Wekiva

Don’t Just Vent: The Citizen’s Pathway to Preserving the Wekiva

The Wekiva River benefits from legislation that specifically protects it in a state whose environmental planning is a model for others across the nation, so why is this beautiful river constantly in danger? Florida’s massive growth and urban sprawl certainly make protecting this ecological treasure difficult, but it is clear to many in the environmental community that citizens concerned about the Wekiva often lack the knowledge needed to translate their concern into effective protection.

Only when voters and alarmed citizens know how local and state agencies function, and where they can intervene, will the Wekiva benefit from the strong public sentiment felt by anyone who has canoed its surface, traversed its trails, or swam in its waters. This fact makes information on where, when, and how Floridians fit into the planning and protection process worth its weight in gold.
Over the past three decades the state of Florida has made planning a coordinated state affair. The Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act of 1975 was groundbreaking legislation that required the local adoption and implementation of comprehensive plans for the first time in the state’s history The History of Florida Growth. However, this act lacked the ability to enforce these plans and ended up creating a number of local plans with massive variation. The Growth Management Act of 1985 overhauled this planning system and made coordination and implementation a reality Florida’s Growth Management Act of 1985. But Florida’s environmental efforts do not stop there. The Wekiva River and its surrounding lands also enjoy special legislative protection in the form of the Wekiva Protection Act of 1988 The Wekiva River Protection Act of 1988. But despite all these factors, Florida’s comprehensive planning system is hardly a full proof protector of the environment or the Wekiva. Seminole County’s relatively recent attempts to develop inside the Wekiva Protection Area illustrate this point and provide a context to understanding the path a concerned citizen must travel to protect the Wekiva today and in the future.

     Astor Farms is a development community that mobilized state environmentalists and many Seminole County residents in early 1998. About one third of this project was located inside the Wekiva River Protection Area, and in 1998 the Board of Seminole County Commissioners approved developer plans to build 300 homes on a 130-acre tract of land. The problem with this plan was that the number of homes spread over the given area would raise the land’s usage above one unit per acre, the agreed upon limit for land to be deemed “rural in character.” Thus, the county’s approval of this plan apparently violated the Wekiva Protection Act that requires all lands surrounding the Wekiva to maintain a rural character. Local political groups like the Central Florida Sierra Club, the Friends of the Wekiva River, and the Seminole Audubon Society joined forces with concerned residents and became involved in September of 1998 when they filed a lawsuit against Seminole County to stop the development. This legal action was brought on when Commissioners voted to approve the development despite the concern of the Department of Community Affairs (DCA). This is where the battle over Astor Farms really began, but the development process was put in motion months before.
     The first step a property owner or development like Astor Farms must take is requesting a change in the designated use of a piece of property. Zoning and Land Use Designations. This request must be filed with the county staff in question. Since Orange, Lake, and Seminole counties all contain parts of the Wekiva’s protection area the staffs in all three of these counties are relevant actors involved in any proposal to change the designated use of lands surrounding the river. Their job is to review the request and determine whether or not it complies with the county’s comprehensive plan. This compliance is contingent on many variables, but two of chief environmental importance. First, the county staff judges whether or not the request is compatible with the land designations surrounding the land in question. In other words, no body wants a Wal-Mart smack dab in the middle of a subdivision full of small children. Secondly, the staff must consider the concept of concurrency. This is the logical idea that the county must have the necessary plans and adequate facilities in place to provide the services a new land designation may require. Once these factors are considered the county staff makes a recommendation to the county zoning or planning board. It is at this stage of the process that the proposed changes become public and citizen involvement can begin. However, most citizens and even political groups don’t hang out at planning board meetings, and this usually makes this stage of the development process relatively peaceful.
     Zoning or planning boards are local agencies that must hold public hearings whenever changes in land designation are proposed. During these public meetings the recommendation from the county staff office is made known. Then the applicant states his or her case for proposing the change. Following this appeal the board opens the floor to citizens or groups wishing to speak for or against the proposed change. Now is the time when voters and those concerned with a change and the effects it may have on the environment can speak up. Florida’s Sunshine State Law makes it possible for anyone to gain access to documents regarding a proposed change before it reaches this board. In fact, the Friends of Wekiva are actually on a mailing list that allows them to receive information on up-coming zoning considerations. These lists and the Sunshine State Law therefore make it relatively easy for concerned citizens to stay up to date any developments involving the Wekiva. This possibility aside, the zoning meeting is usually most citizen’s first look at attempts to change a designation, as well as their first chance to voice opposition or support. But this early chance for citizen participation it is not unimportant. Attendance at as many public hearings as possible helps establish “legal standing” for possible court battles that may occur in the future. After all of the above groups have spoken and recommendations have been considered the zoning or planning board then makes its recommendation to the board of county commissioners.   This is another place where citizen opinion can find its way into government.

     A board of county commissioners another place that alarmed citizens can express their concern over requested changes to land designation. One interesting characteristic of this portion of the process is that the board members are elected officials responsible to voters for their positions. Straight logic would assert that this would make these commissioners especially susceptible to citizen opinion. However, the reality is that elected officials of any kind are also responsive to specific, often wealthy interests (like certain developers). These interests are a challenge for the environment because large, highly organized, and highly motivated citizens groups are needed to counterbalance their disproportionate influence. Another reason this is a good place for citizen participation is that once again there are hearings involved where individual citizens, groups of citizens, or political groups can come out and voice their opinion. Once the proceedings are finished the five member boards vote whether or not to approve the proposed changes in zoning or planning. If the issue only involves zoning requests that do not require an amendment to the county plan than a vote by this board is essentially final. However, if the request involves changes in county planning than a positive recommendation from the board of county commissioners goes on for review by the DCA.
     The DCA bi-annually reviews applications for changes in the land use designation of counties across the state. The official name for these applications for change that arrive form the boards of county commissioners are Amendments to the Future Land Use Map of Florida. The DCA takes all the recommendations made to this point into account while trying to determine whether or not the proposed amendment fits the requirements outlined in the specific county’s plan, as well as the needs outlined in the state comprehensive plan. The DCA determination is called an Objections Recommendations Comments (ORC) Report. In this report the DCA lists any objections or recommendations it may have on a specific amendment, and then sends these back to the board of county commissioners. Amazingly, even this stage of the process gives citizens a chance to actively participate. While the DCA is examining proposed amendments this agency allows citizens to engage it either in support or opposition. This gives Floridians their third opportunity to present their case and opinions on changes that will occur near them and affect their way of life. Believe it or not, the process does not end there. In fact, from the DCA the battle heads back to local government.
     When the DCA’s ORC report returns to a board of county commissioners another public hearing must take place while the board considers making any changes to the original amendment. Once again, concerned citizens can make their presence known alongside local political groups. It is at this stage of the process that the battle over Astor Farms got hot. The ORC report concerning the Astor Farms project contained DCA objections and concerns that the development violated the Wekiva River Protection Act, the state’s Growth Management Act, the state’s comprehensive planning law, and Seminole County’s own comprehensive plan. In the words of Charles Lee, the vice president of the Florida Audubon at the time, “there was not much that [the DCA] did agree with.” The Seminole County Commissioners had a few options after receiving the negative ORC report from the DCA. The obvious path that could have been followed was for the board to heed all the recommendations made by the DCA, and to send the proposed amendment back to the DCA in a more acceptable form. For example, the Commissioners could have capped the number of homes in the Astor Farms project to make the character of the land more suitable. However, concessions like that are rare, and did not occur in this case. The more likely scenario occurs when a board of commissioners resubmits the amendment with few or no changes along with a report that defends this decision. This means that the commissioners essentially approve the amendment once and for all, despite objections from the DCA. This is exactly what the Seminole Commissioners did, and the eventual result was a lawsuit against the county on behalf of local political groups and Seminole county residents. What happens next is absolutely crucial. Once the second report from a board of county commissioners is received, the DCA must recommend approval or decide to fight the proposed amendment in an administrative hearing. Moreover, if the DCA decides not to fight the amendment than an individual citizen or group can decide to do so. The DCA decided to fight the Astor Farms project when the ball entered their court for the second time. In early December of 1998, the DCA published its rejection of the development. The county and developers did not back down. The Seminole Commissioners immediately decided to fight the DCA’s ruling. This decision meant that the battle now turned to a special hearing officer in charge of the possibility of an administrative hearing that could potentially determine the final outcome since this decision basically has effect of law. Had the DCA decided against fighting the development it would have been possible for a political group, or group of citizens to file a lawsuit in a circuit court. However, these groups usually have little legitimacy without the weight of the DCA behind them. An even more important aspect of this suit is that the group filing in the court now carries a heavy burden of proof, along with a string of convincing defeats. This is the system the law lays out, but the Astor Farms dispute was settled another way.
     In November of 1999 the developers of Astor Farms compromised with top members of the DCA in order to partially satisfy nearly all the parties involved. The settlement allowed developers to place as many as 2.5 homes per acre on the eastern edge of the Wekiva Protection Area in an area designated a “transition zone.” This would be permitted as long as developers met strict requirements that would preserve large tracts of land and limit damage to the environment. Thus, the areas outside the transition zone would have to comply with the Wekiva Protection Act. This meaning that development could be no more intense than one unit per acre. Specifically, the Astor Farms project was reduced from 345 homes to 275. This change reduced the density in the portion of the project within the Protection Area and therefore met the specifications of the agreement. Thus, the Astor Farms project proved that negotiation is also an important option when operating in the development system.
     It should now be clear just how complex the path of protection for the Wekiva can be. Proposed amendments and changes to lands near the river must go through multiple offices and decisions at the local level before twice being debated between local and state agencies. The good news for those who wish to ensure the Wekiva’s preservation is that this process is full of opportunities for citizens to become involved in the environmental and planning policy process. Knowledge of these opportunities is vital because of the challenges that currently face the Wekiva, and those that are on the horizon.
     The most obvious threat to the Wekiva is Central Florida’s continued growth that is constantly moving ever closer to the river. This growth slows no signs of slowing, and local groups can only fight so many battles at once. One emerging battle is a recent proposal to build a rather large private school on Markham woods road. This school is a classic example of how growth can slowly, and covertly impinge upon the Wekiva and other environmentally sensitive areas. The school itself poses no threat to the river, but the increased traffic, runoff, and congestion the school would cause would undoubtedly affect the Wekiva and its precious resources. Some groups have also kicked around the idea of widening State Road 46 to four lanes. Here again the increased traffic and movement through the area put even more stress on the environment. Seminole County has been in the spotlight for some time, but eventually Lake County will experience the kind of growth that has put so much pressure on western neighbor. Many local experts, including Keith Schue of the Central Florida Sierra Club fear that future battles will center on attempts to cultivate Lake County lands that have long been protected from developers. Finally, the Wekiva and other environmental treasures around the state are constantly in danger of losing their legislative protection.
     There have been concentrated attempts by the Republican dominated state legislature to roll back planning and its implementation. Many of these legislators’ actions are guided by a strict belief in property rights and can make a case in many courts on those constitutional grounds. Moreover, the complicated nature of Florida’s comprehensive planning gives these legislators several options. The state legislature could attempt to eliminate substantial portions and provisions of the Growth Management Act, but this is unlikely since these cuts are highly visible and politically costly. A more viable option would be funding cuts from relevant state agencies like DCA that are charged with implanting the law. Without the money for employees, research, and travel no government entity can effectively fulfill its duty. The legislature could also attempt to take the teeth out of the Growth Management Act by eliminating its ability to financially sanction or reward local governments whose plans don’t measure up. Any of these options is a possibility, and it only takes one to open the development floodgates on the Wekiva and the rest of the state. Therefore, concerned citizens and lovers of the Wekiva must know how government works, and they must use this knowledge to protect the river and land they love.