Quads Workshop Info so far

Last fall, the Board of Sarasota County Commissioners directed Planning to undertake a new Critical Area Plan study of our public lands at the Celery Fields known as the "Quad Parcels," or just "Quads." 

Critical Area Plan Scope 

On Jan. 29, the Planning Dept. issued a memorandum outlining the Scope of Work for this study. That memo is here.

Lead County Planner Steve Kirk has been helpful in answering our questions about the process. The County is looking at a date in mid-May for the workshop, probably to be held in the evening. The date and venue have not yet been finalized. 

Note: Mr. Kirk says staff will review and discuss proposals submitted by the Fresh Start Initiative. We are aware that some new proposals are being developed within our communities. Anyone who has a new proposal is invited to submit it to Mr. Kirk at any time -- his contact information is at the end of this post.

Below are the responses to our queries thus far:

The public workshop will be an informal event and staff will be flexible in how it concludes. Timing speakers would be unnecessary, however, domination of discussions will be discouraged. 

Any input regarding CAP should be directed  to me at my address, phone number or email address below. The intent  of the workshop is to present to the public all the information the staff has at the time, and then hear ideas and feedback from those in attendance. The staff presentation will include any ideas related to the CAP or the County properties previously provided by the public, including those previously put forth by Fresh Start.  We will also include anything else we receive  prior to the workshop.  It will be made clear in our presentation that we will continue to take public input, and will welcome conversations on the CAP issues after the workshop, and until the CAP study is completed. 

The staff is beginning the study and preparing for the public workshop. 

We will record audio of the workshop.   

The work of the study will continue after the public workshop and should be completed within the 9 month period.  

As stated in the scope of work, once completed, a presentation and discussion of the study will be scheduled with the County Commission. What happens after completion of the study is at the discretion of the Commission and I would not speculate on what action they may take. However, should the Commission direct staff to amend the Critical Area Plan or rezone any of the County owned properties, the public hearing processes as required and outlined in the UDC and CAP regulations will be followed. The County owned “Quads” parcels are all zoned Open Use Rural (OUR), and industrial uses are not permitted. The establishment of an industrial use  would require a change of zoning to a district permitting such use. 

If the Board directs staff to rezone any of the parcels, staff would prepare and process a rezone application as required by the UDC including all necessary documentation. The preparation and processing of such an application, including public hearings, would likely take a minimum of 6 months. The CAP study authorized by the Board, on which we are now working, is not an application to amend the CAP or rezone any property.  It is intended to provide the Board with information to inform decisions in the area of the CAP. Notice of the public workshop will be posed on the Planning and Development Services Calendar on-line at  https://www.scgov.net/government/planning-and-development-services/pds-calendar.This calendar will link to documents related to the workshop. I cannot at this point tell you exactly when this will be posted, but approximately 2 weeks before the workshop.

Steve Kirk, AICP, ASLA 

Planner III 

Sarasota County Planning Services 

1660 Ringling Blvd, Sarasota, FL 34236 

Office: 941-861-5202 

Email: skirk@scgov.net
  

Update: Quad Parcels, Gabbert, Audubon Workshop

With the new year, there are two updates about the Quad Parcels near the Celery Fields, and news of  a coming workshop.

1. On Tuesday the Board will discuss reopening the Critical Area Plan for the Quad parcels. These four parcels are Public Lands. It's the next to last item on the day's long agenda.

This entire process is about public lands, and requires that the public be recognized as stakeholders on a par with all other interested parties. Please advise your neighbors. The staff notes for Tuesday's discussion are here.

Quad Parcels are Public Lands

Critical Area Planning can be useful when an area in transition needs to be rezoned, and its surroundings have changed. The idea is to look at what could be the best uses for the Quad parcels given the current context. How that context is defined will be key. It could include Celery Fields, the Fruitville Initiative, Big Cat Habitat and the businesses of the Packinghouse district, as well as nearby neighborhoods and office parks.

When a critical area plan is opened, new possibilities can be created. The county will seek input "from stakeholders and the general public." This is tricky. If the critical area plan is just about the quads, who are the stakeholders? Robert Waechter and James Gabbert, who own industrial properties bordering on parcel #2? The key will be the borders and scope of work, which need to include the full range of options for future uses on this land -- not simply the "lens" of the Lambert Advisory report. More background here and here.

Seen from highway: Owner James Gabbert who plans a Waste Transfer Station
on this six-acre site.  Beyond the treeline is Parcel #2, with the Celery Fields in background

2. It is confirmed that James Gabbert will receive the long-sought permit to build his Waste Transfer Facility, or WTF, on the six-acre parcel he owns at Porter and Palmer (the left rectangle of parcel 2). It's the first property one sees when coming from the West through the Palmer I-75 underpass.

Mr. Gabbert is expected to receive final approval (no public hearing required) within two weeks. For those wondering what can be done  to mitigate this authorized blight, we'll have some suggestions in the coming week. We'd like to hear yours as well.

3. Sarasota Audubon will hol a workshop about saving public lands from development - see the attached flyer. It's an opportunity to learn some important things. It's free at the Audubon Nature Center (at the foot of Mt. Celery) on Feb. 15, 1:30 pm.

As always, thanks for caring about our entire Celery Fields area -- and about honest, transparent, sensible planning.

Board takes unexpected action on Quad Parcels

The Board of Sarasota County Commissioners today considered its Miami consultant's recommendation that parcel #3 be rezoned industrial and sold to a private end user. County staff did not recommend the proposal from Lambert Advisory, the consultant that did the assessment.

Herald Tribune story here.

After hearing from the consultant, Board discussion took many twists and turns, bringing in members' thoughts on parcels 1 and 2. All said they wished to share ideas while they could -- sunshine laws preventing discussion outside of the public eye.

Upshot: At Commissioner Caragiulo's recommendation, the Board voted unanimously to direct planning staff to look at possible modifications of the Critical Area Plan (CAP) which currently controls changes to the area -- for example, to the roads. The roads have been the limiting factor as they cannot be widened under the current CAP.

Planning staff are to return after Jan. 1 after looking at what can be done if the CAP is modified. This could open a new spectrum of possibilities: If the county wishes, it could integrate our public lands into a larger area coordinated to highlight and support the Celery Fields (a possibility that Fresh Start has raised in its "visioning"). On the other hand, the County could also make the roads more robust, then justify industry on one or more quad parcel.

We'll keep an eye on things. The election is coming, and the results will be crucial for the Celery Fields area.

Fresh Start's latest input to the Board is linked below:

• Statement presented 10.10.18 in "open to the public"

• Letter to the Board regarding the Lambert recommendation for industrial use

Finally, thanks to all -- sincerely -- who have remained staunchly supportive of Fresh Start's efforts, over the past 10 months.

Glenna Blomquist, Carlos Correa, Tom Matrullo, Gary Walsh
Fresh Start Executive Council

Why sell our public land?

Parcel #3: The Northwest Quad at Apex Rd. and Palmer Blvd.

On Oct. 10, the Board will consider its consultant's recommendation to rezone parcel #3 for industrial use and sale, although there is no buyer at the present time. Below are key documents and a comment from Fresh Start.

• Agenda for Board meeting Oct. 10 
• The County staff briefing on the rezoning of Quad Parcel #3 can be found here.
• The 49-page Lambert Advisory Report in full is here.

• Note: the Lambert item is first after proclamations, so approximate time is 9:30-10 a.m. To speak, plan to arrive by 9:15 and fill out a speaker's card for Open to the Public, which allows 3 minutes per speaker.

In its briefing, the planning staff goes into detail about the complexities of rezoning a parcel for industry in this location, because a critical area plan (CAP) is in effect. The CAP requires a binding site plan. But here, there is no end user -- the county is seeking the rezoning.

This leads to a complication noted by staff:

Rezoning the property without an end user or developer would require adopting a generalized binding plan that may not suit possible end users or developers. The binding development concept plan is not one of the characteristics of the PCD zoning district that can be modified. More specifically, the development concept plan’s binding nature cannot be waived as part of the rezone. 

Having examined the Lambert Advisory assessment, Fresh Start has pointed out that it is based upon minimal actual data about our roads, traffic, community, or environment. It was designed to compare spreadsheet valuations of land uses without regard to the specific locality of parcel #3, to come up with a hypothetical sales price. More on this here.

Fresh Start presented a host of possibilities for the Quad parcels. However, Parcel #3 was removed from consideration because Mr. Maio desired to rezone and sell it. Mr. Maio did not cite any public support for his proposal to sell.

Comment:

Why is the county even considering this rezone of public land? Last November when Commissioner Al Maio instigated this idea, he justified it with the claim of budget shortfalls. But since November, the county's understanding of its actual fiscal condition has changed. Maio himself now says the county is in terrific financial shape (3 1/2 min. audio), and that "there is no shortfall" (17 sec. audio). 

Former County Commissioner Jon Thaxton recently said at a public meeting that Florida counties have always set "a very high bar" before considering the sale of public lands. 

Given that the county has no budget crisis, what reason has the Board cited for selling our public land near the Celery Fields? Why this rush to rezone parcel #3 for sale to an unknown private industrial developer at some point in the future? What is compelling us to cannibalize and cash in our public lands to meet any financial need before every other alternative? Could Mr. Maio be fearful that voters or backers would be unhappy if the Board looked at an increase in millage or impact fees to provide a sustainable revenue stream, rather than a one-time irrevocable cash for land deal?

When did selling our public land become the go-to means of dealing with short-term cash flow?

Fresh Start recommends the Board adopt a clear, straightforward policy: 

Before designating public land as surplus, the County shall consider all possible options and uses it might have -- now or in the future. When proposing to rezone and sell our public land, this policy would require the County to include a clear statement of reasons for doing so. 

Returning to parcel #3: 

If there is

• no end user, 
• no financial pressure to sell, 
• no good reason to sell, 
• no support from the community to sell, and there are
• positive alternative uses proposed by the community,

Why sell?

Once sold, public land is gone forever. 

Fresh Start Statement on Plan to Industrialize Quad Parcel #3

To:    The Board of Sarasota County Commissioners
Re:    Fresh Start statement in response to Lambert assessment industrializing parcel #3
Date: October 4, 2018

As many know, Fresh Start has engaged in a nine-month dialog with you and and staff regarding the fate of public lands in the Celery Fields Area. We've sought to understand why you would go against clear public opposition to industry at the Celery Fields. So far, answers have not been forthcoming.

Quad parcels near Celery Fields

A Consultant's recommendation to industrialize public Quad parcel #3 raises additional serious questions, both about how it was done, and more broadly why you would spend good money ($61,209) on a report that looks solely at monetary considerations to the exclusion of all else.

Some of our questions address larger issues of planning and policy. Others specifically concern the handling of the recently completed assessment by your consultant, Lambert Advisory LLC.

Surplus Land Policy: Why do you believe it's a good idea to sell public land? Why would you accept a "highest and best use" assessment that ignores traffic, environment, economic potential, quality of life, and basically everything that matters to residents? What benefit do you believe would accrue to anyone other than the private industrial purchaser of this parcel?

Planning: We have long sought to discuss a certain piecemeal approach to planning. Here, for example, you plucked one parcel (#3) from a complex interconnected area in transition and seek to rezone it -- to something appropriate in 1983 -- without a glance at the larger picture. Fresh Start spent 9 months attempting to paint this larger picture of an area undergoing major changes from the residents' perspective. As stewards of our public lands, surely you see the virtue of proactive integrated planning?

MEC and Industry: Lambert Advisory's blunt determination that "industry" -- with no qualification as to what sort of industry -- would bring the highest price for parcel #3 is at odds with market activity at the Fruitville Initiative. That nearby area has more than 200 acres, which, like parcel #3, are all designated MEC. 

Add caption

In reviewing various plans submitted to the County within the Fruitville Initiative's MEC area, it appears that proposed land uses are all multi-family residential. Further, it is our understanding that while office and retail uses are also being considered, there appears to be little interest in industry. Given that these property owners presumably are marketing their properties to the highest and best use, there seems to be a significant disconnect between the reality created by the Lambert report and what's actually occurring on the ground. Therefore, the Lambert finding warrants rigorous review and reconciliation to assure that the return on the public’s investment is not being short-changed.

Scoping task #4: Fresh Start asked to communicate with Lambert while the Consultant was doing its research. County staff opposed any communication:

Out of an abundance of caution to the process, I would not be comfortable with a private group directly communicating with a consultant on an item that will culminate in a quasi-hearing on a Board directive that was decidedly different from your own. (Email from county planner Michele Norton to Fresh Start dated 7.2.18).

How did this obstruction advance the intent of the county's contractually tasking the consultant (in Scope #4) to base his findings on "a general understanding of the community and its residents"?

Roads and Traffic: Road conditions were the largest factor in last year's hearings concerning industry on parcel 2. To an inquiry from Fresh Start as to what information the County provided to Lambert regarding roads and traffic, Eric Liff, the Lambert employee who did the main research for the report, replied:

At the time of the study, we were not aware of any documented issues related to development constraints, including roadway capacity.  

• Why was the Consultant tasked with assessing highest and best use not provided with essential data about the fragile road situation on Palmer Blvd. and Apex Rd? 

• Was Lambert informed of Mr. Gabbert's Waste Transfer Station planned at Porter Rd. and Palmer Boulevard? Mr. Gabbert has said his industrial waste operation will generate at least 100 trucks a day entering and leaving his facility at Palmer and Bell Rd.  

• If Lambert was not provided with all pertinent road and traffic study data for this "assessment," what possible relation to reality is the Consultant's conclusion?

Waechter warehouse ILW

Domino Effect: If parcel #3 goes to industry, parcel #2 will be surrounded by industrial uses on three sides. Mr. Gabbert's waste transfer station is already in the works for the six acres along Porter Rd. adjacent to the west side of parcel #2; Robert Waechter owns warehousing immediately south of it.

How long before someone comes to you proposing that parcel #2 should be rezoned for industry?


Avoid irreparable damage

For these good reasons and more, Fresh Start opposes Sarasota County's rezoning and sale of our public lands at Apex and Palmer to private industrial developers. Approving industry here will compromise everything planning is supposed to be about: Optimizing road safety, environment, community resources, aesthetics and economic value.

Sarasota has long enjoyed a reputation as one of the rare counties that's met developers seeking uncontrolled growth with intelligent restraint, a sense of design, and an awareness of tradition.

Should you go forward with this recommendation, you'll re-brand this county. Sarasota will be known as the place where, over the unequivocal opposition of its citizens, the Board compromised a 360-acre sanctuary, recreation and residential area.

As our nine-month effort has made clear, many commonsense, beneficial alternatives exist for these public parcels. Instead of selling our land for industrial use, we respectfully ask that you adopt this proposed resolution:

Sincerely,

Glenna Blomquist, Carlos Correa, Tom Matrullo, Gary Walsh
Executive Council for the Fresh Start Initiative

Fresh Start has spent well over 1,000 volunteer hours gathering ideas, community support, and expert perspectives on the Celery Fields Area. Its July report is here. A "big picture" presentation is incorporated in this report, which was presented to the Board on Sept. 12. 2018 in video format. More about the Lambert Advisory report here and here.

County sets discussion of Industry near Celery Fields for Oct. 10

Email Oct. 4 from Fresh Start:​

To all who care about the Celery Fields Area:

While Fresh Start was working to find, vet, and present community ideas for the public lands at Apex and Palmer, the Board hired a Miami consultant, Lambert Advisory LLC, to assess Quad parcel #3 for rezoning and sale.

In August, Lambert turned in an assessment that the county could obtain the highest price if parcel #3 is rezoned for Industrial Use. The parcel could hold an 80,000 s.f. warehouse or other such industrial operation, Lambert stated.

Without recommending for or against approval, County staff has scheduled the Board to discuss rezoning the parcel to Industrial on Oct. 10.

If the Board wishes, it will vote to forward the proposed Industrial rezoning to proceed through the public process: Neighborhood Workshop, Planning Commission, Final Board Hearing. 

Three questions stand out:

1. If the fragile roads near the Celery Fields need to be addressed before allowing a simple park on them -- as Commissioner Caragiulo stated to Fresh Start on Sept. 12 -- what would justify the Board's initiating an industrial rezoning that will generate additional large truck traffic?

2. Lambert Advisory's report compared industrial uses with residential, office, and commercial for parcel #3, and states unequivocally that an industrial zoning would bring the highest sale price ("highest and best use" actually means "best price"). Others question this conclusion, however. 

In reviewing various plans submitted to the County within the nearby 200-acre MEC area of the Fruitville Initiative, it appears that proposed land uses are all multi-family residential. Further, it is our understanding that while office and retail uses are also being considered, there appears to be little interest in industry. Given that these property owners presumably are marketing their properties to the highest and best use, there seems to be a significant disconnect between the reality created by the Lambert report and what's actually occurring on the ground. Therefore, the Lambert finding warrants rigorous review and reconciliation to assure that the return on the public’s investment is not being short-changed.

3. Fresh Start repeatedly asked to speak with Lambert, and was denied. Lambert was tasked with gaining a knowledge of the Community (see scoping document below); how was that mission helped by blocking communication with the community?

More industry

​In addition, ​James Gabbert is working out final details of his planned Waste Transfer Station on 6 acres along Porter Rd. and Palmer Boulevard west of parcel #2. Gabbert has said the facility will generate 100 trucks a day, entering and exiting on Palmer Blvd. at Bell Rd.​ If he meets a few technical hurdles, he can build without further public review, or even a new traffic study.​

Action Item:

This coming Wednesday, Oct. 10, the Board will consider the Lambert recommendation to rezone parcel #3 for up to 80,000 s.f. of industrial use (time to be announced). If you are able to attend, please put it on your calendar. No need to speak -- just being there will mean a lot. 

Fresh Start is still seeking more information and will update soon.

Thank you,

The Fresh Start Executive Council

Restaurant Depot, Tampa

Fresh Start: September 2018 Update

To our Fresh Start HOA's, delegates, advisers and far-flung Celery Fieldsians:

Fresh Start offered a broad view of the context of development and potential in and around the area of the Celery Fields in its Sept. 12th appearance before the Board. We showed visuals of the many thousands of acres of new housing the board has already approved, and asked why elected officials couldn't reserve 30 acres of public land near our birding and recreation area for public uses. (Links to all presentations and correspondence are below).

We've held off on this update to gain a better understanding of two parallel developments, which we'll mention in a minute. But it's important to note that Fresh Start believed our portion of the task was complete when we submitted our update on July 11. We did what we said we'd do: offered community-approved proposals for Quad parcels 1 and 2. Our four specific proposals in April had drawn praise from the Board, but no concrete direction. We were just asked to "refine" them. We surveyed our neighborhoods about sports resources, and the YMCA which did some further market research (which would pertain to all four proposals), and that's what we gave to the Board in July.

We expected a response -- some questions, suggestions, perhaps a directive to county staff to offer an analysis or pursue discussions via the EDC or tourism officials -- but we heard nothing. On August 14, more than a month after our July 11 update, we wrote to Long Range Planner Jane Grogg, our County liaison, asking when or whether such feedback would be forthcoming. 

We were simply told to show up on Sept. 12 -- to present. Frankly, we were more than a little baffled. As we had received zero response to our latest update, what exactly were we expected to talk about?

Fresh Start had a choice: We could go and simply stand there, waiting for the Board's thoughts and direction. Instead we chose to offer a broader analysis that would support Board action on one item: Removing the public parcels from the surplus lands list, and working together on future uses:

The Board took no vote. Actually, it didn't discuss the proposed resolution, or any of our community proposals. The only commissioner who addressed practicalities, Paul Caragiulo, said the Board needed to first deal with serious road issues. What we didn't have an opportunity to say is that this was exactly the sort of work the county staff could have been doing all along to help the Board come to a determination. Mr Caragiulo was exactly right, but the County had yet to make a beginning. Commissioners Hines, Moran and Maio said nothing to Fresh Start after our presentation. Commissioner Detert thanked us, characterizing our September report as beautiful yet critical. (Fresh Start believes it's the situation at the Celery Fields that is critical.)

Parallel proposals

Here's where the plot thickens. While Fresh Start was working for nine months -- more than a thousand volunteer hours -- to find, vet, vote, and present our community's ideas, the county had hired a Miami consultant, Lambert Advisory LLC, to assess and rezone Quad parcel #3 for sale, at Commissioner Maio's instigation.

Emails obtained through a public records request show that county staff was working assiduously with Lambert. In August, the firm's assessment was that the county could obtain the highest price for parcel #3 if it rezoned it to industry. The parcel could hold an 80,000 s.f. warehouse or other such industrial operation, Lambert stated.

County staff apparently accepted this assessment and has scheduled the Board to discuss rezoning parcel #3 to Industrial (ILW) on Oct. 10. If the Board wishes, the proposed rezoning will then begin the public process - Neighborhood Workshop, Planning Commission, Public Board Hearing.

Three observations:

1. If the fragile roads need addressing before allowing a simple park on them, as Mr. Caragiulo stated, how is it that staff would approve and forward a rezone certain to generate more large truck traffic?

2. Lambert Advisory's report compared industrial uses with residential, office, and commercial for parcel #3, and states unequivocally that an industrial zoning would bring the highest sale price ("highest and best use" actually means "best price"). Others question this conclusion, however. 

            One source familiar with the nearby Fruitville Initiative, which has over 200 acres all with the same "MEC" (major employment center) designation as the Quads, says none of the five major Fruitville Initiative landowners is finding interest from industrial developers. Companies seeking to build in that area are proposing a mix of multi-family, condos, homes, offices, and commercial. These parcels are all closer to the highway than parcel #3. If industrial were the best way to realize monetary advantage, why wouldn't someone be rushing to put it there?

3. Fresh Start of course knew that the County had commissioned Lambert's study. We repeatedly asked to speak with Lambert, and were denied by County staff. Which provokes another question: Lambert was tasked with gaining a knowledge of the Community (see scoping document below); how was the mission helped by blocking communication with the community?

More industry

Finally, we must note that James Gabbert has resubmitted his plan to build a waste transfer station on 6 acres he owns that run along Porter Rd. west of parcel #2, with a strip along the southern edge. We only learned about this earlier this week.

No new traffic study will be required for Mr Gabbert's Special Exception, according to County Transportation staff. 

To sum up:

While Fresh Start presented, presented, and presented, were we heard? Did any engagement occur? We have yet to hear consideration of what our communities have offered. We are asking when that consideration will take place.

At the same time, an initiative to industrialize parcel#3 is moving ahead, and Mr. Gabbert is moving ahead with plans to put his waste transfer station adjacent to parcel #2, right next to the highway. Will our Communities' concerns, voiced in three presentations, be considered as these industrial efforts go forward? Will parcel #2 go industrial next? And what of parcel #1?

Please stay tuned, and thank you for your ongoing support. 

The Fresh Start Executive Council

Glenna Blomquist, Carlos Correa, Tom Matrullo, Gary Walsh

Presentations and relevant links

February 4, 2018 First Interim Report of 2018, with updates from March 25 and April 11, 2018

April 25, 2018 PowerPoint presentation to the Board - April 25 2018

• April 25 Accompanying Text Report of April 25th to the Board with links to previous documentation
• April 25th, 2018 -  Video of April 25th Presentation

July 11, 2018 - “Refined” Fresh Start Report

August 14, 2018 - “Has the Board responded?” Email from Fresh Start to Jane Grogg

August 16 and 20, 2018 Email from Jane Grogg to Fresh Start and Response from Fresh Start

September 12, 2018 Fresh Start Presentation - Video

Waste Transfer Facility Porter at Palmer Blvd.

• Gabbert Waste Transfer Special Exception Review
• Gabbert Waste Transfer Plan, August 2018

Photo of Celery Fields by Emanuel Guzman

A welcoming place

Matrullo: Protect sites near Celery Fields

A slightly modified version of this Op-Ed column ran in the Herald Tribune on 9.11.18

A consultant's report commissioned by Sarasota County recently recommended selling Parcel #3 of the Quad Parcels near the Celery Fields for an 80,000 square foot industrial operation. 

In the course of its analysis, the Consultant, Lambert Advisory, offered the image to the left, which shows parcel #3, a nine-acre site, surrounded by an office/industrial area to the north, and a similar smaller grouping to the west.

The image seems to suggest that the prevailing zoning supports selling Parcel #3, now public land, to a private industrial developer.

Is the "aerial" image a reasonable representation upon which to make a fair judgment? Let's go to Google Maps, and see what happens if we slightly widen the view from the air:

Relative size of industrial area and Celery Fields 

From this vantage we see that parcel #3 actually faces the quite large (360 acres) open area of the Celery Fields, rich in wildlife, wetlands, and recreation, to the East. The single most imposing feature of this entire area is formed by the plateau and waters of the Celery Fields -- a much used and touristed area that already lacks sufficient parking or complementary uses necessary to support it. (Audubon report.)

It appears that Parcel #3 could be sold on the pretext that the county needs money. The Commission won't consider raising taxes or raising impact fees, which would balance the costs to the taxpayers of new development. Yet one Commissioner recently stated that the county is in terrific financial shape and has no shortfalls. Thus the pressure to sell our public lands would appear to be non-existent.

The Lambert Advisory study makes it seem like the only reasonable option is industry, recommending an 80,000-square-foot building on parcel #3. It finds vehicular traffic insufficient to consider commercial use, even though the site is within a short walk of the very busy and successful Detwiler’s produce market through the Palmer Boulevard underpass.

If rezoned to industry, our public lands would likely be saddled with large warehouse operations, manufacturing, demolition, or other uses whose sole object is to maximize a private developer's own profit. The impacts feared by many who opposed two industrial proposals last year -- Restaurant Depot and James Gabbert's waste processing operation -- would be there: truck traffic, potential pollution, disruption of the natural flow of the area, potential disturbance to nesting birds, and more.

The Fresh Start Initiative opposes the sale of these public lands to private industrial developers. Our communities love the Celery Fields, and desire nothing more than a sensible area plan that could address the lack parking and of complementary support systems. It's as simple as having a place to walk to for a bite to eat, or where one could relax with friends before or after walking Mt. Celery, near the birds and other wildlife. One could add community programs for children that would offer opportunities to learn about ecology, birds, water, stormwater engineering, and more.

A combination of environmental precaution, neighborhood prudence, and common sense provision drives Fresh Start's effort to preserve all three Quad Parcels for public benfit.

This is not a political issue. It's simply neighbors taking a clear-eyed assessment and finding that the "highest and best use" of our public lands is to invest in our communities, protect our valuable natural treasure, and serve the people who live and work here, whose lands these are.

On Wednesday, Sept. 12, Fresh Start will ask that the County dedicate the Quad parcels to beneficial public uses in perpetuity.

Recognition of the "national caliber" of the Celery Fields

In view of the brand new Lambert Advisory report recommending industrial rezoning for one of the Quad Parcels -- precisely the issue that caused a major outcry last year when James Gabbert and Restaurant Depot proposed to put industrial installations on parcels #2 and #3 -- it's helpful to look at what the County's own staff has said about the Celery Fields area:

"Celery Fields is a national caliber example of how recreation, stormwater management and conservation strategies can be leveraged to achieve multiple environmental and recreational benefits, including becoming an international birding destination." Sarasota County Parks 2016 Master Plan, p. 7.

+=========+

"Trends in resource-based recreation indicate that the public seeks nature-based education and programming at nature centers. The County might . . . consider a comprehensive assessment of nature centers at multiple locations . . .. This could be tied in with the existing facilities . . . and Sarasota Audubon Nature Center at Celery Fields." Sarasota County Parks 2016 Master Plan, p. 102.

+=========+

In 2012, the County granted a ground lease to The Sarasota Audubon Society lease in recognition of the significance of the Celery Fields. In the document the County states:

"In addition to its role in the treatment and storage of stormwater, the Celery Fields serves as an important habitat and food source to many species of animals and birds . . ." Sarasota County Ground Lease Agreement with The Sarasota Audubon Society, Inc., 2012.

+=========+

Letter of 2.22.17 from Sarasota Audubon Society to Commissioner Al Maio recommending denial of industrial rezoning of the Quad Parcels last year. "A phenomenal number" of federal and state listed birds have been found at the Celery Fields, whose nesting and feeding would be "at risk."

Audubon recommended county create "an advisory group of affected citizen stakeholders to work with county staff in determining a land use suitable . . ."

The full Audubon report includes a Celery Fields species checklist and statistics on tourist visits.

                                                        +=========+

The Lambert Advisory Report of August 2018 notes the existing zoning for the Quad Parcels: "All commercial and industrial development is prohibited." 

It's a full circle -- in view of the changes to the area -- specifically the Celery Fields birding and recreation area -- what possible justification can there be for rezoning these parcels for industry?