Will this Benderson Initiative destroy the Fruitville Initiative?

To: County Planners and Planning Commissioners

RE: Rezone 21-02; SPA PED Rezone; Comp Plan Amendment 2021-B

To: Steve.Kirk <skirk@scgov.net>, Andrew.Stultz@sarasotaadvisory.net, Colin.Pember@sarasotaadvisory.net, Joseph.Neunder@sarasotaadvisory.net, Kevin.Cooper@sarasotaadvisory.net, Laura.Benson@sarasotaadvisory.net, Teresa.Mast@sarasotaadvisory.net, Neil.Rainford@sarasotaadvisory.net, Drew.Peters@sarasotaadvisory.net, Justin.Taylor@sarasotaadvisory.net, Frank.Strelec@sarasotaadvisory.net, Matt Osterhoudt <mosterho@scgov.net>

Dear Mr. Kirk, Mr. Osterhoudt, and Planning Commissioners:

This concerns the Aug. 5, 2021 hearing regarding the matters listed above.

I've heard from a variety of people who seriously question the changes Benderson Inc. wishes to impose on SPA-3.

Those who were involved in the development of the Ordinance for the Fruitville Initiative recall that its #1 distinctive feature was to disallow self-standing Big Box stores. The entire concept was of a walkable community not infested with giant trucks, a place built on MEC strictures in which workplaces and residences took priority. Retail was supposed to be local, not regional, in order to avoid a large volume of commercial consumer traffic.

I'm informed that according to the traffic study, the proposed 179,200 sf increase in stand-alone retail will increase average daily and PM peak trips 3,908 and 466, respectively.

But this is hard to prove - wouldn't the level of traffic depend on the nature of the retail on site? If instead of a nice butcher shop or cafe we suddenly have a Bass Pro, or Target, the traffic could become significantly greater in volume, drawing people from a distance. If this area were designed as a shopping center, that would be welcome. But the whole point of the Initiative was to create something different - local, walkable living/working neighborhoods. And the reason for that was to do something unusual, that set Sarasota apart. Indeed, I recall people in 2011 speaking about how as a "Gateway" area, the Initiative would send the message that Sarasota is not the same as every other place along I-75 - its unique attention to sensible, well-planned growth would be on display.

Basically, if that was the premise of the original form-based code of the Initiative, then allowing large, free-standing retail (requiring truck service areas) would disrupt the street grid and draw extraneous traffic in ways that would make a hash of that original premise. What Benderson is seeking basically undermines what started as a coherent, unified plan for a certain kind of community - sabotaging it, with County permission, into incoherence and conflicting goals.

It seems to me - and others I've spoken with - that what Benderson seeks is not a minor modification, but a transformation of the vision, purpose, and inherent nature of the Initiative. If this is the case, then we are not dealing with an "amendment" - rather this is a radical imposition of a shopping mecca upon what was conceived of as someone's living/working space.

What would it say if instead of creating a showcase for Sarasota's good planning sense, Sarasota County ended up compromising its principles and destroying that very goal?

Thanks for giving this your consideration at your hearing of August 5, 2021.

The Planning Commission hearing will be online here.

Tom Matrullo
Citizens for Sarasota County

UPDATE: Planning Commission ignores facts, law, and courtesy, advocate says

Update: 8.25.20 from Becky Ayech:

I received a call from Michele Norton with Sarasota County Planning Department regarding what I thought I had heard at the August 20th meeting.  She said that three people had listened to it and they did not hear what I heard. Several of you also reviewed it and no one heard what I did, but there have been several different things people did hear.  Thank you for taking that upon yourselves.

I thanked her for pursuing this.  I was glad that I didn't hear what I thought I did.

With that said, I still reminded her that the public was not treated appropriately.  We had followed all the County's Rules and their manner, that they lectured us and that they were going to get that rule changed is not part of their charge.  She said they will continue to look at this matter.

(Editor's note: There is clearly at least one moment when a voice breaks through the presentation. A masculine voice at 2:47:16 can be heard first indistinctly, then quite distinctly saying "You are the most conservative right human being that I've ever known." It's unclear who was speaking and who was being addressed.) 

===

Editor's note: The email below from Becky Ayech regards the Planning Commission hearing of 8.20.20 on the Publicly Initiated Amendment to the Comp Plan on behalf of Old Miakka. This 170-year-old community in East Sarasota County (Commissioner Moran's District 1) is seeking an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that would preserve the rural character of the area. (Herald Tribune story).

The email was sent to the Board of Sarasota County Commissioners on Sunday, August 23, which happens to be the third anniversary of the County hearing regarding James Gabbert's Debris Demolition plant proposed at the Celery Fields.

As yet we have been unable to verify the alleged swear word some say they heard duing the PC hearing. 

                                          Video of the 8.20.20 PC Hearing

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

To: Michael Moran <mmoran@scgov.net>, ncdetert@scgov.net, "Charles D. Hines" <chines@scgov.net>, Alan Maio <amaio@scgov.net>, cziegler@scgov.net

Good day Commissioners,

This is taken from the County's website:

Purpose: The Planning Commission, as the LPA, is obligated to interpret and advise the County Commission on the adoption of and amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, as well as land use applications filed, pursuant to state statute or existing county ordinances.

At the 8/20/20 meeting of the Planning Commission, the Commissioners DID NOT fulfill or even consider what their purpose is.

Rather, they lectured the participants on how egregious they were by following the process SET OUT BY SARASOTA'S  PLANNING DEPARTMENT AFTER CONSULTATION WITH SARASOTA' S LEGAL DEPARTMENT.

WHEN THE MIAKKA COMMUNITY CLUB FILED THE REQUEST FOR A PUBLIC INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WE HAD A $5,000.00 CHECK IN HAND.

WE WERE TOLD THAT WE DID NOT NEED MONEY, BUT 20 SIGNATURES OF REGISTERED VOTERS IN THE COUNTY.  WE PROVIDED 75, 45 WERE VERIFIED.

WE DID NOT DIG UP THIS REGULATION YOUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT DID!  

THE ONLY THING WE ARE GUILTY OF IS FOLLOWING THE LAW.  I cannot say the Planning Commission is guilty of following "the Law" as articulated in their purpose.

At the "process request " hearing in front of the Planning Commission, Mr. Spaeth was asked how much money this would cost, and he told them very little.  This is a map change not a language change.  Never the less, the public had to be lectured on how much this cost the taxpayers.  This is an inaccurate and nonfactual statement.

At the process hearing, Mr Spaeth also pointed out that here are other counties that have the same regulations.

At one point in the hearing, a Commissioner's mic was NOT muted and it sounded like he called someone a "righteous bitch".  Please review the meeting to see if I heard correctly. If I did ,then he should be removed.

Every member of the public who spoke in support of CPA-2019-C was respectful.  The Planning Commission did not return this courtesy.  On your Speaker Card, that one fills out to speak, it talks of civility. The Planning Commissioners were not civil.  They were condescending. They lectured us. NEITHER OF THESE ARE INCLUDED IN THE "PURPOSE" OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

At the end of the meeting, a Commissioner said they were going to get rid of this regulation. THAT IS ALSO NOT THEIR "PURPOSE".

The Planning Commission DID NOT address the facts that were presented to them.  Rather, they took the stance of  the proverbial three monkeys, "hear no facts, see no facts, speak no facts".

I ask that you look into these statements. The Planning Commission is a reflection of you. This was an ugly reflection.

Please respond to my email. please make sure the "righteous bitch" statement was an error in my hearing.

Respectfully submitted,

Becky Ayech

President

Miakka Community Club

As a postscript.  I chair two of your committees/commission:  The Traffic Advisory Committee and the Historical Resources Committee. 

I WOULD NEVER TREAT ANYONE THE WAY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, WHO  EXCERSIZED THEIR RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN GOVERNMENT, WERE TREATED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.

==

See the 8.27.20 Sarasota News Leader story about the hearing: With concerns about rights of owners of the affected parcels, Planning Commission votes to recommend denial of Miakka Community Club initiative to reduce residential density east of I-75

See also: Irreplaceable impact of Old Miakka lifestyle by Carrie Seidman in the Herald Tribune.

Official Report: Findings of Fact of the Sarasota County Planning Commission

Below are the official findings of fact submitted by the Sarasota Planning Commission after the June 1, 2017 hearing on TST Venture's proposal to site a waste processing plant on public land adjacent to the Celery Fields, Sarasota's Preserve, Bird Sanctuary, and premier recreation area. Click here for a full transcript of the hearing, at which more than 200 citizens, including some from as far away as Ft. Lauderdale, came to express their concerns. Video here.

In the end, the Planning Commission voted unanimously against the proposed facility. Below are their 20 reasons. The PC is a purely advisory board. The actual power lies with the Board of County Commissioners. This report will be included in the packet that goes to the Commissioners who have scheduled a final public hearing for August 23, 2017, beginning at 9 am.

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

PLANNING COMMISSION REZONE PETITION FINDINGS OF FACT

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

1.      The proposed change would not be consistent with the intent, goals, objectives, policies, guiding principles and programs of the Comprehensive Plan;

2.      The proposed change would not be compatible with the existing land use pattern and designated future land uses;

3.      The proposed change would have an impact on the availability of adequate public facilities consistent with the level of service standards adopted in the comprehensive plan, and as defined and implemented through the Sarasota County Concurrency Management System Regulations, Chapter 94, Article VII of Exhibit A of the Sarasota County Code, as amended;

4.      The existing district boundaries are not logically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change;

5.      The proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood;

6.      The proposed change will create a drainage problem;

7.      There are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accord with existing zoning;

8.      It is not impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use;

9.      Whether the gradual and ordered growth contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan can be best accomplished through the approval of a land use which is less intense than the intensity designated on the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan;

10.  The proposed change would create adverse impacts in the adjacent area or the County in general;

11.  The subject parcel is not of adequate shape and size to accommodate the proposed change;

12.  Ingress and egress to the subject parcel and internal circulation would adversely affect traffic flow, safety or control; and

13.  The proposed change has been reviewed in accordance with the interposal agreement with the School Board of Sarasota County and whether school capacity has been adequately addressed, including on- and off-site improvements.

============================================== 
PLANNING COMMISSION:

SPECIAL EXCEPTION PETITION FINDINGS OF FACT

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

1.      The proposed use is not consistent with the intent, goals, objectives, policies, guiding principles and programs of the Comprehensive Plan;

2.      The proposed use is not compatible with the existing land use pattern and designated future uses;

3.      There are not adequate public facilities available consistent with the level of service standards adopted in the Comprehensive Plan, and as defined and implemented through the Sarasota County Concurrency Management System Regulations, Chapter 94, Article VII of Exhibit A of the Sarasota County Code;

4.      The proposed use, singularly or in combination with other special exceptions, will be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, order, comfort, convenience, or appearance of the neighborhood or other adjacent uses by reason of any one or more of the following: the number, area, location, height, orientation, intensity or relation to the neighborhood or other adjacent uses;

5.      The proposed use will not be adequately buffered to effectively separate traffic, visual impact and noise from existing or intended nearby uses;

6.      The subject parcel is not adequate in shape and size to accommodate the proposed use; and

7.      The ingress and egress to the subject parcel and internal circulation will adversely affect traffic flow, safety or control.

Transcript of June 1 Celery Fields Hearing (Sarasota Planning Commission)

A full transcript of the June 1, 2017 Planning Commission Hearing on James Gabbert's proposal to build a giant unenclosed waste plant near the edge of the Celery Fields is now available. Read it here.

The final hearing of the Board of Sarasota County Commissioners on the matter is set for Aug. 23, 2017.

Opportunity Lost: Waste plant will disfigure the face of East Sarasota

To: The Sarasota County Planning Commission
From: Tom Matrullo
RE: Rezone 17-01 and SE 1765
May 21, 2017

Commissioners:

“When there is no vision, the people perish.”

Sometimes opportunities creep up on you. They’re not easy to see, then -- Eureka!

Back in 2005, Sarasota County worked up a unique vision of a welcoming gateway at the Fruitville exchange on I-75.

In 2010, that early sketch got fleshed out in a series of meetings, charrettes, and compromises. For a year, the stakeholders -- County staff, landowners, representatives of 3,400 homes in 20 neighborhoods, and the Polyzoides planning firm -- worked at it.

The Fruitville Initiative -- an innovative  vision of a mixed-use community based on a grid of walkable streets, preserving the rural character of East Sarasota while bringing a gateway feel with hotels, shops, offices, cafes -- was the collaborative result.

In 2014 the Initiative was formalized in a rezoning as Ordinance 2014-054. In addition to offering a means to satisfy the County’s need for a major employment center (MEC), the Initiative envisions an organic relation with the Celery Fields.




Please have a look at this image from the Polyzoides site:

The waterway is the northern cell of the Celery Field Preserve. It’s a delightful place to kayak - it can also be the basis for the kind of “Riverwalk” envisioned here.

This was an example of transformative planning.

Suddenly we’d have something special - not humdrum offices, trucking centers and big boxes, but walkable shaded streets, perhaps an Audubon-themed hotel, a museum that would recognize the legacy of East County from the days of Mastodons through the ranches and agricultural and social history of workers harvesting fields of celery.

In short, a Destination. People would perceive Sarasota as a place savvy enough, sensible enough, not to look like every other place along I-75. Instead of Mobile and Cracker Barrel they’d see a community with its own flair; an inspired synergy with a fabulous natural setting at its doorstep.

A place like this would say in a sophisticated way, “Welcome to Sarasota: where we remember our legacy.”

The coming development of the Fruitville Initiative will open onto what has become a spectacular Sarasota success story -- a regional stormwater facility that is metamorphosing into an international birding and eco-tourist highlight.

Sarasota Audubon’s report of its Nature Center’s opening season offers a good look at an auspicious first year.

So here’s the prospect we face:

The Fruitville Initiative will add enormous value to the area, and position itself and the Celery Fields as the face of East County. Coburn Road, running through the new Initiative sector, will continue down past Ackerman (changing its name to Apex) to East Palmer. At Palmer folks will either turn left to go to the Audubon Center, or right to go to the burgeoning Packinghouse District.

If Mr. Medred has his way, at this crossroads they will gape at a giant wall behind which will rise 35-foot piles of demolition debris and yard waste. They’ll listen to sonic booms of concrete being pulverized, diesel engines running constantly, and wait at the corner while trucks loaded with demolition debris enter and leave this key intersection of two already overburdened two-lane roads.

Twenty-seven years ago, I covered construction and development for the Herald Tribune. Nearly every month for a decade I was at the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, where Wayne Daltry and a very astute team examined developments of regional impact and did their best to give our region some of the order that even now makes it a magnet for people seeking a better quality of life than they can find elsewhere.

For the past 11 years I’ve been a member of the Bee Ridge Neighborhoods Committee. I learned from that very thoughtful group of citizens how constructive and open interaction with the County on major projects like the low impact improvement of East Bee Ridge Rd. can lead to win/win outcomes for all.

And in 2010 I attended some of those challenging meetings of the Fruitville Initiative stakeholders -- their efforts were generous, creative, and at times heroic.

Regarding Rezone 17-01 and SE 1765 I must tell you: I have never seen a plan so blatantly contemptuous of surrounding uses. Beyond seeking to change Open Use Rural (OUR) to ILW, it seeks a special exception to allow more intense industry than Major Employment Center (MEC) permits. Unworkable on a practical level, the plan manipulates the letter of the Code to violate the spirit of a wide range of policies, goals and objectives -- relating to traffic environment, health, economic development and more -- of our Comprehensive Plan, MuniCode, and LDRs.

Bo Medred offered this image at the Oct. 20, 2016 Planning Commission

hearing to illustrate a waste facility operating near homes.

This cynical scheme will drive a stake into the heart of an area that, properly stewarded, could bring Sarasota a recognition and lustre most communities would kill for. An endorsement will put in question whether common sense and rational planning have abandoned Sarasota County.

The Quad parcels -- which are still our public lands -- are open to many potentially promising uses. Marketed with patience and perseverance, the Quad will find the right opportunity to make it come to life. Nothing very fancy -- a combination of a market, a public garden, some art galleries, a daycare center, some community rooms for meetings, music, study. That, along with some offices and affordable housing within walking distance of the Packinghouse District and of SCAT’s bus station, would form the nucleus of an attractive neighborhood center. All it takes is some outreach and imagination to discover the local trends, the needs of the community and the opportunities to attract visitors.

The county first surplused the quad parcels in 1997, then did nothing with them for 18 years. During those years, everything changed. A new context -- with new economic synergies and long-range opportunities -- has emerged.

These opportunities are clear, mutually enhancing and far reaching. And easy to see. Just climb the mound at the Celery Fields and look out on the open face of East County.

With all due respect: don’t feed this promise into the pulverizing engines of a giant waste processing plant. Advise staff and our officials to work with Mr. Gabbert to find a site consistent with the values and goals of Sarasota County.

Many say the Celery Fields is our Central Park. Go there. Breathe the fresh air, look at the ponds and the light. It’s also the Siesta Beach of East County.

Thank you.

Tom Matrullo

​​

June 1st: Save our Celery Fields

Sarasota residents ask concerned citizens to come downtown on June 1 for a brief gathering prior to a hearing on a controversial plan to build and operate a large unenclosed industrial Waste Processing facility on public lands adjacent to the Celery Fields.

WHAT: On Thursday, June 1, the proposal to put an unenclosed, 15-acre industrial waste plant on public lands near the Celery Fields comes before the Planning Commission. Area residents, clean businesses, environmentalists and everyone concerned that County planning has lost sight of the public interest will gather for a brief update before the 5 pm hearing at the County Administration Building. Many will attend the hearing to monitor the proceeding.

WHEN & WHERE:  Thursday, June 1, 2017 @ 1660 Ringling Blvd., Sarasota, 34236.

• 4 pm: Gathering in front of the Administration Building on the Ringling Blvd sidewalk.
• 5 pm: Planning Commission hearing in the Commission Chambers.

PARKING: Behind the County Administration Building at 1660 Ringling Boulevard.

WHO: A broad-based nonpartisan group of Sarasota taxpayers including Neighborhood Associations, business owners, environmental organizations and citizens who recognize the value of the Celery Fields as a regional stormwater system, tourist destination, bird sanctuary, and recreation area. Is the County practicing rational planning that fairly balances private enterprise with the public interest as our Comprehensive Plan requires? Folks will be on hand to offer updates and answer questions beginning at 4 pm.

WHY:  Industrial development for the public lands adjacent to Our Celery Fields is neither compatible with the natural setting nor with common sense in light of 25 years of growth trends in the area -- the Fruitville Initiative, many new neighborhoods, light clean businesses and the growing commercial Packinghouse District.

Approval of this industrial waste site would FAIL the County's mission statement:

"Protect a Community's Health, Safety and Welfare."