amendments would encourage "road diets" which narrow existing roads and would repeal concurrency --  the requirement that developers do traffic studies and pay any proportionate share of needed road improvements which exceed impact fees.

The hearings are on transmittal of the amendments for state review for any impacts on critical state resources. They will come back for a final adoption hearing in October.

Further details by Monday.

-- Dan Lobeck