Video courtesy of Critical Times SRQ
More on transportation:
How Transportation And Infrastructure Became Political Footballs - an interview with Charlie Zelle, the Minnesota Commissioner of Transportation.
Showing posts with label zoning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label zoning. Show all posts
Thursday, February 6, 2020
A conversation about zoning: How it works and how it can fail
A conversation about urban planning, transportation, commuting, and about how zoning works and sometimes doesn't. With Cathy Antunes and Andrew Georgiadis, in Sarasota, FL. Antunes often writes about development, growth, and dark money at The Detail. Georgiadis is an urban planner with Plusurbia. They spoke on Feb. 6, 2020 at Fogartyville.
Video courtesy of Critical Times SRQ
More on transportation:
Video courtesy of Critical Times SRQ
More on transportation:
Saturday, November 9, 2019
Lucas: We won - but Gabbert's WTF needs to be watched
|
Sunday, June 10, 2018
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:
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:
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.
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.
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.
- 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.
Monday, January 29, 2018
RaceTrac at East Rd. -- Workshop Jan. 30
Letter from Steve Stottlemyer about a RaceTrac gas station proposed for East Rd. and Fruitville Rd.:
A PROPOSED RACE TRAC GAS STATION ACROSS FROM SUN-N-FUN AT THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF FRUITVILLE ROAD AND EAST ROAD IS BACK DESPITE BEING DEFEATED TWICE BEFORE – IF YOU’RE OPPOSED TO STRIP COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IT’S UP TO YOU TO STEP UP AND STOP THIS
That’s Right!!! Here they come again!!! For those of you who may be new to east of I-75, in 2002, the Board of County Commission approved an ILW (Industrial Light Warehouse) rezoning on 35 acres located on the south side of Fruitville Road, just west of East Road. In exchange for ILW zoning, the eight property owners at the time agreed to “Perpetual Covenants & Restrictions" in a Resolution to forever forbid certain commercial uses on the property, in lieu of preparing a Critical Area Plan (CAP) for this area. The restrictive covenants and agreements forbid the following:
"Restaurant, fast food restaurant, delicatessen, bar, or tavern for on premise consumption of alcohol, automotive service stations or truck stops and similar uses, Convenience stores, with or without the sale of fuel. General retail store for single occupant exceeding a minimum of 100,000 square feet of continuous floor area within a single building,"
The County Commission was adamant Fruitville Road, east of I-75, would not be stripped out with intensive commercial uses as was done on the west side of I-75. Think University Parkway.
Despite these restrictions, the current Owner Attorney Bill Saba who purchased out of foreclosure a portion of the 35 acres is back once again trying to create strip commercial development along Fruitville Road. This time he is attempting to remove the “Perpetual Covenants & Restrictions” on just the corner parcel of Fruitville Road and East Road to put up a RaceTrac Gas Station. A brief history of their previous shenanigans is as follows:
1. In 2013 as part of a Rezoning Petition No. 13-10 for a small parcel within the 35 acre Fruitville Industrial Park, Attorney Bill Merrill representing Saba tried to convince the Board of County Commissioners to remove the restrictive covenants and agreements with no public input, but the County Commission said no.
2. In 2015 Attorney Bill Saba hired Attorney Bill Merrill and Land Planner Bo Medred (think Gabbert Transfer Station in the Celery Fields) to file Rezone Petition No. 15-11 to again attempt to remove these “Perpetual Covenants and Restrictions” restricting commercial uses the Owners had entered into with Sarasota County. This petition was denied because the citizens of east County stood up and objected to the strip commercialization along Fruitville Road east of I-75 and because the Commission felt it should live up to County commitments.
3. RaceTrac has employed Lawyers John Patterson and Michael Siegel of the Shutts & Bowen Law Firm to make this new attempt in spite of the fact that it was Nora Patterson, wife of John Patterson, who as a member of the County Commission, insisted on the restrictions in the 2002 rezoning.
If Attorney Saba is successful this third time, other land owners will also request unrestricted commercial zoning on their properties. Citizens and property owners east of I-75 have managed to fight strip commercial east of I-75 on Fruitville Road for years. And through the efforts of ever vigilante neighbors, we have been successful. But this type of strip commercial zoning will only continue moving east towards Lorraine Road. You and only you can make a difference.
Please take the time to show up at the scheduled neighborhood workshop on Tuesday, January 30, 2018 at 6:00 pm at the Shriners Sahib Temple located at 600 North Beneva Road and let Attorney Saba and RaceTrac know we citizens do not want strip commercial development on Fruitville Road.
RaceTrac filing here.
-- Steve Stottlemyer 941-724-4835.
RaceTrac filing here.
-- Steve Stottlemyer 941-724-4835.
Thursday, September 21, 2017
The first UDC workshop: Purpose, Customers, Scope
 |
| Matt Osterhoudt, Planning Director, foreground. Chris Brimo, CGA, background |
The first of three public workshops on the UDC to be conducted by the Sarasota Planning Dept. was held on Wed., Sept. 20, 2017 in Osprey.
UDC? What is it?
The Unified Development Code aims to bring together about 700 pages of Sarasota County zoning rules and 100 pages + appendices of Land Development Regulations.
Timing?
The project began in March 2017 and is designed to last about 18 months, through Summer 2018.
Cost?
$285,000, from Zoning funds.Purpose?
To clean up conflicts, contradictions, outdated references and other incompatibilities between Sarasota's Zoning Code, last overhauled in 2003, and its Land Development Regs (LDRs), even older than that.Consultant?
Calvin Giordano & Associates (CGA) - Florida consulting firm.Benefit?
According to Sarasota County Planning Director Matt Osterhoudt, there is overlap, redundancy, and inconsistencies between the zoning code, which regulates everything from land use to chicken tending, and the LDRs, which are the rules that a few big developers use when they propose new developments.
Bringing these two codes into harmony will save time and money for those that use the codes. This seems an eminently sensible thing to do.Main beneficiaries?
The developers, builders, and contractors who need a clear, well ordered set of rules to look to when they are proposing new developments.And the Public?
The public, the communities that are impacted by new development, is - or should be - a constituency that is addressed here. But it's not clear whether that is the case. (See also this open letter regarding the public's role in planning).
At the UDC workshop there were in fact more members of the public than there were members of the developer and builder communities. People with questions about impacts, with concerns about weakening the Comp Plan, and with strong objections to current rules that fail the public interest. One example: the weak and very narrow notification policies that require developers to let folks within 500, or 750 feet of a target site, know that a rezoning is proposed.
Another example: antiquated land use designations out of sync with the rapidly changing landscapes of Sarasota County. Recent example: A developer proposed a demolition waste plant in a burgeoning residential, retail, and eco-tourism area because of a land use designation from 37 years ago -- a time when no neighborhoods, schools, businesses, or nature preserve were there.What's the problem?
At the workshop, when members of the public noted that certain notification procedures for public lands seem to fail to reach people who will care, and who will be affected if a proposed development (such as a waste plant at the Celery Fields) were to go forward, the response was that surplus lands are "outside the scope" of this UDC code overhaul.
At this point, Sarasota County Planning appears to view as its main customers those developers and builders who must use these codes every day in order to do what they do. Fair enough. And the project seems well organized to accomplish its task.
Planning views the Board of Commissioners -- its employer -- as another constituency it must please.
But it's not clear whether Planning fully recognizes that the Public who elected the Board, and whose taxes pay both the Board's and the Planning Department's wages, have standing here as well.What can be done to give the Public clear relevant standing?
As environmental advocate Jono Miller put it after the hearing, one way to address this is to have the public involved up front, early in the "scoping session" that designs projects like the UDC code, sets project parameters, and decides whose interests will be served.
More representatives from the Public were at this workshop than developers, builders or contractors.
Builders and contractors will surely benefit from a cleaned-up, better organized code. But will our communities see any benefit to their concerns about notification, updated land use, and more? Maybe we need to be there as equal participants when future such projects are scoped. Advisory boards could reserve seats for the public interest.What's next?
The public interest here is entirely distinct from that of the developers, builders and contractors. It needs to be better understood and integrated into the planning process.
One can hope that the openness of the Planning Dept. to record all comments on the UDC update, and to transmit them to the Board, will register.
Matt Osterhoudt also stated that he and fellow planners will make themselves available to meet with any individual or group that wishes to do so.Anyone may get in touch with Planning via any of three ways:
Better understanding of the needs of those who use county codes, and those impacted by that use, can come from closer dialog.
- Email staff at planner@scgov.net
- Submit comments through this form on the planning website.
- Meet directly with Matt Osterhoudt or Bill Spaeth of Sarasota Planning.
Two more public workshops are planned in October and November. The first revised code document is expected to be ready to be seen in December.
Tuesday, September 19, 2017
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.
All three public "workshops" are in Nokomis:
Public Workshops
Location:
Nokomis Community Center, Main Hall
234 Nippino Trail
Nokomis, FL 34275Dates:
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.
6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible.
Tuesday, June 6, 2017
Maynard Hiss on siting, planning and waste
At CONA on Monday, June 12, will look at what can be learned from the June 1, 2017 Planning Commission hearing about the proposal to site a waste processing plant next to a pristine Preserve and Audubon Center. What are the logical next steps in the effort to protect the Celery Fields?
I was thinking how useless this facility would be if we had a very serious hurricane and thousands of homes were destroyed. In some of the bigger hurricanes 60,000 homes have been destroyed and mobile homes especially the older ones would probably be gone to a large extent in 150 mph winds.
The only way a transfer site would be able to handle hundreds of houses would be if it was connected to a rail line, which could quickly move large amounts of sorted debris out fast and effectively.
I was also thinking how poor the soils in Sarasota are and how this much yard waste and compost could benefit agriculture and ecological restoration. So siting the yard waste in a more suitable location would also be helpful and synergistic especially if some of the worst types could be comp.
On the other hand I see this highly accomplished business person who has contributed significantly to the resource recovery industry being hammered by people who largely support his efforts and applaud his efforts but who are forced to oppose him because the only alternative on the table is to blight one of the nicest potential gateways and ecotourism sites in the County. And area that could play a central role in making the east part of the county as desirable as the west part of the County.
Public participation will never work in a context where people can only say yes or no to really bad proposals for really good things.
Below is a thoughtful comment from Maynard Hiss that addresses the hearing, and looks beyond it to speak of how the public planning process seems skewed in ways that are unproductive and fail to result in clear commonsense vision for surplus lands, planning, zoning, and community involvement in a process basic to who we are.
+=====+
Maynard Hiss What is amazing about this is how little analysis went into the siting process except for the part that the applicant was getting a good deal on public land much more suited to nature-based water and ecological conservation.
 |
| Maynard Hiss at Planning Commission |
The only way a transfer site would be able to handle hundreds of houses would be if it was connected to a rail line, which could quickly move large amounts of sorted debris out fast and effectively.
I was also thinking how poor the soils in Sarasota are and how this much yard waste and compost could benefit agriculture and ecological restoration. So siting the yard waste in a more suitable location would also be helpful and synergistic especially if some of the worst types could be comp.
I think the saddest part of the last meeting was how one's choice is limited to NO, when the participants would be more effective and more productive by helping site the much-needed facilities in a much better location. For example, our solid waste plan would be much more effective with a resource recovery facility that could handle a major disaster. It would be much more effective if the facility had much easier access to markets for the recovered materials such as if it was on a rail line. Or if the organic yard waste was closer to agriculture or horticulture or a biofuels areas where it could be quickly used.
It is sad when the only choices for the public are to say NO to really bad ideas that would destroy one of the most strategic areas for tourist development in the County.
It is sad when the only choices for the public are to say NO to really bad ideas that would destroy one of the most strategic areas for tourist development in the County.
So instead of using the intellectual capital of the citizens in a positive way such as by getting a lot of experts on the great and positive characteristics of this unique area of the County with a very high value set of assets that could be developed synergistically with the attributes of the site, they have to deal with County planners and commercial interests who want to turn back time and return the are to a low-quality light industry by adding heavy industrial waste to the site.
On the other hand I see this highly accomplished business person who has contributed significantly to the resource recovery industry being hammered by people who largely support his efforts and applaud his efforts but who are forced to oppose him because the only alternative on the table is to blight one of the nicest potential gateways and ecotourism sites in the County. And area that could play a central role in making the east part of the county as desirable as the west part of the County.
Public participation will never work in a context where people can only say yes or no to really bad proposals for really good things.
 |
| Rally before 6.1.17 Planning Commission Sarasota County Administration Building |
Wednesday, May 31, 2017
Letter to the Planning Commission: Jason Boehk
Dear Planning Commissioners Benson, Bispham, Cooper, Cutsinger, Ebaugh, Morris, Neunder, Pember, and Stultz:
As a Sarasota resident and taxpayer, I urge you to reject the Proposed Land Use Change for Critical Area Plan Amendment Rezone Petition No. 17-01 to Rezone approximately 16 acres from ILW (Industrial Light Manufacturing/ and Warehousing) with Stipulations and OUR (Open Use Rural, 1 Unit to 10 Acres) to ILW with Amended Stipulations, and Special Exceptions No. 1765 to Allow a Recycling Facility in ILW Zone District.
I strongly oppose the proposed rezoning and “special exception” for the following reasons:
1. Serious ethical and legal questions are swirling around the entire process by which the County has jettisoned the parcels in question. I remain hopeful that a thorough investigation, by County whistleblowers or others, will reveal the true nature of the transactions. One thing is clear to me: the beneficiaries of selling the valuable parcels, which represent an important buffer for the fragile habitat of the Celery Fields, do ~not~ include the taxpayers and residents of Sarasota County.
2. The Celery Fields is a tremendous asset for the County, and a huge potential economic driver via ecotourism. Allowing the siting of a concrete-crushing and building-waste processing facility adjacent to this treasure, is entirely reckless and irresponsible. Moreover, doing so will represent an insult to the visionary County and community leadership from years past, efforts that combined with serendipity to make the Celery Fields into a unique environmental boon for the County as well as a nationally-recognized destination for birdwatching.
3. I work for a company with offices located off Porter Road, so I am already familiar with the degraded road and public safety situation in the vicinity of the proposed waste-processing facility. This facility will add many more trucks to roads that are already insufficient. With school traffic and the impending completion of more residential communities in the neighborhood, approving this rezone and special exception will demonstrate a willful disregard for public safety.
4. Sarasota County’s Zoning Mission Statement states that “Zoning's fundamental purpose is to protect a community's health, safety and welfare.”[1] A concrete-crushing facility in this location will jeopardize all three. Moreover, this is a not how a “Critical Area Plan” deserves to be handled by Sarasota County government.
In sum, I am hard pressed to find a more egregious example of the County’s poor stewardship of our public lands and resources than this one, with the convoluted, opaque process surrounding Jim Gabbert’s acquisition of these properties, and the County’s bizarre, apparent encouragement of his effort to build a waste processing facility adjacent to East County’s “Central Park,” the Celery Fields.
The prosperous, dynamic future of Sarasota County is tied to the fortunes of the Celery Fields, not to a concrete-crushing facility in the same location.
Please, adhere to the genuine letter and spirit of Sarasota’s zoning, and reject this outrageous proposal.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Sincerely,
Jason Boehk
Sarasota
[1] Zoning: An Explanation of Zoning Districts in Sarasota County, Florida
As a Sarasota resident and taxpayer, I urge you to reject the Proposed Land Use Change for Critical Area Plan Amendment Rezone Petition No. 17-01 to Rezone approximately 16 acres from ILW (Industrial Light Manufacturing/ and Warehousing) with Stipulations and OUR (Open Use Rural, 1 Unit to 10 Acres) to ILW with Amended Stipulations, and Special Exceptions No. 1765 to Allow a Recycling Facility in ILW Zone District.
I strongly oppose the proposed rezoning and “special exception” for the following reasons:
1. Serious ethical and legal questions are swirling around the entire process by which the County has jettisoned the parcels in question. I remain hopeful that a thorough investigation, by County whistleblowers or others, will reveal the true nature of the transactions. One thing is clear to me: the beneficiaries of selling the valuable parcels, which represent an important buffer for the fragile habitat of the Celery Fields, do ~not~ include the taxpayers and residents of Sarasota County.
2. The Celery Fields is a tremendous asset for the County, and a huge potential economic driver via ecotourism. Allowing the siting of a concrete-crushing and building-waste processing facility adjacent to this treasure, is entirely reckless and irresponsible. Moreover, doing so will represent an insult to the visionary County and community leadership from years past, efforts that combined with serendipity to make the Celery Fields into a unique environmental boon for the County as well as a nationally-recognized destination for birdwatching.
3. I work for a company with offices located off Porter Road, so I am already familiar with the degraded road and public safety situation in the vicinity of the proposed waste-processing facility. This facility will add many more trucks to roads that are already insufficient. With school traffic and the impending completion of more residential communities in the neighborhood, approving this rezone and special exception will demonstrate a willful disregard for public safety.
4. Sarasota County’s Zoning Mission Statement states that “Zoning's fundamental purpose is to protect a community's health, safety and welfare.”[1] A concrete-crushing facility in this location will jeopardize all three. Moreover, this is a not how a “Critical Area Plan” deserves to be handled by Sarasota County government.
In sum, I am hard pressed to find a more egregious example of the County’s poor stewardship of our public lands and resources than this one, with the convoluted, opaque process surrounding Jim Gabbert’s acquisition of these properties, and the County’s bizarre, apparent encouragement of his effort to build a waste processing facility adjacent to East County’s “Central Park,” the Celery Fields.
The prosperous, dynamic future of Sarasota County is tied to the fortunes of the Celery Fields, not to a concrete-crushing facility in the same location.
Please, adhere to the genuine letter and spirit of Sarasota’s zoning, and reject this outrageous proposal.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Sincerely,
Jason Boehk
Sarasota
[1] Zoning: An Explanation of Zoning Districts in Sarasota County, Florida
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)