Manatee County Commissioners say land-use changes based on law

Bridgewater’s Laura Whinfield could not attend a May 9 public hearing, but the outcome turned out as she suspected.

On 305 acres at the northwest corner of State Road 70 and White Eagle Boulevard, Lakewood Ranch developer Schroeder-Manatee Ranch will now be able to build up to 250,000 square feet of light industrial use buildings.

The request also reduced commercial/retail space by 100,000 square feet. SMR officials said the change was necessary to create the high-paying jobs envisioned for the property.

That may be true, but Whinfield said she is frustrated.

“It wouldn’t have mattered what we said,” said Whinfield of the vote by Manatee County commissioners to approve the project. “That’s disconcerting for us, the public, who are hoping for an open mind.”

Whinfield and fellow residents from the Bridgewater neighborhood attended both the Manatee County Planning Commission meeting in February, and the first of two public Manatee County Commission meetings, in March, although no one attended the final May commission meeting. At initial meetings, Whinfield and others asked for modifications to the adjusted plan — such as prohibiting the light industrial use in the southwest corner of Rangeland Parkway and White Eagle Boulevard, the only portion of the project directly across from residential — and finding a way to minimize truck traffic at the entrance to CORE directly across from Bridgewater’s entrance.

SMR representatives did not commit to either request. The entrance points into CORE have been indicated on county maps for more than a decade and are placed at median cutouts. SMR does not know where future CORE companies will purchase land, so it does not want to eliminate options for them at this time.

The project changes had the support of county staff members.

However, the situation with CORE highlights a sentiment echoed by many citizens who come to oppose or seek protection against developments they feel intrude on their quality of life. Does the county commission hear their concerns or does it automatically favor development? The CORE project changes is just the latest example.

“We hear it all the time, but it isn’t as simple as saying the public does not want it,” said County Commission Chairwoman Betsy Benac. “That is not the standard for denying a rezone ... in a quasi-judicial format, we deny a rezone simply because (those who live in the neighborhood don’t want it). That’s why we don’t allow clapping — because if it appears that we’re denying something because it’s popular, then we’re inviting a lawsuit. When it says quasi-judicial, it means we have to act like a judge. A judge has to make decisions based on the law.”

In Manatee County, development is guided by a series of planning documents.

First, the Comprehensive Plan sets the foundation for policies and goals the county hopes to meet with development and sets a range of uses for lands within its boundaries. Next, the land development code sets zoning, or the future land uses allowed in particular areas. For  example, a parcel currently zoned for agriculture may have a “future land use” designation of residential with up to three units per acre or planned development commercial.

County staff members evaluate what is being proposed against that criteria before making a recommendation to approve or deny a rezone/development application.

“People do not understand the process,” Benac said. “I think the biggest problem is the words ‘approve development.’ They don’t understand the laws that relate to comprehensive planning and zoning. We don’t deny or approve development. We make sure it complies with the rules. That’s all we can do.” 

Benac and fellow Manatee County commissioners declined commenting specifically on the CORE approval, citing there is a 30-day window following a public hearing in which a decision could be challenged and they are advised by the county attorney’s office not to comment.

However, commissioners also said they weigh the merits of each application individually and must determine whether a project complies with the county’s guidelines for development. 

The Manatee County Attorney’s Office regularly reminds the board that it is acting in a quasi-judicial manner for Comprehensive Plan and rezone applications for development.

“We are deciding whether or not it meets our standards,” assistant county attorney Bill Clague said at a land-use hearing. “It has to be based on evidence related to our standards (to be legally defensible).”

Manatee County Commissioner Vanessa Baugh said Manatee County has changed significantly since 1989, when the county developed its comprehensive plan. What might have been appropriate at that time, may no longer be suitable, and the board considers that change.

“You have to look around. There are a lot of different factors you have to look upon to decide yay or nay,” Baugh said. “You have to make sure whatever is gone will give a better quality of life. Can the business community and the residential community live together in a live, work and play environment? There is no rubber stamping that goes on.”

“We have to follow the law, and in this state, property rights are very strong,” she said. “If someone comes before us and (their application) is abiding by the law, then it’s not always a cut and dry situation.”

She and other commissioners said they consider compatibility with neighbors, transportation, density and other factors for each development. 

“We have to look at what people are saying and look at the big picture,” Commissioner Priscilla Whisenant Trace said. “What fits?”

Commissioner Robin DiSabatino said she feels the prior board did “rubber stamp” some developments, relying heavily on the opinion of staff members, but that has changed since the November election.

“In my opinion, this new board has its eyes wide open and is doing more homework and asking more questions and that’s why we’re there,” DiSabatino said. “We’re there to represent seven different points of view and to discuss the merits of each case individually. In my opinion, if it meets the Comprehensive Plan then they have a more solid case, however, there are parts of the plan that are open to interpretation.”

DiSabatino said she considers factors such as overriding public benefit, compatibility and the environment. She also looks at current zoning compared with what a developer is entitled to under future allowed land uses. 

“Just because someone is entitled to something or it’s legal, it doesn’t always make it right or fair. Those are the things that I look at,” she said. “I know people have property rights. But if you own a property next door, you have property rights as well that get infringed upon.”