The following update was posted by Mayor Megan Sladek at http://Facebook.com/MeganSladek following the meeting of the Land Planning Agency’s discussion of hotly contested proposed project in Oviedo. At the Sanford Herald, we want to encourage citizens to be involved in helping shape our community while also creating a venue you can rely on those who prefer your hometown local newspaper to social media. Here’s what she had to say:
UPDATE on 4/1: the Land Planning Agency voted to recommend amending the comp plan with additional project restrictions and to change the zoning with additional project restrictions (they did not move it forward with a recommendation for approval exactly as proposed by the developer). This will hit Council at two additional meetings. The situation on this property is that is allowed to be used for commercial purposes, even though it is formally comp planned for low density residential. It's that pesky Vested Rights Certificate rearing its head again. BACKSTORY: In 2016, a charter school asked to build here based on a piece of paper that allowed them to put commercial-style things here. I voted to allow it based on the existence of that Vested Rights Certificate.
My position did not prevail, the owner of the property sued Oviedo, and after we spent all our insurance money fighting (which I thought was dumb, because they had a piece of paper that said it was allowed), a judge said to pay out $4 million of your tax dollars to the property owner, and we did. POOF, there it went. This one is more complicated that it appears at first glance.
THE PROJECT NEAR THE CORNER OF 419 and LOCKWOOD - a developer has asked to change the Comprehensive Plan designation of this land to allow for a mixed use development of 172 dwelling units (55+ apartment building) and 6,156 square feet of commercial space.
Let's talk about COMPREHENSIVE PLAN amendments. As a general rule, they are 100% a policy decision. The Land Planning Agency and City Council are *not* legally obligated to change the "Comp Plan," and our hands are *not* tied. We could, in theory, just say no to this request. More on that below.
Contrast this with a REZONING, which is a quasi-judicial process where Council evaluates whether the proposed zoning is consistent with the Comp Plan. If the zoning requested is allowed under the rules of our Comp Plan, then our hands *are* tied.
While we don't have to allow the max-out density and intensity under the Comp Plan, the excuses we use to push back are much more limited and they have to come from state statutes and our already-existing zoning code. We can't invent new excuses on the spot to object to a rezoning. It's multiple choice, and if the developer checks all the right the boxes, the city's answer has to be yes or the developer can sue and have a court make us give the right answer.
On the JUST SAY NO idea: sometimes, even though you could say no, it's not in everyone's best interest to do so. On principle, I think it's a stinker move to change the comp plan one parcel at a time. I think residents should be able to count on the city to stick to the Comp Plan. That being said, if a developer can prove that changing the Comp Plan will make life better for EXISTING RESIDENTS, I'm all ears. If this project can show that it will (1) create less traffic and (2) create less pavement than is currently allowed, in my opinion, it would be foolish not to agree to it. Given the facts on this one, it doesn't look like the proposal would do either of those things.
No matter how this shakes out, it is important to remember that because of how laws are in Florida, all the non-wetland portions of this parcel will very likely be clear-cut eventually. It doesn't matter if it's a single family subdivision or a 10-story tall apartment complex, the same amount of land is legally allowed to be scalped either way. There is nothing the government can do to stop it because it is the government that made the laws that created the scalping requirement. St. Johns River Water Management District requires water from every project to be engineered to not flood the new development and not dump water in illegal ways, so this land will have to be reshaped at ground level to prevent water from draining straight into the Econ. There's no good way to reshape that much dirt with trees in the way. I don't like it. But I do like that Oviedo requires significant replanting in any project.
If you made it all the way to the end of this post, THANK YOU! Hope you learned something helpful and I hope to see you at City Hall advocating for the smartest growth we can pull off under the laws that constrain us.
