Contact us at  gulfcoastconservancy@verizon.net

The Critical Linkage concept is key to ensuring that comprehensive plans remain focused on the future.

The Work is
Mapped Out

The citizens of Florida have a unique chance to create a model wildlife corridor from the Chassahowitzka National Wildlife Refuge in Citrus County to the Suncoast Seabird Sanctuary in Pasco County. At the Gulf Coast Conservancy, we call this the Nature Coast Greenway and Wildlife Corridor.

As shown on the map, portions of the corridor have already been preserved. Placing the remaining parcels under protective management will provide a greenway with plenty of room for the natural Florida to flourish. The Nature Coast will offer residents and visitors a spectacularly beautiful
natural environment where humans and wildlife can live in harmony.

Acquisition and preservation of the properties which comprise the Nature Coast Greenway and Wildlife Corridor are underway, but there is still much work to be done. Many of the parcels needed to complete the project are still at risk. Acquisition of these sensitive natural areas is our number one priority.

The land already acquired also needs our attention. The agencies charged with managing these precious assets are developing their management plans which will determine the mix of public use and environmental protection. Our continuous involvement will be instrumental in helping to assure that a reasonable balance is achieved.

History of Action: SunWest Harbourtowne

The SunWest Harbourtowne project is planned to be a mixed use golf course community on 1100 acres located in coastal Pasco County, south of Aripeka Road and west of US 19. As proposed, it will irrevocably alter Aripeka and the region’s wildlife—both inland and coastal.

The development would essentially isolate protected lands along the coastline in southern Aripeka from thousands of acres of protected land to the north. This is not only devastating for the black bear, but dramatically impacts other species of wildlife that currently inhabit the region. (from factsheet; read more)

A key component of the development is the swap of a 90-acre SWFWMD parcel for approximately 1,267 acres with 119 acres of upland and 1,148 acres of saltwater marsh owned by Sunwest to the south, but isolated from Conservation land to the north (read GCC press release for background). This swap provides Sunwest access to their development off Aripeka Road as well as additional developable acres of land (presently proposed as a golf course).

Bears have been documented on this SWFWMD parcel. If SWFWMD swaps land with SunWest, it effectively severs any linkage to all points south where black bear have been documented with radiotelemetry. Thus, despite the Pasco County ELAMP acquisition of Aripeka Heights, directly across Aripeka Road from the SWFWMD parcel, the black bear core habitat area would end north of Aripeka Road.

Several organizations from the Conservation Community signed on to a letter to the Governing Board that raised serious questions about the disposition of conservation lands, believing the long term stability of conservation could be undermined by the District’s action.

We are very disappointed that the SWFWMD Governing Board agreed to the land swap. We feel strongly that the District made a mistake in approving the swap of public conservation lands to a private developer. We believe the District made a decision that could and will harm wildlife and the integrity of the Florida Forever program and in doing so did not serve the public trust. Read more at http://www.tampabay.com/

October 2007 —SunWest Harbourtowne submitted a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) to Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (TBRPC).

January 2009—TBRPC, Pasco County, Hernando County, FDOT, Pasco Wildlife, FWC and SWFWMD all submitted comments, questions and Requests for Additional Information (RAI) addressing the inadequate responses from Sunwest First, Second and Third Sufficiency Responses.

As of today, the GCC has submitted comments to the TBRPC on Sunwest Harbourtowne's four Sufficiency responses. Sunwest has been declared sufficient by Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. The TBRPC final report is available online.

On June 23, 2009 the Pasco County BoCC sent the Comprehensive Plan changes for Sunwest to the Department of Community Affairs for review. Core assumptions in the Sunwest Harbourtowne application require massive changes that will fundamentally rewrite the 2006 Comprehensive Plan. Changes impact protections for wetlands, conservation and coastal lands, listed species and development limitations in the Coastal High Hazard Area. The historic fishing village of Aripeka, formally so designated by the Pasco Historical Commission and Board of County Commissioners in October 1993, will have its special character adversely affected if an additional 2500 homes, offices, and retail stores are juxtaposed to a community with a permanent population of approximately 400.

Pasco County spent much time and taxpayer money developing the mandated Comprehensive Plan to guide future growth for the benefit of current and future citizens. The DCA, in its role of monitoring compliance to Comprehensive Plans has resisted sweeping changes in the past. We have submitted our detailed objections to the DCA.

The GCC asked for support from citizens and the Conservation Community to request that the DCA find the Sunwest DRI and Comp Plan changes inconsistent with Florida’s growth management statutes and rules. In partnership with 31 organizations and individuals we sent a letter to DCA urging them to find the SunWest Harbourtowne DRI application and comprehensive plan amendment not in compliance in order to halt the unsustainable development and preserve the ecological resources of Florida’s Nature Coast.

St. Pete Times summarizes DCA objections

The St. Pete Times summarizes DCA objections to proposed changes to the comprehensive plan.

September 11, 2009 – DCA issued their Letter of Objections, Recommendations and Comments on Sunwest saying “The County is shifting more intense development to the most vulnerable portion of the subject site which is inconsistent with state law." DCA agrees that the Sunwest Comp Plan changes are inconsistent with state law and the County’s Comprehensive Plan.

Public hearing notice

Public hearings were repeatedly rescheduled until the final ruling on March 30. This notice describes the planned development.

Current Status

After several reschedulings, the public hearings and decision making took place at the BOCC meeting March 30, 2010. At this meeting, the County Commissioners gave their final approval to land use changes associated with this development.

County officials and representatives of the SunWest owners said the new plan contains significant wildlife and environmental protections, including a habitat management plan for black bears in response to the DCA's criticism. We believe the changes are insufficient, and protections for wildlife unenforceable, particularly for the Florida black bears, and the GCC will consider the merits of court action to call this question.

As feared, the Department of Community Affairs gave its approval to the final plans, however the project still needs a state environmental resource permit. Joe Murphy, in a guest column in the St. Pete Times, Sunday, June 6, 2010, summarized the issues and indicated that the fight is far from over. Check back for recommendations for citizen action on behalf of the wildlife and natural spaces impacted by the proposed development.

We continue to encourage the County to follow advice given in the Urban Land Institute study, paid for by tax payers and accepted by the BoCC in April of 2009. The study recommended that the county “allow the comprehensive plan to act as the primary document that articulates the county’s long-term vision and organize the planning department around that long-term vision;” and “curtail the use of variances and exceptions in approving land use amendments, zoning approvals, and building permits.”

What you can do.

Study the issue, read the reports and factsheets. As the permitting process continues, you will be ready to share your opinion as appropriate.

For more detail, visit our Advocacy Resources page.

The Conservancy can use your help. To support our efforts, please consider membership. We can then keep you up to date on important events and actions.

 

CURRENT EVENTS


Pasco County loses champion

Friends of the environment lost a good friend when Bob Tietz, the Pasco County biologist, recently succumbed to cancer. Bob was a valuable resource in efforts to preserve the county's natural riches from ill-planned development.

During the staff review process, he was able to forge agreements that went a long way toward preserving nature along the Nature Coast. For those of us seeking to understand the actions of the County Commission, Bob was the go-to guy to explain the “why” behind the “what happened." He will be missed.

 

GCC gets ready should Oil reach our marshes

GCC is watching oil spill plans develop. The looming disastrous impact that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill will have on our coastal marshes has been the subject of planning meetings held by County Emergency Management Teams.

GCC members attended meetings in Pasco County and St. Petersburg to discuss existing emergency action plans and recommend changes to address the current problem. At present, all we can do is watch and wait as the spill approaches. Anyone who notices oil either on land or offshore should notify county Emergency Management teams right away. See the website, or call the oil spill information hotline: (888) 337-3569.

 

Critical Linkages
Protected or Not?
Apparently Not in Pasco

May 2010 – After two and a half years of legal wrangling, in which the GCC participated in opposition to the development, the Department of Community Affairs has removed its objections to the proposed development near the intersection of Shady Hills Road and the Suncoast Parkway.  

The crucial legal issue hinged on whether the description of the critical linkage wildlife corridors as published in the Comprehensive Plan was sufficient to detail the actual location on the ground. Another factor in DCA’s decision was the failure of Pasco County’s commissioners to enact a wildlife protection ordinance including these linkages. 

A little history is required to understand the legal position. Please read the background on the issue below, and let's not let history repeat itself. Ask the County Commission to prevent future damage to the critical linkages in Pasco County.


Ten years after the County agreed to enact it, Pacso's Critical Linkage Wildlife Protection Ordinance has still not been finalized and enacted.

In 1999, Citizens for Sanity, Inc. sues Pasco County over wildlife protection deficiencies in the Comprehensive plan.

In 2000, Pasco County agrees, as part of settlement, to the “establishment of a wildlife ordinance and for the establishment of wild life corridors to connect the major well fields.” Action to institute this ordinance was to start within 45 days.

In 2002, Pasco Count accepts Assessment of Measures to Protect Wildlife Habitat in Pasco County, a study prepared by consulting firm Glatting, Jackson et al that defines critical linkage wildlife corridors between the undeveloped well fields in the county.

In 2006, Pasco County references, but does not define, these critical linkage wildlife corridors in revisions to the Comprehensive Plan.   Note here that 4 years have passed since the county agreed to enact a wildlife protection ordinance and the ordinance is not yet even drafted.  

In January 2008, Bell Fruit/Zelenda Partners applies for development of property east of Suncoast Parkway and north of Quail Hollow subdivision. The proposed development intrudes into the North Pasco to Starkey critical linkage wildlife corridor. County Staff recommends approval with conditions. The developer rejects conditions and threatens to sue under Burt Harris.

In March 2008, BOCC sends modified agreement to DCA for approval. In May 2008, DCA sends the Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) report to the county that rejects development plan, citing, among other things, Environmental Suitability (failure to protect critical linkage wildlife corridors) as reason.

In July 2008, the first draft of the critical linkage wildlife protection ordinance is published, 6 years late. On September 6, 2008 Staff submits a re-worked development plan to County Commission. County Staff believes that disagreements have been worked out and recommends approval based on conditions that protect the integrity of the wildlife corridor. Staff’s recommendation is placed on the county website to be used by interested parties to evaluate the proposed development.  On the Friday afternoon before an unusual Monday meeting of the BOCC, attorney for the developer submits revisions to the agenda item. At the BOCC meeting, Staff objects that they have not had time to review the changes. Over repeated objections by the County Administrator, County Attorney, and County Growth Management Director, Commissioner Mulieri insists that development proposal be considered with the last minute changes included. She states that the developer is a friend and he has waited long enough to get permission to develop his land. The rest of the BOCC concurs without comment and the development proposal passes unanimously.

In October 2008 GCC writes DCA to protest development plan. In November 2008 DCA sues Pasco County in Administrative Court. GCC signs on as intervenor.   August 2009 sees a revised draft of the critical linkage wildlife protection ordinance published. After objections by Commissioner Cox, provisions that allow County Commissioners to reduce the width and change location of the corridors are inserted in the ordinance.  

Between December 2008 and April 2010, negotiations between DCA and GCC on one side versus Pasco County and developer on the other continue. Developer’s lawyers convince DCA lawyers that, since the wildlife protection ordinance defining the critical linkages has not been implemented, the critical linkages as defined in the Comp Plan are vague and unenforceable, and therefore not binding on this development.  

May 2010: A settlement agreement between DCA and Pasco County is reached that in effect allows the developer to build within the critical linkage boundaries. GCC is left with only the option of proceeding with a lawsuit against DCA, Pasco County and the developer. Sadly our resources do not permit this, and we reluctantly agree to the settlement.