Streamlining Code Rewrites Dominates Joint Manatee Work Session

BRADENTON -- Manatee County Planning Director John Osborne bravely stood before the BOCC, Planning Commission members, and a team of his own staff to offer up a new engine to take Manatee County through its building and development processes. His plan was to take on development's efficiency issues, implement easier codes and address the inconsistencies that has confused and impeded past performance. Mr. Osborne suggested adding user friendly tables and relocating specific engineering standards would help streamline the process. 

The plan emphasized a reorganization of chapters, as well as the use of conditional use permits, as opposed to special use permits. It called for consolidating planned development districts into one PD district, having public and private streets exercise the same requirements and amending regional park standards. There were suggestions for peer reviews, rezoning, impact-fees and amending planned development. And all procedures and access would be modified and easily accessible on their website.

Osborne said the draft code would be online September 16, and that planning had scheduled both workshops and hearings on August 25 and September 29. The BOCC land use workshops are September 1 and October 6 and Osborne said he was hoping an "adoption hearing" could be held by late 2011, or early 2012. 

Questions and comments: BOCC chair, Commissioner Carol Whitmore took a deep breath and said, "Glad for the policy decisions." Planning commissioner George Mendez asked "Am I going to be able to look at these documents and know where to go?" John Osborne answered, "There will be tools and tables to help on the website." Planning commissioner Steve Belack said, "acronyms and abbreviations get to be a problem, and then I don't know what the hell they are talking about." County Commissioner Robin DeSabatino emphasized the importance of there being code in the language for "affordable housing", referring to the proposed Land Development Codes. Commissioner Donna hayes later replied to DeSabatino's statement saying, "Public Housing, I would like to see the same code, there should be no difference."

County Commissioner Joe McClash said he thought everyone within five miles should receive a notice when development changes were introduced, saying "Put the info online to view, only without paying a fee." McClash added, "and change that North County Gateway, change it to maybe Florida International Gateway."

Osborne was wrapping it up when he said "We're trying to reduce what goes into public hearingsÉ when it can be handled administratively," adding, "technology has become our best tool."

A brief breath of fresh air came into the room, between these two huge issues, when Michelle Atkinson took us on a wonderful tour of Florida Friendly Landscape. She had all of the tips and wisdom of happy land and and an easy way to care for it. The do's and don'ts and her presentation can be found here.  

Development Services Manager Doug Means from the Planning Department took the podium carrying an equally explosive revision only this one was of the wetlands. It too was designed to trim the process, define the vague and reduce the procedures. He handed over the delivery to the planning's Joel Christian, who began with recommendations for code revisions.

Christian covered the background of the comprehensive plan's history and wetlands protection criteria. He started out with the things that wouldn't change, like wetland buffers, easements, wetland density transfer and enforcement. But the 10-plus people in the hall, some that had signed up to speak, were there protesting what was going to change -- namely, wetland identification, general prohibition, applications for wetland impacts, criteria for approval of wetland impacts and mitigation. The proposed ground for these changes was that the current language did not identify the purpose for the Wetland Protection section of the Land Development Code (LDC). 

Planning put a scale for restitution on trade off when wetlands are deemed too costly to avoid impact. And that scale is also based on functionality, so if one is graded a .4 or .5, (low performing, challenged) its fate could easily be bargained away. Developers are discouraged to create any impact on a wetland that was large -- a rating of a .6 or .7 -- as the scale would make it to costly. But one of the largest violators of wetland destruction in the state is phosphate mining, and they are to be exempt from the new rules.

Citizen comments did a exemplary job of exhibiting those concerns. Linda Jones said, "there is too much wiggle room," when speaking of the revisions, and addressing the low function wetlands, she added, "40 percent is a functioning wetlandÉ  .5 acre holds a half million gallons (of water) or moreÉ the language is too vague." 

Rosalie Shaffer, from the League of Women Voters said "Wetlands are essential, without them we'll have problems -- costing many millions to correct." She added, "what if your kidney was functioning at 40 percent." Shaffer felt there shouldn't be any wetland bargained away. Barbara Hines from Manasota88 said, "It will cost a lot of money to do this. How are you going to do this without doing baseline data?"

With some apprehension upon the commissioners and much pro and con in the room, some weight was lifted when Commissioner Carol Whitmore decided, and most of the other commissioners agreed, to not move towards a hearing, but to schedule another workshop to comb out the tangles. Whitmore explained, "Éwe want to get it right," before adjourning the meeting