Becky Ayech on Conservation Subdivisions and Quasi-Judicial Proceedings and a word from Jon Thaxton

Becky Ayech, shown below -- a longtime resident of Old Miakka who has battled the county innumerable times -- shared these key elements of Sarasota's Unified Development Code, or UDC. She was featured in this Sarasota Magazine piece by Elizabeth Djinis.

This is from Sarasota UDC:

1. The purpose of the Conservation Subdivision Regulations is to implement the requirements of the Sarasota 2050 Resource Management Area (RMA) System by creating the following implementation tools:

i.  An alternative subdivision standard to the large lot subdivision form.

ii. A Conservation Subdivision overlay zoning district to increase density. The only methods available to increase density on a property within the Rural Heritage/Estate RMA, Greenway RMA and the Agricultural Reserve RMA, as depicted and defined within the Sarasota County Comprehensive plan, is to rezone to: Village Planned Development District, Hamlet Planned Development District or Conservation Subdivision overlay district.

2.  The purpose of the Conservation Subdivision Design Standards is to preserve environmental systems, rural character and the viability of agricultural land by creating greater flexibility in the design of residential developments to achieve the following standards:

3.   The secondary purpose of a Conservation Subdivision is to provide alternative subdivision standards that will support the following objectives:

i.  Facilitate the construction and maintenance of housing, streets and other infrastructure in a more efficient manner; and

ii.  Protect the viability of agricultural land.

==============

Comments from Ayech, followed by 

It is interesting that conservation subdivisions are mandated when increasing the density in the rural Heritage/Estates which would allow very small lots which are not consistent with preserving rural character. The open space is devoted to lakes and stormwater ponds  (treated sewer holding areas) and not agriculture.

The rezone requests are quasi-judicial proceedings. To just write the Commissioners and ask them to vote No has no basis in the facts they use to make their determination.

We heard that from two Planning Commissioners when these rezones were before them. I had submitted a movie and comments but too late to get in the packet so I doubt if they saw it. That is why people don't win.

================

THE FOLLOWING ARE THE FINDINGS OF FACTS AS DETERMINED BY THE FACTS THAT HAVE BEEN TESTIFIED TO IN FRONT OF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS:

1. The proposed change would/would not be

consistent with the intent, goals,

objectives, policies, guiding principles, and

programs of the Comprehensive Plan;

 

2. The proposed change would/would not

have an impact on the availability of

adequate public facilities consistent with

the level of service standards adopted in

the Comprehensive Plan, and as defined

and implemented through the Sarasota

County Concurrency Management System

Regulations, Chapter 94, Article VII of

Exhibit A of the Sarasota County Code, as

amended;

 

3. The existing district boundaries are/are

not logically drawn in relation to existing

conditions on the property proposed for

change;

 

4. The proposed change will/will not

adversely influence living conditions in the

neighborhood;

5.  proposed change will/will not create a

drainage or flooding problem;

 

6. There are/are not substantial reasons why

the property cannot be used in accord

with existing zoning;

 

7. It is/is not impossible to find other

adequate sites in the County for the

proposed use in districts already

permitting such use;

 

8. The gradual and ordered growth

contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan

can/cannot be best accomplished through

the approval of a land use which is less

intense than the intensity designated on

the Future Land Use Map of the

Comprehensive Plan;

 

9. The proposed change would/would not

create adverse impacts in the adjacent

area or the County in general;

 

10. The subject parcel is/is not of adequate

shape and size to accommodate the

proposed change;

 

11. Ingress and egress to the subject parcel

and internal circulation would/would not

adversely affect traffic flow, safety or

control, or create types of traffic deemed

incompatible with surrounding land uses;

 

12. The proposed change has/has not been

reviewed in accordance with the Interlocal

Agreement with the School Board of

Sarasota County and whether school

capacity has been adequately addressed,

including on- and off-site improvements;

===================

And now a word from former County Commissioner Jon Thaxton:

"For over the last decade, the state legislature and local governments have been passing development industry-sponsored laws designed to reduce or eliminate environmental protection standards, diminish public participation, and all but eliminate the ability to challenge comp plan decisions. As a result, the comp plan planning process itself is now the most serious threat to Florida’s quality of life, natural environment and economy.  

"The land use decision process has become rigged with the deck stacked decisively in favor of large developers."

The entire essay is here.