"Our quality of life is at risk" - Cathy Antunes

On Wednesday the County Commission will be voting on amendments to the Sarasota 2050 plan. The original 2050 standards for rural land outside the Urban Service Boundary (USB) were the result of a robust collaboration with community leaders and development interests. Since 2050 was adopted over ten years ago, understanding of best land use practices has improved dramatically. The 2050 changes fail to incorporate these new insights, nor are they the result of community collaboration. Rather, the changes are the result of County meetings with a handful of landowner/developers focused on facilitating development of their rural land.

The proposed 2050 changes ignore the reality of supply and demand. In the unincorporated County, Sarasota’s total potential housing supply (unbuilt) in 2010 was 45,000 units. Since then at least 9,000 units have been added. Add over 10,000 units in the City of Sarasota and 70,000 units in North Port, bringing total potential housing to 134,000 units. Those numbers don’t include the City of Venice and Longboat Key. Sarasota County’s projected ten year housing demand is 16,400 units. With potential units over 134,000 units and a projected demand of 16,400 units , our supply vs demand ratio is over 800%. Cities known for wise planning (like Portland, Oregon) move their USB when they don’t have enough potential housing to meet 10 year demand. With a supply vs demand ratio of 800%, why would the County make it easier to develop rural parcels by weakening 2050 standards? Is the practical result of these undisciplined amendments a de facto elimination of Sarasota’s Urban Service Boundary?

Proposed 2050 changes to walkable design standards enable inefficient subdivision development. Joe Minicozzi studied Sarasota County’s property tax base and found it took subdivision housing 42 years to pay off its infrastructure needs - longer than the life of the infrastructure! Charles Marohn is another planning thought leader who has documented how subdivision style development provides a short term cash benefit to municipal budgets for about eight years, until the long term costs of infrastructure maintenance and public services start kicking in, sinking municipal budgets. This important data is missing from County policy.

Walkable development leads to real value and healthy municipal budgets. Walkability isn’t the mere presence of sidewalks. Walkability provides a lifestyle which enables residents to work, shop, go to school and live in an area with zero to minimal need for a car. Minicozzi found Sarasota’s walkable, mixed use development delivered a much higher tax yield per acre - one that paid off it’s infrastructure costs in as little as three years. Changes to Sarasota 2050 plan eliminate design standards which deliver a truly walkable neighborhood.

Real estate studies show walkable communities are in demand. A1999 study by the Urban Land Institute of four new pedestrian-friendly communities determined that homebuyers were willing to pay a $20,000 premium for homes in them compared to similar houses in surrounding areas. A 2012 Milken Institute study shows strong correlation between walkable urbanism, educated residents, and local GDP. According to their findings “The six highest-ranked walkable urban metropolitan areas have an average GDP per capita of $60,400 . GPD per capita in walkable urban metros is 38 percent higher than the average GDP per capita ($43,900) in the 10 low-ranked walkable urban metros. Incorporating this information into our local planning policy is critical to our economic vitality. Creating walkability where we already have infrastructure, inside our USB, is an obvious economic game changer for Sarasota County. Why are our local leaders focusing on building rural lands instead?

Proposed 2050 changes do not include appropriate analysis of their impact on wildlife habitat, transportation (accidents, evacuation, congestion),and agriculture. Sarasota County’s Land Management Master Plan is out of date. According to the County website, it was due to be updated in 2010. This document is the roadmap for stewardship of our natural resources. Why has it been allowed to languish?

According to 1000 Friends of Florida, 2050 changes do not comply with Florida Law (statutes 163.3177(1)(a)9, 163.3177(1)(b) and 163.3177(1)(f)). These changes benefit a handful of landowners, but those who chose a rural lifestyle and those who work, live and own property west of I75, will ultimately be subsidizing overdevelopment at odds with their own economic well being. 

Enough is enough. Attend the County Commission vote this Wednesday at 1:30 pm, 1660 Ringling Blvd in County Commission Chambers. 

Our quality of life is at risk. Oppose these Ill-conceived policy changes.

Cathy Antunes serves on the boards of the Council of Neighborhood Associations and Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Government. She is organizing the 2050 Action Network, a growing network of civic groups advocating for the preservation and enhancement of Sarasota’s natural resources, economic diversification and quality of life.

-- Reposted from the SH-T