A Road to Nowhere

The Ibis Street Thoroughfare Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2017-F comes before the County on Wednesday, April 25 -- it will be found under item 7 on the Board agenda.

Comment by R.N. Collins:

The Sarasota Board of County Commissioners will take the first step towards building a road to nowhere if it approves the Ibis Street Thoroughfare Comprehensive Plan Amendment during an April 25 public hearing.

The county transportation planning department believes that the traffic congestion south of Twin Lakes Park will be so severe in the year 2040 that we need a new thoroughfare to connect Clark Road to a full interchange at State Road 681 and I-75 via another north–south roadway.

But neither the full interchange nor the north-south roadway exist today, and neither is considered financially feasible by the Sarasota-Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization.

If the interchange is built, FDOT will design and fund it, but FDOT hasn’t even looked into the need for the interchange yet.

And while the north-south roadway is part of a plan to provide an alternate route from Venice to Manatee County, the project is unfunded.  The project recently suffered a setback when the commission rescinded an important funding request for the segment connecting Lorraine Road to Bee Ridge Road Extension.  That segment is a sorely needed connection needed to support development already under construction at the 5000-unit Waterside Village, the 600-unit Artistry community and the 3,500-unit LT Ranch Village.

So it is highly unlikely the proposed thoroughfare will have anything to connect to for many years or decades to come.  Instead of providing connectivity, it will be a road to nowhere.

Actually, that’s not an entirely accurate statement.

The new thoroughfare will go somewhere.  It will dead end at Manatee County-based developer Pat Neal’s 533-acre sod farm where he wants to build 1,100-home subdivision on land zoned for only 258 homes.

Unfortunately for Neal, county regulations prohibit him from building a large development unless the property has direct access to a major road—one that is part of the county thoroughfare plan.

Normally thoroughfare plan additions are considered after the county prepares an in-depth analysis and after the public has multiple opportunities to weigh-in on the proposal.  In fact, the transportation planning department had wanted to consider several changes to our thoroughfare plan during the 2016 comprehensive plan update.  But those changes could not be processed because the county had not held the required public input sessions.

With the county’s holistic thoroughfare evaluation on hold due to a lack of department resources, Neal convinced the county to let him “adopt” Ibis Street and pursue a privately-initiated amendment.

The private process enables Neal to fast track the proposal to designate his access road as a major road.  It bypasses almost all the public engagement that must occur when the county initiates such a change.  And this case, avoiding a lengthy series of feedback sessions and workshops allows the developer to quickly overcome the prohibition on rezoning his property.

I wouldn’t object if putting a line on a map and saying a dead-end country road is a major road was the only effect of Neal’s proposal,

But it does much more.

It allows Neal to divert impact fees away from curing today’s traffic jams and use them instead to improve a dead-end country road that will be used only by his subdivision for years to come.

We believe road improvement priorities should be determined with more, not less, public input.  And we believe impact fees should be spent on real traffic problems we face today, not on ones that are imagined to occur more than 20 years in the future.

Call or email the Sarasota County Commission today and ask them to vote against the Ibis Street Thoroughfare Comprehensive Plan Amendment on April 25.

-- R. N. Collins

Documents relating to the Ibis Street Amendment are here.

Shoot first, aim later?

Letter to Ray Eubanks, of the state Dept. of Economic Opportunity from Vicki Nighswander:

Dear Mr. Eubanks, 

Safety and health are constantly brought up at County land use hearings, MPO meetings and other county and city update meetings as a paramount driving factor in considerations. However, the consequences of growth have not been embraced and brought into the decision making processes. The Comprehensive Plan is like a bible for planning purposes. It brings up and defines the communities unique variables. 

What is needed now more than ever is a dynamic process of needs assessment of the consequences of growth, not just for Sarasota County, my adopted home, but throughout this state that is experiencing huge growth and development. I would like to suggest an additional chapter for each county that requires ongoing needs assessment re. the community consequences of growth and sets plans in motion to make sure there is no further negative impact. 

Case in point in the building and development approval processes that attention be paid to not further impacting on proximity intersections that are already experiencing significant crashes. The crash data and the building approval process must start meshing. Entrances and exits from new developments and buildings must be evaluated so that the locations put the least amount of added density on already congested and high accident areas. Then it can be said for this one factor safety has been addressed. When you don't look at the ecological factors of building and development, you are missing the boat when it comes to safety and the broad spectrum of health as well. The environment has been forgiving but with growth it's reaching its saturation point and negative impacts are the result. 

Please consider a dynamic health and safety analysis on an ongoing basis focusing on the consequences of growth defined by each community on an ongoing basis. Safety and health as primary concerns of communities must be more than words. 

Here's another case in point for my area. New building has been proposed and approved for areas adjacent to I-75. The County has its traffic crash data, the state has its data. It's not put together as a health and safety concern as there is no doubt that a new community right next to a state highway with entrances and exits within a mile will cause further congestion let alone more accidents in the area. But that issue wasn't even addressed. The data wasn't put together on the County vs the State Rd intersections. I heard no discussion other than once again those in authority exclaiming that safety is first on their minds. MPO is forced into addressing accident intersections after the incident to figure out how to improve the intersection, change light patterns, change sidewalks etc. When all of this could have been thought out initially when lives and money can be saved. There is enough data out there to be on the front end of safety and health in the building approval process.

Thank you for your consideration.
The consequences of growth are upon us. 

Sincerely,
Vicki Nighswander MAT, MPH

Cattlemen Rd. at Bee Ridge Rd. in Sarasota - a perilous intersection.

"There is no doubt that a new community right next to a state highway with entrances and exits within a mile will cause further congestion let alone more accidents in the area."

Proposed offramp delivering cars to Walmart and Wilkinson Rd., Sarasota. 

 "All of this could have been thought out initially 

when lives and money can be saved."

More retrofitting on Bee Ridge Rd.

Long Range regional transportation: Open House March 12, 4:30 pm

Population explosion for Sarasota and Manatee

Planners bracing for influx of residents

Some 40,000 international tourists, a new mall and 5,000 more homes are in the pipeline for the Interstate 75- University Parkway area, yet there is no immediate plan for roadwork to improve the already burdened interchange. STAFF PHOTO / THOMAS BENDER

By Dale White

Published: Monday, December 15, 2014 at 3:07 p.m.

Last Modified: Monday, December 15, 2014 at 3:07 p.m.

MANATEE COUNTY - The population of Sarasota County could grow by 72 percent and Manatee County's could grow by 67 percent over a 40-year span, according to research presented Monday to a regional transportation panel.

More here.

Facts

MORE PEOPLE AND JOBS

On Monday, a Sarasota-Manatee transportation planning board compared 2010 census data with population and work force projections for 2040.

For Manatee County, including all of Longboat Key, the numbers cited are:
2010 population — 318,500
2040 population — 469,100
Increase — 150,000
Growth rate — 2 percent
2010 employment — 153,000
2040 employment — 229,600
Increase in jobs — 76,600
Job growth rate — 3 percent

For Sarasota County, excluding all of Longboat Key, the numbers cited are:
2010 population — 373,700
2040 population — 518,100
Increase — 144,400
Growth rate — 2 percent
2010 employment — 213,000
2040 employment 267,900
Increase in jobs — 54,900
Job growth rate — 1 percent
SOURCE: Sarasota Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization