WE NEED your help to stop the development of this sensitive land!
THE REZONE PETITION STATES (19-04):
“The Applicants specifically want to rezone approximately 1.015 acres of a fill area in Shakett Creek from OUC (Open Use, Conservation, 1 unit/25 acres) to RSF-1 (Residential, Single-Family, 2.5 units/acre) in order to build one single- family residence on the property. The Applicant also intends to rezone approximately 1.43 acres closer to the intersection of Laurel Road and Albee Farm Road from RSF-1 to OUC in what the Applicant is referring to as a “rezone swap”. The intent is to provide single-family residential zoning on the property where the Applicant would like to build a single-family residence and in exchange rezone another part of the property similar, but slightly larger in size, to OUC for conservation purpose. Much of the property is impacted by Shakett Creek, except for an area in the northeastern part of the property near the intersection of Laurel Road and Albee Farm Road and a fill area in Shakett Creek that is high enough to build. It is the latter fill area in Shakett Creek that the Applicant would like to use to build one single-family residence.”
HISTORY:
The owners bought this land at a highly discounted price from Sarasota County through a tax deed sale (a purchase price of under $25,000 for nearly 15 acres of land that abuts 2 sides of navigable waterways leading to the Gulf of Mexico). Two community workshops were held by the owners to inform neighboring residents of their intention (June 29, 2017 and December 18, 2019). The owners publicly stated that their goal for purchasing this land was to build their family residence on an island that sits at the southwest corner of the property. This island is currently zoned OUC. In order for the owners to build their home there, they are seeking permission from Sarasota County to rezone this portion of their property. They want to swap OUC zoned land with RSF-1 zoned land located elsewhere on the parcel.
CONCERNS SURROUNDING THIS ZONING SWAP:
Response Time by Public Safety Services
Public safety is a concern. The owners of this property have signed a waiver and made it public knowledge that in the event of an emergency, public safety services may be delayed and they are aware of this delay. The delay is due to the fact that the proposed driveway and bridge leading to the building site will not support the weight of heavy emergency service vehicles.
Non-Binding Development Concept Plan
Petition 19-04 is a Non-Binding Development Concept Plan. This means that the owners are not obligated to the plan submitted and it can change at any time. Whereas a Binding Plan means there are no allowable deviations from the approved plans. It is entirely possible that if approved, the owners of this land can build multiple homes on the property.
NOTES FROM THE JUNE 6, 2019 REVIEW BOARD PUBLIC HEARING
Four concerns that arose from the Sarasota review board hearing on June 6, 2019.
Sensitivity of the Swap:
A swap of this nature (OUC to RSF-1) is unpresented and had never occurred within Sarasota County, as stated by a County Employee.
Delay in Response to Public Safety:
A delay in emergency service response time was reaffirmed by Mr. Tom Hicks, a Sarasota County Public Safety representative who spoke at the review hearing. It was also affirmed by Mr. Hicks that this delayed response would pass with the property Meaning if the property was sold, the new owners would have to accept the terms of the Fire Marshall report and the possible delay in emergency response services time.
Non-Binding Development Concept Plan:
When publicly asked by Commissioner Morris “Would you be willing to make a stipulation that if this does go through that you would build a single family house on the property” An agent for the owners stated “I don’t think they are willing to make that stipulation.”
Additional Disturbance to OUC Land:
Notwithstanding the land within the proposed swap; if approved there would be additional disturbance to OUC land granted for personal access and utility easement, potentially up to 700 linear feet along Shakett Creek.
COMMENTS FROM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Commissioner Morris: “This is not a good deal for Sarasota County – taking environmentally sensitive land and swapping for something that is zoned RSF-1.” “Not a good trade for Sarasota county.” “The fact that the applicant has come before us and stating one house but absolutely not willing to stipulate that.”
Commissioner Theresa Mast: “… never recalls a swap of sensitive lands to RSF-1” “(She thinks) this applicant knowingly purchased this property in its current state ..” “The community would get the raw end of the deal on this one”
Commissioner Strelec: “…. a real safely issue out there and although people in the fire department can make agreements to that kind of thing it doesn’t change that fact that I think there is a real danger and that is why I don’t support this.”
Commissioner Cooper: “The applicant opened with a statement calling for ‘equal land for equal land’. I think that is a mischaracterization of what is happening here. The only thing equal is their relative size.”
One a final note, Commissioner Theresa Mast thanked the community members who came and spoke in opposition of this petition and carrying themselves in a very professional manner. She stated that commissioners are guided by regulations rather than emotions and have to factor those issues.
REVIEW BOARDS RECOMMENDATION:
The Review Board made a unanimous recommendation to deny Petition 19-04. A final review from the County Commissioners is set for September 10, 2019. If you would like to learn more about this rezoning request and watch the entire review hearing, please do so by following this link:
For more, contract Bill Cantrell at NACA:
Bill Cantrell | President
NACA (Nokomis Area Civic Association)
Cellular | 941-586-8301
billcantrell@verizon.net
www.naca-nokomis.com
Mr. Cantrell,
ReplyDeleteAs the couple who is applying for a zoning swap of land in Nokomis which is supposedly the subject of your misleading article, “Planning Commission sides with Nokomis residents on Shakett Creek” on the internet website https://sarasotavision2050.blogspot.com, we would like to inform you and the readers of the following critical outright untruths and omissions.
Your article states as follows:
“Sensitivity of the Swap:
A swap of this nature (OUC to RSF-1) is unprecedented and had never occurred within Sarasota County, as stated by a County Employee.”
In order to allow the expansion of a shooting range located 2.15 miles upstream on Shackett Creek, the Sarasota County Planning Board & BOCC unanimously approved Rezone Petition No.14-34 rezoning OUC zoned lands bordering on the East bank of Shakett Creek.
Modern rifles shoot well over twice as far. Is a shooting range in our neighborhood an acceptable land use while a single family home would not be acceptable in your opinion?
“Delay in Response to Public Safety:
A delay in emergency service response time was reaffirmed by Mr. Tom Hicks, a Sarasota County Public Safety representative who spoke at the review hearing. It was also affirmed by Mr. Hicks that this delayed response would pass with the property Meaning if the property was sold, the new owners would have to accept the terms of the Fire Marshall report and the possible delay in emergency response services time.”
Florida State Statute 633.208 Sec 8(a) exempts single family homes from NFPA 1 CH 18 (access).
The Fire Marshall wrote to us on December 13th 2016: “You have satisfied our request as it relates to your property.”
The official Findings of Fact issued by the Planning Commission states as follows: “12. Ingress and egress to the subject parcel and internal circulation would not adversely affect traffic flow, safety or control;”
“Non-Binding Development Concept Plan:
When publicly asked by Commissioner Morris “Would you be willing to make a stipulation that if this does go through that you would build a single family house on the property” An agent for the owners stated “I don’t think they are willing to make that stipulation.”
We own two adjacent parcels, both with split zoning RSF-1 and OUC. We propose to build one single family home on the Southern Parcel. Current zoning would force us to build inside a sensitive wetlands area.
The Northern Parcel has a buildable RSF-1 area outside the wetlands. We are volunteering to protect the wetlands area on this parcel by rezoning it to OUC. County Staff did not recommend any stipulations.
“Additional Disturbance to OUC Land:
Notwithstanding the land within the proposed swap; if approved there would be additional disturbance to OUC land granted for personal access and utility easement, potentially up to 700 linear feet along Shakett Creek.”
This is incorrect and willfully misleading. Wetlands impact when building a single family residence on the Southern parcel would be reduced by 82% with an approved rezoning. We demonstrated this by comparing a 2006 development proposal with our improved 2019 proposal. Rezoning would dramatically reduce wetlands impact and not add additional impact.
COMMENT SIZE IS LIMITED ON THIS WEBSITE. PLEASE CONTINUE READING PART II IN THE NEXT COMMENT.
PART II
ReplyDelete“COMMENTS FROM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
Commissioner Morris: “This is not a good deal for Sarasota County – taking environmentally sensitive land and swapping for something that is zoned RSF-1.” “Not a good trade for Sarasota county.” “The fact that the applicant has come before us and stating one house but absolutely not willing to stipulate that.”
Commissioner Morris is incorrect in his claim that “environmentally sensitive land would be traded for RSF-1 zoned land”. The buildable RSF-1 zoned land on the Southern Parcel is located 100% inside a sensitive salt marsh. Meanwhile, the current OUC area is over 98% disturbed uplands fill infested with exotic, invasive vegetation and less than 2% wetlands. We are simply asking to correct a grave zoning error to protect environmentally sensitive wetlands.
“Commissioner Theresa Mast: “… never recalls a swap of sensitive lands to RSF-1” “(She thinks) this applicant knowingly purchased this property in its current state ..” “The community would get the raw end of the deal on this one.”
Commissioner Mast offered the above justifications as official grounds for recommending the denial of our petition. She added that she has lived in the area since she was very young. These reasons do not seem adequate to recommend the denial. Commissioner Morris was the Chair of the Planning Board when they unanimously approved Rezoning Petition 14-34, rezoning OUC zoned lands bordering on Shakett Creek. Neither Commissioner Morris, nor Commissioner Mast remembered or opposed the OUC rezoning for the shooting range 2.15 miles upstream on Shackett Creek.
“Commissioner Strelec: “…. a real safely issue out there and although people in the fire department can make agreements to that kind of thing it doesn’t change that fact that I think there is a real danger and that is why I don’t support this.”
- Florida State Statute 633.208 Sec 8(a) exempts single family homes from NFPA 1 ch 18 (access).
- The Fire Marshall wrote to us on December 13th 2016: “You have satisfied our request as it relates to your property.”
- The official Findings of Fact issued by the Planning Commission states as follows: “12. Ingress and egress to the subject parcel and internal circulation would not adversely affect traffic flow, safety or control;”
“Commissioner Cooper: “The applicant opened with a statement calling for ‘equal land for equal land’. I think that is a mischaracterization of what is happening here. The only thing equal is their relative size.”
This statement blatantly false. Nobody has asked for ‘equal land for equal land’. The environmentally sensitive salt marsh inside the buildable RSF-1 zone is 40% larger than the disturbed uplands area infested with exotic, invasive species, which is currently zoned OUC.
40% is a considerable increase in OUC zoned area and the salt marsh we are trying to protect lies 100% within the current RSF-1 zone.
We are disappointed that you as the President of NACA officially support the current zoning designation, which forces the destruction of an environmentally valuable wetlands area.
Approving this rezoning request does not destroy wetlands, it would save this sensitive salt marsh.
Freedom of Speech should stop where lies start. We request that you change your position and also the content of your publications and email communications with County Staff.
Kind regards,
Achim & Erika Ginsberg-Klemmt