For the past thirteen months I have been working as a volunteer to help a local couple rezone a parcel on Shakett Creek. My file folder on this matter is 885 megabytes and there are over 850 individual files in the folder. I got involved because I'm retired, I'm frequently willing to help people out when I can, the outcome will be better for the environment, and I think this case has the potential to address some serious systemic problems with County Planning.
This is all heading towards some resolution at 1:30 on Wednesday September 9th when I make a presentation to the Board of County Commissioners. Although I am very optimistic, ya never know what will happen with the Board and we have to contend with an online petition opposing (501 signatures) and a 7-0 vote against from the Planning Commission.
If, in addition to the basic cover letter summary stuff (page 1737), you only read two things, I'm recommending an email I sent to the county on March 16th (page 2108) and a Special Report I produced (How Sarasota County Mistook a Wetland for an Upland, an Upland for a Wetland, and Why it Matters) starting on page 1949.
This links to a website created by the owners of the parcel.
To view/listen on Wednesday click here and scroll down to the 9/9/20 meeting.
Wish us luck.
Jono
PS By my calculations it will be 50 years to the day that Julie and I arrived (separately) in Sarasota to attend New College.
The entire parcel has been given FLU codes by SWFMD and those codes are to be maintained in the counties land use database for land use and future land usage. These parcels as a whole have been deemed of high ecological value to the county, state and its residents for the future benefits the county and its citizens. If this zoning swap were to occur how could this possibly be good for the environment. An approval would "grant" nearly an additional acre of OUC conservation land for access to the Island that is not included in the SWAP calculations. This area also contains nearly 1200 linear feet of mature mangroves (on either side of the penisula) and 4500 sq ft (per the applicant submission) of wetland and 586 sq ft of water surface area (per applicants submission) that will be subject to additional disturbance and destruction so that infrastructure in the form of a driveway, culvert bridge can be installed in the cut. This bridge will stop access to the Marine Park located through were the bridge is planned to be installed in the cut. The county got it right. The applicants have gambled on a distressed property that they purchased at a tax sale from the county. The current zoning is what they purchased. They knew what they were or should have. They have buildable RSF-1 zoning already. The county has the zoning right.
ReplyDelete