Comment #1 on the Critical Area Plan for the Quads

Comment #1 on the Critical Area Plan for the Quads at the Celery Fields

To: Steve Kirk (skirk@scgov.net), Matt Osterhoudt (mosterho@scgov.net) Jane Grogg (jgrogg@scgov.net)

October 4, 2019

Having had the opportunity to review a draft of the Planning Department's Critical Area Plan (CAP) that concerns our public lands at the Celery Fields, we wish to offer some comments in hopes of clarifying community concerns.

Before going into detail, we wish to affirm that public lands in Sarasota County should only be considered according to community-oriented principles. A plan for public lands should:

• Put people first.
• Advance Sarasota’s long-held values of good stewardship and intelligent planning.
• Situate the specific discussion within the larger context of changes and area trends.
• Respect Sarasota’s distinguished tradition of protecting and preserving public lands.

The Draft CAP offers a detailed, balanced look into the area the Board tasked you to study. An example comes on page 15 (of draft received on Aug. 28th). The Level of Service (LOS) on Palmer Blvd. between Porter and Apex is found to be unacceptable, and the possibility of widening Palmer Blvd. from Porter to Apex to four lanes is considered. The report goes on:

“the negative impact on the character of the Palmer Boulevard corridor from such a change must be considered.”

This observation is highly significant; it’s a sign of the report's judicious approach to the task it was given. But -- and this is the crux of the matter -- the larger reality of that acknowledged "negative impact" is never fully given its due.

The ultimate welfare and fate of a substantial evolving area of beauty, recreation, community health and economic opportunity should be the primary and central concern of this plan, and so far, this most certainly is not the case.

Inadequate Scoping

In great measure this has to do with the design of the task, rather than with its execution. While the report seems to fulfill its objective, the design of that objective - its scoping -  ignores all the most important issues that relate to the future of the Celery Fields area. At one time, the community had a hand in shaping the actual scope of a CAP - as with the Fruitville Initiative. Why not here?

What’s missing is an in-depth inquiry into the large meaningful trends transforming the entire surrounding area. In recent years, the Board has approved thousands of residences within walking distance. Children live and go to schools on buses that come along Palmer. The Celery Fields itself has become a valued amenity for residents and many visitors. The industrial park, on the other hand, often shows many vacancy signs.

Without taking into account the predominant features of the area as a whole, this plan misses what really matters: the public good. Imagine for a moment that someone applied to the Federal Government to frack a plot of land, and simply says, "this land is not close to any homes, let us frack." Now suppose the land sits atop Lincoln’s head on Mt. Rushmore -- should that fact be ignored?

What you were tasked to do is not ask, for example, how people living within walking distance of  the Celery Fields will be affected by bringing industrial development forward to Palmer Blvd.

Compare the existing configuration with what is proposed: Ackerman Park serves to screen the industrial areas to its west from drivers on Apex Road. Putting industry on the Quads does precisely the opposite: It takes away the buffer (our public lands) and replaces them with construction on Palmer Boulevard. The result will be a continuous built barrier between the Celery Fields and the residential and commercial areas accessible via the Palmer Underpass. Industry would add more large truck traffic to Palmer, Porter, and Apex, which are now about to be impacted by trucks from James Gabbert’s Waste Transfer Facility.

Survey the entire community

There’s a great deal of knowledge about the area that this CAP should see as its duty to address -- real-life factors for thousands of people who now live there:

1. What do actual trends in the industrial park show in terms of vacancies, land prices, rental prices?
2. Why is no one seeking to purchase the MEC parcels in the 240 acres of the Fruitville Initiative for industry? 
3. Where are the vectors that would demonstrate the obvious fact that Board actions have changed the area in an overwhelming way to residential and recreational?
4. Traffic analysis should include the peak times, patterns and needs of the immediate community.
5. How many school children ride how many buses to school that stop on Palmer Blvd.? Why do they stop right in front of the Celery Fields Parking Lot and block all traffic in both directions? How can this be improved?
6. How many people use the Celery Fields, at what times of day, what days of the week, for what purposes?
7. How many groups use the Celery Fields for sports training, environmental studies, teaching, birdwatching, picnicking, stargazing, photography, dogwalking, kayaking, exercise, wedding photos and so many more purposes?
8. With evermore recreational users and visitors - human and avian - from elsewhere, what plans are underway to to meet  anticipated needs for parking and complementary activities such as a place to sit and enjoy a meal?

Without fully studying the area, how can you possibly plan in a way that offers reliable estimates of probable impacts?

What is clear is that the Planning Dept. was asked to look at implementing the 1975 land use designation for the Quads. Which means the task and scoping of this 2019 Critical Area Plan directs you to look away from, rather than inquire into, the greater and more fundamental questions of communal good in this changing landscape. Your findings flow ineluctably from the design of your task.

Policy and stewardship

In addition to the compromised frame, there is need for serious consideration of basic matters of stewardship, tradition, and policy. Ask anyone who has lived in Sarasota for a long time: it is not a “given” that public lands should be sold. In fact, it’s been a long-held principle in this county that public lands are public forever -- not to be sold for private development, except in rare explicable circumstances.

Our communities have shared our hopes and vision for this area with you over several years. We reiterate our expectation that you adopt community-based principles:

• Put people first.
• Advance Sarasota’s long-held values of good stewardship and intelligent planning.
• Situate the specific discussion within the larger context of changes and area trends.
• Respect Sarasota’s distinguished tradition of protecting and preserving public lands.

In addition, include in your plan strong provisions in the event the Board votes to sell or develop:

• Detail specific constraints with regard to footprint, traffic, noise, architecture, lighting, noise, landscaping, business model, compatibility for any rezoning, special exception, etc.

• Require a rigorous examination of any applicant’s business practice. Restaurant Depot Tampa location is served by huge trucks, and attracts a large public trade in cheap alcohol and food -- which escaped notice when the firm applied to build on parcel #3.

Restaurant Depot sought to build a warehouse on parcel #3
This is its Tampa site

Opportunity lost

Finally, why do this at all? No applicant has asked for this. The first thing this plan should state is the Board’s explanation as to why it prefers private profiteering to the public good.

Forward-looking planning for recreation and habitat preservation will not only serve the ever-expanding population of Sarasota County; it will sustain and improve air and water quality, and enhance current property values. In addition to all else, the county will see a significantly larger monetary return by supporting public land use by and for our citizens, over a far longer period of time.

In brief: we ask that you do justice to nature, to our communities, and to the future of Sarasota: incorporate the vision, values, vitality and promise of the larger Celery Fields area in this report to the Board.

Respectfully,

Tom Matrullo