Jono Miller: History and Natural History at the Celery Fields, Workforce housing elsewhere

This letter was sent to the Board of County Commissioners (Chair: Charles Hines) from Jono Miller, who proposes two new projects -- a history and natural history facility on one of the public parcels, and affordable housing near the bus transfer station and current Sarasota archive on Porter Rd.

Charles et al.

I'm writing in reference to the article in the Herald Tribune this morning regarding surplus lands and affordable housing. I applaud any approach to surplus lands that places what the land can do for the County or its mere cash value.

I don't know if any commissioner's have advocated using any of the quad parcels for affordable housing, but, based on the handout at the May 14th public workshop, we know the public has suggested co-housing development, tiny homes, assisted living facility, assisted living apartments with staff housing, adult day care, elder cottage housing, AND affordable housing. There's probably a need for all those, but I don't they they represent the highest and best uses for the quad parcels.

As I testified at the workshop, I think the question we should be asking regarding the three quad parcels (or any surplus land) is " What can be done here that benefits the community, that cannot be done elsewhere?" That's because at this time It is only the three quad parcels that have the potential to synergistically contribute to the Celery Fields Stormwater Facility (and de facto nature park). Uses that are either neutral or detract from the Celery Fields should be located elsewhere. What sorts of uses might augment the celery fields? Projects that build off of the unique aspects of the site -- aspects related to water management, agricultural history, bird watching, or outdoor resource-based experiences in general.

Having said that, I am supportive of using county land to facilitate workforce housing, but I don't think the County should be giving surplus land away for such uses. Selling at a discounted rate might make sense, but I fear eliminating land costs for some projects could render other potential workforce housing projects that have to buy land unfeasible and create a presumption that the County will provide additional land in the future, absolving entrepreneurs of the burden of making the numbers work otherwise.

I am once again attaching a proposal to maximize the potential of county land adjacent to the bus transfer facility (for workforce housing) as a means to maximize part of one of the celery field quad parcels (by co-locating cultural history interpretation with natural history). The ability to reduce the number of household cars by creating workforce housing adjacent to the bus transfer facility is an example of something that cannot be easily replicated elsewhere. Location, location, location. And using that land sale, even at discounted rates, to fund a complementary publicly accessible amenity at the celery fields would potentiate both the transit-accessible housing and the celery fields.

Sincerely,

Jono [Miller]

Documents included with letter:

Add caption