By signing this petition, you are telling Orange County Mayor, District Commissioners, and the designated case planner that you oppose staff's recommendation to recommend the transmittal of Lake Pickett North (LPN): Sustanee and are therefore asking them to vote "NO" on the proposed development in rural east Orange County.
Info: This case has environmental, traffic, compatibility and consistency issues as well as strong community opposition, financial implications for taxpayers, financial implications for the county, environmental issues/water pollution, as well as wildlife welfare issues. Located off Lake Pickett Rd next to the Econ Sandhill Conservation.
Vote NO on LPN Sustanee: BCC Transmittal
This petition is now closed.
End date: Jan 23, 2024
Signatures collected: 1036
Signature goal: 1000
Signature goal: 1000
SUBJECT: Vote No on LPN: Sustanee
Language for the Petition
Dear Mayor Demings and Commissioners,
I hope my email finds you well. During the January 23, 2024 2 PM Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting, a proposed development called Sustanee (LPN) will be voted on for transmittal. I am writing to ask that you vote no to the proposed Sustanee Development (a.k.a. Sustany in 2016) for several reasons. The proposed development has environmental, traffic, compatibility and consistency issues as well as strong community opposition, financial implications for taxpayers, financial implications for the county, illegal land use/groundwater contamination, as well as wildlife welfare issues.
First, one of applicant land owners has a borrow pit operating off the land that falls within the Lake Pickett Study Area for five years. The borrow pit is located on the bordering parcels and has open land violations with the State of Florida. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection filed a case for illegal operation and environmental destruction. The local judge ruled in favor of the State and the borrow pit has a cease and desist order on it. The applicant land owner continues operation and land leasing in defiance of the court's order. According to records, the continued operation has caused damage that expanded outside the property and into the bordering county owned/protected Econ Sandhills Conservation Area. The landowner applicant initially included the illegal borrow pit parcels in the LPN application but has since shaved the parcels off of Sustanee yet the pit remains open and operating to this day. The co-applicant will benefit from the transmittal of LPN: Sustanee if the BCC approves the transmittal due to the other applicant buying all land once transmitted.
Second, there is no surrounding development that is compatible or consistent to the proposed LPN: Sustanee. To the north is Seminole County rural boundary with acreage properties. To the west is the SJWMD Sandhill Conservation. To the East are minimum 1 home per 1 acre developments and Lake Pickett Rural Settlement with acreage properties. To the South is a cow pasture. The cow pasture may eventually have 1 acre+ lots from The Grow thus allowing a 1 acre transition to LPN. There is nothing that is compatible with the proposed LPN: Sustanee.
Third, the community remains in opposition to the proposed development. The community expects that the county honor the commitment to stop urban sized developments at the Econ River. Urban developments were not to cross the Econ River. This is a commitment the county made to the people. The approval of this development is continued urban sprawl, which is a violation of our comprehensive land use plan. There is no infrastructure in the rural service area to support this development. The cost to build the infrastructure to service this development (e.g., fire station, new school, sewer capacity, etc.) is an unfair tax burden to the rest of Orange County Citizens - especially when considering that if LPN is not built, the additional infrastructure and the taxpayer costs to subsidize the development needs is not required in the area.
Additionally, the surrounding rural roads are failing. Hwy 50/Colonial is an F road that even with improvements will remain a F road. The County has a $22 billion deficit in roadway infrastructure funds. The available funds should be spent fixing roads in the urban corridors not building roads in the rural service area. The NEOCATS Study states that the suggested roadway improvements to "fix" the roads for Sustanee are not feasible. In 2016, when this development was denied, the applicant proposed a bridge across the Econ River claiming it was necessary to move traffic. Now, the applicant is proposing no bridge but is pushing all traffic out onto a failing rural road network. This is unfair to the existing community.
Thank you for your attention and your service to our community. Please vote no on the transmittal of Sustanee.