Showing posts with label urban service area. Show all posts
Showing posts with label urban service area. Show all posts

Friday, March 23, 2018

Unprecedented exception to Urban Service Boundary granted to developer

This article is placed here with permission of the Sarasota News Leader. Two passages have been highlighted by editors of this blog.

Urban Service Area Boundary for Sarasota County to be moved to allow Lee Wetherington Homes to build a corporate headquarters on Fruitville Road


County planning staff and area residents voice support for a Comprehensive Plan change with restrictive criteria

                  A graphic shows the site planned for the new office building. Image courtesy Sarasota County
On the recommendations of staff and their Planning Commission — along with support of people who live adjacent to the site at the heart of the request —  the Sarasota County commissioners have voted unanimously to approve a policy change to allow the construction of an office building outside the Urban Service Area Boundary on Fruitville Road.
The March 14 action necessitated a super-majority vote, as stipulated in the Sarasota County Charter.
The action will enable Lee Wetherington Homes to build a 15,000-square-foot, two-story office building to serve as its new corporate headquarters. The structure will be across from the Sun N Fun RV Resort, which is located at 7125 Fruitville Road.
Officially, with their vote, the commissioners approved a Small Area Comprehensive Plan amendment, which modifies Future Land Use Policy 3.1.2 and the county’s Future Land Use map designation for the 1.88-acre parcel in the southwest quadrant of Fruitville Road and Shannon Road. The new designation is Light Office; the former one was Semi-Rural.
Additionally, in a separate vote, the commissioners agreed unanimously to rezone the Wetherington parcel from Open Use Estate-1 to Office, Professional and Institutional.
“The area within the Urban Service Area Boundary [is] where the County has planned, or is in the process of planning, for the facilities needed to support development including roads, sewage collection and water transmission lines, stormwater management facilities, schools and public libraries,” the Comprehensive Plan says.




A graphic shows developments near the location of the planned Lee Wetherington Homes corporate office (the yellow square outlined in red) on Fruitville Road. Image courtesy Sarasota County

Representing Lee Wetherington Homes, Shawn Dressler, a planner and landscape architect with consulting firm Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. of Sarasota, explained that the project team “took a long time developing the criteria” a developer would have to meet to be able to gain approval of any other light office projects outside of the Urban Service Area Boundary.
Those criteria are as follows:
  • The proposed use shall have frontage along a 4-to-6-lane major arterial roadway as classified on the Sarasota 2040 Future Thoroughfare Plan.
  • It shall be located “within a corridor where more than 50% of the existing parcels within 1,000 feet of the subject parcel,” as measured along the 4- to 6-lane major arterial roadway, are
non-residential uses;
  • It shall be located within a corridor where adequate infrastructure is available to serve the subject property.
Fruitville Road is “starting to function as an urban infill corridor,” Dressler pointed out during the public hearing.
Nonetheless, the Wetherington Homes project team wanted to make certain that any development outside the Urban Service Area Boundary would be in keeping with the character of that section of the county, he added.
“I do believe the proposed [Comprehensive Plan] change would be compatible with the existing land use pattern … and future land uses” in that area,” Commissioner Michael Moran said in making the motion for approval of the amendment.
Commissioner Alan Maio seconded the motion, noting that the people who live next to the site for the project “seem to feel comfortable with this. I think that says a lot.”



A graphic shows the site of the proposed office building (in yellow) in the vicinity of other development on Fruitville Road. Image courtesy Sarasota County

One of the residents who spoke during the public hearing, Mary Beth Humphreys, told the board members, “The direction of this corridor is headed toward commercial. … The office use does fit …”
Furthermore, Humphreys urged them to follow through with a Planning Commission recommendation. That was for a planning workshop to discuss a corridor plan for Fruitville Road, she noted. However, she cautioned, because of the number of special exceptions already approved for projects in that area, “we may be too late to go back and look at this.” (emphasis added)
Humphreys pointed out that she has been a member of the county’s Planning and Development Services Department staff for more than 29 years. She has been a professional planner in the department since November 2008, according to her LinkedIn account.
Details about the project
The sole goal of the Lee Wetherington Homes’ project, Dressler told the board, is to build a corporate office for the company, which has been renting space in Lakewood Ranch. “They’re ready to move permanently to Sarasota County.”
The facility also will make it possible for employees of the firm to work closer to sites where Wetherington Homes has construction underway, he added, resulting in “less vehicle miles our staff has to put on the road.”
Dressler also noted Lee Wetherington’s charitable works in the community, as evidenced by a Boys & Girls Club that carries Wetherington’s name. In fact, Dressler told the board, Wetherington is far better known “in many circles” as a philanthropist instead of as a homebuilder.
Additionally, Dressler pointed out, the building will encompass a showroom, where potential customers will be invited to look at features Lee Wetherington Homes offers. “[The structure] needs to be high-quality architecture,” he explained, if it is to demonstrate what people can expect of the company’s houses.
In her presentation to the board, county Planner Vivian Roe, provided maps showing the variety of development within the immediate area of the site proposed for the corporate headquarters. Along with Sun N Fun, she said, they include the Southwest Florida Water Management District office, the Kimel Lumber and Hardware Store, Stottlemyer’s Smokehouse and Texaco Station, Fruitville Grove and Critter Ridge Landscape Contractors.
Additionally, during her public remarks, Humphreys noted that the County Commission has approved projects under the aegis of the Sarasota 2050 Plan that will bring about 10,000 new homes to the Fruitville Road corridor.
“The area has transitioned away from the typical semi-rural characteristics, which are large lots and agricultural-type uses,” Roe said.
When Commissioner Charles Hines asked whether the USAB had been moved at any time since the figurative line was included in the County Charter, Deputy County Attorney Alan Roddy responded that he remembered a legal challenge in 1996 that resulted in such action, leading to the development of the Fox Creek community. “I don’t know of another one.” (emphasis added)
As for the site plan: Dressler explained that the property “does have a relatively high quality but small functional wetland … that we are preserving,” along with a “high-quality live oak in the middle of the site.” The 60 parking spaces will be located around that tree, he added.
The project was deemed to have a de minimis impact on traffic, he added, so county staff did not require a detailed transportation analysis.
“The biggest piece of infrastructure” in the area is Fruitville Road, he pointed out. Fire Station No. 10 is only 3 miles away, he continued.
The property has an on-site sewage treatment and disposal system, Roe noted. The only access into the property will be from Shannon Road, both Roe and Dressler said, but Dressler added that the company plans significant improvements to the right of way of Shannon Road.
Other public remarks




An engineering drawing shows plans for the site. Image courtesy Sarasota County

During the public hearing Ray Humphreys followed his wife to the podium, telling the commissioners he has lived on Shannon Road since 1961. “I want the building to go in there,” he said.
One other resident voiced support for the project, while another, Sharon Schlabach, conceded that the area is “going to change.” However, Schlabach, said, “I do object … strongly” to the access into the property being planned from Shannon Road.
“We don’t believe we’d be allowed to access [the property] off of Fruitville Road,” Dressler told the commissioners.
Only Glenna Blomquist spoke in opposition to the Comprehensive Plan amendment.
“The applicant seemed to make this a very benign case,” she said, “but I don’t think it is.”
Instead, Blomquist continued, she fears that the change in the Comprehensive Plan might lead to an expansion of activities in the area that the commissioners have prohibited.
Why should the Urban Service Area Boundary be changed for one individual? she asked.
After Moran made his motion to approve the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment, he addressed Lee Wetherington, who was seated in the audience. “I truly appreciate your philanthropy in the community and your investment in our county very much,” Moran said.

Sunday, March 4, 2018

Update: Unprecedented risk: Urban Service Area could effectively be at an end

Update: The hearing has been postponed.  The petitioner has requested an indefinite continuance.

Urban Service Boundary at Risk

On March 14, the Sarasota County Commission will consider a really bad proposed amendment to the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan amendment.

It would allow pockets of urban development beyond the Urban Service Boundary (USB). 

On February 1, the Planning Commission, which is packed with development interests, recommended approval of the amendment by a vote of 8 to 0, with one recusal.

The amendment would set a precedent to allow individual urban developments outside the Urban Service Boundary (and outside of the Sarasota 2050 areas and Overlay Districts), by approving them in individual Comp Plan amendments, making exceptions to the USB. It has never been done before but if it happens now than developers will be clamoring for the same treatment in the rural lands.

This would get around the requirement of the Sarasota County Charter for a unanimous County Commission vote to move the Urban Service Boundary or to expand or create an Overlay District as well as the requirement of voter approval to eliminate the Urban Service Boundary.  The staff analysis specifically acknowledges this “objective,” noting that the Charter requirement for a unanimous County Commission vote has prevented any movement of the Urban Service Boundary since the Charter limits were enacted by voter referendum in 2008.

The present proposed Comp Plan amendment would specifically allow a Light Office development across from Sun N Fun on Fruitville Road, about 1.25 miles east of the Urban Service Boundary, for influential builder Lee Wetherington, and elsewhere that certain criteria are met.  The staff analysis states that could include other parcels in that corridor. 

Although the amendment’s criteria include a requirement that “adequate existing public infrastructure is available to serve the subject property” it would allow the subject office development even though there is no public infrastructure available to provide sewage treatment and a septic tank will be used instead. The staff report does express some concern about this, but the obvious violation of the amendment’s own criteria somehow did not prevent the staff from endorsing it.

If this loophole is allowed by the County Commission, the Urban Service Boundary is effectively gone, as it can be breached any time by a site-specific amendment. This threatens all subdivisions beyond the Urban Service Boundary east of I-75 and in south County, as well as all of us impacted by urban sprawl and its increase in traffic, infrastructure expenses, environmental degradation and other public concerns.

The Charter requires at least four of the five County Commissioners to approve any Comp Plan amendment which increases the density of intensity of development. County staff agrees that this applies to the proposed amendment.

This very bad Comprehensive Plan amendment should be defeated by the County Commission.

What good is an Urban Service Boundary if it can so easily be violated and ignored?

This piece by Dan Lobeck first appeared in the Manatee-Sarasota Sierra Group newsletter.

Friday, July 10, 2015

Developer Seeks Removal of Affordable Housing

Developer Seeks Removal of Affordable Housing

From Affordable Housing Overlay, Far East of I-75



Just one more urban sprawl outrage after another, and this one at the expense of affordable housing.

On Tuesday, July 14, the Sarasota County Commission will hold the first of two public hearings on a developer's proposal, supported by County staff and the developer-packed Planning Commission, to slash the affordable housing required in the Affordable Housing Overlay far east of I-75 from 50% to 60% of all homes on the 412 acres, to a mere 15%.

The amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would also reduce the required time for the housing to remain affordable from forever (the current requirement if it is 50% affordable) or ten years (if it is 60%) to just five years.

"Affordable" under current data is defined as sold to a family (if four people) earning not more than $60,700 for a certain portion of the homes and $48,560 for others.

The hearing is scheduled as the final item, number 8, in the morning session that begins at 9 am at the north county administration center, 1660 Ringling Boulevard in downtown Sarasota.  A second public hearing is scheduled for September 22.

The Affordable Housing Overlay was approved in 2006 to allow urban density in this 412 acre parcel, at the eastern end of Palmer Boulevard where it connects to Iona Road, east of the Bee Ridge Extension.  The affordable housing requirement was the trade-off accepted by the developer for the urban density, in what was designated the Affordable Housing Overlay.  With that, the property was rezoned from one unit per ten acres to 2.5 units per acre.

This followed an unsuccessful attempt by the developer to extend the Urban Service Area boundary to include the property, in 2002.

Amazingly, County staff agrees with the developer that the affordable housing requirement should be essentially abandoned on the basis that "it has been ineffective in producing the desired results since its adoption in 2007."

Has anyone told staff that was when a housing recession hit the county and the nation and almost nothing was being built in Sarasota County, affordable or otherwise, until very recent years?  Of course they know this, but they just want to allow the developer the excuse, the same one that was used to gut the Sarasota 2050 Plan that was finalized around the same time.

Another reason for the delay in developing this property is that the developer tried previously to gut the affordable housing requirement with a proposal to instead make a large payment for affordable housing elsewhere.  That was rejected by the County Commission on a 5 to 0 vote on November 20, 2013, on the basis that the affordable housing requirement was too important to weaken or abandon.  Certainly, that argument remains more viable than ever.

Now however, the developer has hopes that this County Commission, which is more decidedly pro-developer than ever before, will say yes.

Concerned citizens will be watching closely, to see if there is anything that will prevent these Commissioners from advancing urban sprawl, even their expressed commitment to affordable housing.

  -- Dan Lobeck
      
Join Control Growth Now Today

Monday, October 13, 2014

Andre Mele: The Trouble with the 2050 Amendments


News flash: residential sprawl subdivisions lose money. They take more than they give. In community after community across the nation, since World War Two, infrastructure for sprawl has been subsidized by taxpayers lulled into believing that the temporary jobs and insufficient tax revenues will create an economic boon. The Sarasota 2050 chapter of the County’s Comprehensive Plan was designed to remedy that. It was supposed to create healthy development incentives while keeping profit-seeking developers from reaching into taxpayers’ pockets, and to preserve both agricultural and wild habitat in keeping with the State Constitution and the County Charter. But 2050 is being systematically dismantled by a series of developer-sponsored amendments. Taxpayers, guard your wallets!


Sarasota County has been creating land-use plans for over thirty years that envision a fully rural character east of the Urban Services Boundary (roughly contiguous with I-75), and encourage smart development within the urban corridor. 2050 is an optional alternative development model in Sarasota County’s Comprehensive Plan, and it steers rural (green-fields) development toward walkable and bikeable 2-4-story population centers with parks and greenways, in trade for more undeveloped land, and reduced sprawl.

By the terms of Sarasota 2050, all new development is required to be “fiscally-neutral.” But the landowner / developers have concluded that fiscal neutrality, in which all infrastructure and community services are paid for by the development project, must be eliminated. Citing unwieldiness and unpredictability, making little or no effort to find a work-around, the developers have fallen back on the time-honored tradition of back-room deals that force surrounding communities to share the bill.

On October 22, after a pro forma public hearing with zero prospect of making substantive changes to the amendments, Sarasota County’s Commissioners will be voting on whether to subsidize profiteering developers and big landowners looking for a payday at taxpayer expense. The subsidies won’t just be in the form of dollars. They will include our willingness to tolerate dramatic increases in traffic, significant loss of important wildlife habitat, impaired water quality in the County’s streams and bays, and to say a final good-bye to the remarkable rural character of eastern Sarasota County. Farm fields, ranch pastures, greenbelts, greenways, wetlands and wildlife corridors will be lost, and the patchy, fragmented habitat that remains will rapidly degrade.

Let one thing be clear: there is absolutely no demand for all this proposed housing. There are at least 50,000 sites available for development and redevelopment west of I-75 – inside the Urban Services Boundary. The most recent and credible population projections call for 16,000 new units in the county over the next decade: tapping just one-third of the capacity that already exists inside the Urban Services Boundary.

New development in the east will not only destroy the rural character of the region, it will siphon investment dollars away from the existing urban coast, leaving blight untouched and redevelopment opportunities wasted. It is a lose-lose proposition. Urban development built to current standards, however, would be much kinder to the bays and other coastal waters than the existing mashup of decaying, runoff-inducing impermeable surface. The miles urban residents walk, bike, and ride aboard public transportation benefit everyone, reducing traffic and lowering Sarasota County’s carbon footprint.

If the County Commissioners vote for these amendments, they will be on the wrong side of history, and will be voting for a de facto tax increase for their constituents. They will be responsible for the degradation or destruction of habitat that is home to endangered and threatened species such as the Bald Eagle, Wood Stork and Florida Panther, leaving the county open to potential litigation from environmental groups, and possible EPA injunctions. They will also be degrading a threatened species called Old Florida.

If you would like your voice to be heard, the Commissioners’ email addresses are here.

Attend the October 22 hearing, at 1:30 in the Commission Chamber, 1660 Ringling Blvd, and sign in to speak. For more information, go to sarasotavision2050.blogspot.com.

Andy Mele is the SunCoast Waterkeeper, an affiliate of the Waterkeeper Alliance, with 220 bay, river and sound Keepers worldwide. Visit www.suncoastwaterkeeper.org or www.waterkeeper.org.



More letters of opposition can be found here and here.