|
|
|
||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Dear Friends: As you may be aware, 1000 Friends of Florida recently filed a challenge to Martin County Comprehensive Plan amendments that would exempt public projects from the county's development regulations. For your information, we have included below some of the recent correspondence and media coverage on this issue. Thank you. Charles Pattison,
AICP April 15, 2002 Ms. Linda Shelley RE: Jensen Beach High School Dear Ms. Shelley: I am writing on behalf of 1000 Friends of Florida to thank you for arranging the teleconference call on April 10th with the legal representatives involved in this case. As we stated at that time, the Jensen Beach High School is not the subject of our plan amendment challenge and never was. Our dispute with the County is over proposed text amendments that weaken the comprehensive plan's protection of uplands and wetlands habitat, not with this school project. We are joined in issuing this letter by our partners in this action, Lloyd Brumfield, Donna Melzer, and the Martin County Conservation Alliance, all of whom have agreed to my signing this letter on their behalf. Specifically, all of the parties above agree that they will not challenge development orders issued by the County for the proposed Jensen Beach High School. The "school project" is defined generally as the building, parking, and recreational facilities directly associated with the school, and such facilities are generally found on the western edge of the approximately 98 acre parcel. In more particular terms, the "school project" involves 65 acres on the western portion of this tract, and is bordered generally by areas known as "WETLAND #7" to the east and "WETLAND #3" to northeast. As stated above, we do not believe that the proposed school project should be held in abeyance pending the conclusion of these comprehensive plan challenges. As stated on a number of occasions and restated in this letter, neither organization nor individuals intend to challenge development orders for the school project. It is also our understanding that our challenge has not delayed any consideration for the school as part of its normal permitting and development review process. We continue
to believe, however, that if more time were available, wetland impacts could
be further reduced. That being said, our groups do understand the tight timeframe
and need to move forward on this project. We are hopeful that insights gained
from these events can be used to better address future projects with environmental
and flooding issues. This correspondence makes good on our public statements
in support of the school. It is also our hope that this understanding lays
a foundation for further communications with the County and School Board to
resolve the substantive plan amendment challenges. Regarding other public
facilities, we intend to propose settlement language on the text amendments
soon. From documents provided by the School Board, it appears that more than $200,000 is being committed to a SFWMD approved mitigation project in St. Lucie County to offset wetland impacts. Our organizations would very much like to see those funds, if at all possible, made available to assist the County in its effort to acquire acreage in the Cypress Creek tract. We request the School Board and County's support in making this proposal to the SFWMD. In conclusion, we ask that representatives of the County and School Board acknowledge that this correspondence accurately reflects the basis of our agreement discussed pursuant to our teleconference call of April 10, 2002. I have provided a signature block for this purpose below. Thanking you for your efforts on behalf of all parties to resolve this issue, I am Sincerely,
Why 1000 Friends
Challenged Recent Martin County Comprehensive Plan Amendments 1000 Friends of Florida has been in the news lately for filing a legal challenge regarding two amendments to Martin County's Comprehensive Plan. Why did 1000 Friends take this action, and what impact will it have on the proposed Jensen Beach High School and Palm City Fire Station? We took this action because we believe these amendments weaken the protection for Martin County's rich natural resources. And even with this legal challenge, Martin County can still proceed with the construction of the high school and fire station in question. Martin County's comprehensive plan provides a blueprint for how future growth and development will take place in this rapidly growing part of the state. This plan is widely regarded as one of the best in Florida. Its goals, objectives and policies have resulted in the noticeable difference in the character of development and quality of natural areas between Martin County and its neighbors to the north and the south. 1000 Friends believes that the two amendments will weaken protection for Martin County's distinctive natural resources, thus diminishing the quality of life for area residents. The first amendment, which calls for "balancing" public interests and environment concerns in the selection of sites for public projects, appears fine at first glance. However, what it really does is establish a lower standard of environmental protection for public projects, and a higher level for private ones. Shouldn't local government be a leading steward of the land, for the benefit of its citizens and future generations? Shouldn't all projects in Martin County, be they public or private, receive the same level of scrutiny? Will this open the door for lower private development standards as well? The second amendment lessens the standards for the siting of schools with respect to consistency of plan policies in general, and wetland and upland protection policies in particular. We believe state law is clear that all development be consistent with the local comprehensive plan. Measures that weaken the protection of the county's environmentally-rich natural areas and provide blanket exceptions to other important plan policies are short-sighted. Two important public facilities currently proposed, the Jensen Beach High School and the Palm City Fire Station, are not even mentioned in 1000 Friends' case. There are ways for Martin County to proceed with both projects without delay. The county could authorize a "special allowance" in the form of an emergency or expedited plan amendment for these two public facilities by using creative site planning to avoid or minimize environmental damage. In the past, the county has used this process for the Hobe Sound Library, new health department office, and Port Salerno Post Office. 1000 Friends has already offered to assist the county and school board with this process for the high school and fire station, should they desire. However, we do offer one caveat with regard to the Jensen Beach High School. The current proposal not only provides for the high school and its needed ball fields, but also authorizes additional tennis and basketball courts, soccer fields and parking areas in adjoining wetlands. 1000 Friends believes these facilities can better be located elsewhere, to avoid impacting sensitive wetlands and allow more options for sensitive siting of the high school. This is what a careful site review should have addressed in the earliest planning stages. We know that the citizens of Martin County support better managing growth. Last spring, 1000 Friends commissioned a professional public opinion poll of registered voters in Martin County. More than 80 percent not only supported existing growth management laws, but felt they should be strengthened; 81 percent felt that Martin County didn't have to choose between a clean environment and strong economy; and an overwhelming 97 percent agreed that we should leave behind a clean and healthy environment for our children and grandchildren. Isn't the siting of schools and other public facilities in an environmentally-sensitive manner an appropriate place to start? Charles Pattison is Executive Director of 1000 Friends of Florida, a nonprofit organization devoted to promoting better growth management in communities across this state. Statement
Regarding Plan Amendment Challenges 1000 Friends of Florida, Lloyd Brumfield, Donna Melzer, and the Martin County Conservation Alliance make the following statement regarding the action we recently filed challenging the validity of two adopted amendments to the Martin County Comprehensive Plan. Some have suggested that these challenges will cause either the delay or outright cancellation of two important public facilities, the Jensen Beach High School and the Palm City Fire Station. Not only do we firmly believe that these challenges are appropriate, but we believe there are ways for Martin County to proceed with both public projects without delay. Our case is based on what we believe are blanket, carte blanche changes to the natural resources protection policies found in the comprehensive plan. The fire station and high school are not even mentioned in our case. The existing policies are the cornerstone of goals, objectives, and policies that provide the noticeable difference between Martin County and its neighbors to the north and south. Our purpose is to protect those policies, as provided in state law, and prevent changes that would alter forever the environment and quality of life for all citizens of Martin County. We believe these policies are too important to sacrifice for just any public projects that might be proposed. That being said, we also believe that there are ways for Martin County to allow these two current projects to continue without delay, while our legal challenges proceed. We would support and work with the County to allow these two time-sensitive projects to be developed. The County should provide justification for granting a special allowance for the high school and fire station using creative site planning to avoid or minimize environmental damage. In the recent past, Martin County has utilized provisions for emergency and expedited plan and map amendments, and for these projects could use such provisions again. This would mean an allowance for a project specific, fact based waiver which recognizes that such designated sites and facilities are needed, the most reasonable, and which minimizes environmental impacts to the greatest extent possible. Additionally, we understand that the School Board has flexibility in meeting the Department of Education's guidelines in developing schools and associated facilities in order to minimize environmental impacts. Such a procedure would provide the public with the justification necessary for quick approval. Past examples include the Hobe Sound Library, new health department office, and Port Salerno Post Office. The emergency and expedited amendment process allows the community to move quickly and appropriately on the high school and fire station, while preserving the very natural resources that make Martin County so unique. In working to accommodate the needs of a growing community, we maintain that the public involvement that was so very important for locating the Jensen Beach Library and the environmentally friendly policies that have been so critical to the County's growth and development are essential for the future. For additional information, contact Charles Pattison or Terrell Arline of 1000 Friends of Florida at (850) 222-6277. December 10, 2001 Mr. Steven Fry,
County Attorney RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendments Cycle 00/01 Dear Mr. Fry: I am writing to express our remaining concerns over several plan amendments that the Commission has noticed for adoption tomorrow. In particular, we believe additional changes are needed for consistency with Chapter 163 and 9J-5 for school siting (#01-11), exemptions to the siting of public infrastructure (#01-12), either County or CERP, with regard to comprehensive plan policies, and mixed use changes (#01-09). We want to thank you for conducting the December 4, 2001, workshop to review and discuss possible changes to the amendments that would address some or all of the comments you have received thus far. We were pleased to learn of a postponement for the consideration of upland policies resulted. Unfortunately, other revisions seem to have been made available after 4:30 pm on Friday, December 7, and were not posted onto the County's web site until sometime Monday, December 10, and then only briefly. Regarding the school siting amendment, we are aware that DCA recently sent a letter dated December 7, 2001, withdrawing its previous objections. However, we continue to believe that neither a comprehensive plan amendment nor an interlocal agreement can waive the clear requirements of Chapter 163 and 9J-5 that all development be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of local comprehensive plans. In addition, while we note the effort the County has included a matrix that scores and ranks proposed school sites (none of which are required to be consistent with the comprehensive plan), a staff memo dated December 5, 2001, suggests that the Long Range Planning Committee which reviews the recommendation of the Technical Assistance Advisory Committee, need not be bound by the matrix itself. In reading the text of the DCA letter, it does not appear to us that it is aware of this provision. The proposed change that establishes a procedure for balancing plan goals, objectives and policies in the siting of public facility projects involving stormwater and Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) projects allows, with several exceptions, the picking and choosing of criteria for which these projects are required to be consistent. The concept of having one standard for public uses and another for private development is problematic. The development standards in the plan should be the minimum consideration for public projects. We would hope that in fact your projects would exceed the minimum standards to demonstrate that even tighter restrictions can be met. In particular, new Objective 5(a)(8), allows any site to be selected that "... has been found to be the most appropriate for the facility." This means any site is potentially eligible for this consideration. The proposed "waiver" for CERP related projects could have many unforseen consequences, not the least of which is granting what amount to changes to the comprehensive plan on a case by case basis. As laudable as this concept is to streamline CERP project approvals, a different approach, which also ensures citizen participation in the process, could achieve a similar result. That would be to simply consider such projects as "small scale" amendments which means notice and standing are preserved, but the public is given the opportunity to participate to the maximum extent possible in changes to the comprehensive plan. This process would ensure quick action without opening up the plan to the unforseen and as yet in some instances, unknown needs for the CERP process in Martin County. We are supportive of the Commission's efforts to encourage urban infill development, and understand that in some cases this would require changes to plan policies if mixed use development is to be encouraged. The changes proposed in Objective 1 to Community Redevelopment Areas appear reasonable, but allowing mixed use and traditional neighborhood development through the granting of density/intensity bonuses, density transfers, and the waiving of impact fees may not be appropriate in all low, medium and high density residential areas. We believe such considerations must be made on a case by case basis, and then only in consideration for the protection currently afforded existing neighborhoods. Thank you for considering these comments as part of the record at the public hearing tomorrow. Sincerely,
Dear Mr. Reed, I cannot accurately
express my disappointment that 1000 Friends of Florida is continuing their
baseless attacks on Martin County government. The Year 2000 Elections are
over, and your organization These latest challenges may delay the new Jensen Beach High School, and the new Palm City Fire Station. I hope you'll understand the following analogies. There's a difference between being a Leader and an Activist. A difference between being effective and vocal. A difference between being loud and being heard. I believe 1000 Friends has lost their perspective. You've already lost the entire slate of local elected Martin County officials. DCA, the permitting agencies, and other Regional Governments are watching, and you'll lose them next. 1000 Friends does control by their actions how they're percieved, and right now its not as positive as you think. Please distribute this e-mail to your Board of Directors. I hope you'll reconsider and drop these challenges. Martin County Commissioner Lee Weberman Thursday, February
28, 2002 STUART County commissioners say they're going on the offensive in the dispute over legal challenges to the Comprehensive Plan, blaming opponents for potentially delaying key projects in Jensen Beach and Palm City. "They have a right to sue, and we have a right to publish their e-mail addresses and let the citizens of Martin County know what they're up against," Commissioner Michael DiTerlizzi said during Tuesday s commission meeting. On Monday, commission critics filed a challenge to Comprehensive Plan amendments that exempt public projects, including the new Jensen Beach high school, from the county's strict development regulations. DiTerlizzi called the challenge a frivobus lawsuit, and commissioners said it might delay construction of the high school and a new fire station in Palm City. Commissioners said they will spread that word to those inquiring about the issue, and give out the phone numbers and e-mail addresses of the critics challenging the amendments. The commission's response is part of a public relations effort to advise Jensen Beach residents andschool supporters of the challenge, Commissioner Lee Weberman said. "I know we shouldn't be an advocate to forward that information, but I also don't want to stick my head in the sand and be silent, because we are so passionate on this issue," Weberman said. The Martin County
Conservation Alliance and the 1,000 Friends of Florida on Monday filed the
challenge Lloyd Brumfield,
a member of the conservation alliance, said he expected strong responses from
the "I have a problem with that; there's just a lot of bull in their game," Brumfield said. "They're playing dirty pool. That's nothing new for them." Commissioner Doug Smith, however, said those who challenged the amendments are putting a dark cloud over the county. "Thanks to 1,000 Friends of Florida and Mr. Brumfield, who filed the lawsuit, we may lose the Jensen Beach high school. ... That might be a reality," Smith said. The new high school, expected to open by 2004, is to be built partially upon wetlands. County Attorney Stephen Fry said officials shouldn't be concerned about handing out the information about 1000 Friends of Florida and the Martin County Conservation Alliance, because the groups often involve themselves in public matters. "They hand out their business cards; they promote themselves as a public-spirited agency," Fry said. "I see no reason why the public shouldn't feel free to contact them regarding the public interest in this." County officials said the Comp Plan changes, approved Dec. 11, are needed to fit important public projects inside the rapidly filling urban service area. Brumfield said
the county already had the power to exempt public projects from county land-development March 6, 2002 The Honorable
Lee Weberman, Commissioner Dear Commissioner Weberman: I am responding to your e-mail message of February 28, 2002, on behalf of Nathaniel P. Reed and myself, regarding the school siting and public facilities comprehensive plan amendments. We will honor your request that your message be distributed to our Board of Directors. 1000 Friends of Florida did chose to file an administrative challenge to these two plan amendments after carefully reviewing and considering the adopted versions of both amendments. While we were pleased with changes made at the request of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, in our opinion, the final versions remain inconsistent with state statute and administrative rules. We do appreciate the Commission's consideration of our comments regarding ways to overcome these inconsistencies during the plan amendment process. With respect to your concerns regarding our motives for taking this appeal, I can assure you that our only purpose is to see the fair and equitable implementation of the 1985 Growth Management Act. We have no political end result in mind, and as you are aware, have supported Martin County positions in the past regarding certain amendments and legal challenges. We remain convinced that the Commission must adhere to the provisions of 163.3194, F.S., when it considers both a new Jensen Beach High School as well as a new Palm City Fire Station, and should do so without resorting to a wholesale revision of critically important comprehensive plan policies. As always, we would be happy to meet with your and/or members of your staff to discuss those provisions and our concerns with the adopted amendments. Sincerely,
cc: Board of
Directors
|