Steve W
09-14-2005, 12:47 PM
Well the developers win again. I am sure the developers will build a nice retention pond somewhere to make up for the wetlands loss. :rolleyes:
So how does one get on the SJRWMD board?
From http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/091405/met_19762905.shtml
The Florida Times-Union
September 14, 2005
Board OKs wetlands plan
By DAVID BAUERLEIN
The Times-Union
PALATKA -- Freedom Commerce Centre's proposed development on 126 acres of wetlands in Jacksonville won the blessing of the St. Johns River Water Management District Board Tuesday.
On a 4-2 vote, the board agreed with the recommendations of the district's staff and an administrative law judge that favored letting The Goodman Co. build on the bitterly contested wetlands.
Some members of the public who traveled in a caravan to speak at the board meeting called out "shame, shame" after the vote was tallied.
The majority of board members said that when looking at the big picture, the region would benefit, even if there would be some harm to Julington and Pottsburg creeks.
"We're getting more safety for the environment than we give up," board member David Graham said.
Dissenting board members Susan Hughes and Ann Moore disagreed.
"I think this particular mitigation plan is not sustainable, and our mission is to have sustainable protection," Hughes said. "That's troubling."
Freedom Commerce Centre covers 853 acres on Jacksonville's Southside, roughly bordered by Baymeadows Road, Interstate 95 and Philips Highway. The thickly forested land already has office parks, apartments and a cinema.
In 2000, Goodman bought the land and made plans to expand the development with shopping centers, office buildings or apartments into areas that would necessitate filling 126 acres of wetlands that are part of the headwaters for Pottsburg and Julington creeks.
To win the support of the water management district's staff, Goodman said it would preserve 393 acres of wetlands at the site and also put into conservation about 1,600 acres at different locations in St. Johns County.
The St. Johns Riverkeeper and Sierra Club challenged the staff's recommendation in an administrative law hearing. In August, Judge Charles Stampelos issued an order agreeing with the staff's finding and recommended the board approve a permit.
Frank Mathews, an attorney representing Goodman, said the board should not be swayed by the pleas of about 25 people who urged the board during a public comment period to "show courage" by rejecting Stampelos' finding.
"That's not showing guts," he said. "That's not making a statement. That's disregarding the lawful process that these folks [Riverkeeper and Sierra Club] initiated."
Opponents criticized the mitigation package because Goodman has agreed to provide free right of way for a future St. Johns County road through an 800-acre parcel of its mitigation land that is one of the largest tracts in the company's conservation package in the permit application.
Ken Wright, a lawyer representing St. Johns Riverkeeper, said the board should reject the permit application because neither the district's staff nor Stampelos had considered how the future road "smack down the middle" of the land would diminish its environmental value.
"We know a road is going to go through there," said Peter Belmont, representing the Sierra Club. "All the pretending in the world's not going to change that."
Board member William Kerr said that if St. Johns County did decide in the future to build the road, the water management district would be able to obtain more land and even money in exchange for giving the county permission to use a strip of the conservation land for the road.
Kerr and Graham were joined by Ometrius Long and John Sowinski in favor of the permit.
Three board members -- Clay Albright, Leonard Wood and Duane Ottenstroer -- recused themselves because of business dealings with previous owners of the mitigation land or because of previous forestry work on mitigation land.
The Army Corps of Engineers previously rejected an application by Goodman to build on the wetlands. The corps uses different rules and regulations than the water management district in reviewing applications. Goodman is appealing the decision.
So how does one get on the SJRWMD board?
From http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/091405/met_19762905.shtml
The Florida Times-Union
September 14, 2005
Board OKs wetlands plan
By DAVID BAUERLEIN
The Times-Union
PALATKA -- Freedom Commerce Centre's proposed development on 126 acres of wetlands in Jacksonville won the blessing of the St. Johns River Water Management District Board Tuesday.
On a 4-2 vote, the board agreed with the recommendations of the district's staff and an administrative law judge that favored letting The Goodman Co. build on the bitterly contested wetlands.
Some members of the public who traveled in a caravan to speak at the board meeting called out "shame, shame" after the vote was tallied.
The majority of board members said that when looking at the big picture, the region would benefit, even if there would be some harm to Julington and Pottsburg creeks.
"We're getting more safety for the environment than we give up," board member David Graham said.
Dissenting board members Susan Hughes and Ann Moore disagreed.
"I think this particular mitigation plan is not sustainable, and our mission is to have sustainable protection," Hughes said. "That's troubling."
Freedom Commerce Centre covers 853 acres on Jacksonville's Southside, roughly bordered by Baymeadows Road, Interstate 95 and Philips Highway. The thickly forested land already has office parks, apartments and a cinema.
In 2000, Goodman bought the land and made plans to expand the development with shopping centers, office buildings or apartments into areas that would necessitate filling 126 acres of wetlands that are part of the headwaters for Pottsburg and Julington creeks.
To win the support of the water management district's staff, Goodman said it would preserve 393 acres of wetlands at the site and also put into conservation about 1,600 acres at different locations in St. Johns County.
The St. Johns Riverkeeper and Sierra Club challenged the staff's recommendation in an administrative law hearing. In August, Judge Charles Stampelos issued an order agreeing with the staff's finding and recommended the board approve a permit.
Frank Mathews, an attorney representing Goodman, said the board should not be swayed by the pleas of about 25 people who urged the board during a public comment period to "show courage" by rejecting Stampelos' finding.
"That's not showing guts," he said. "That's not making a statement. That's disregarding the lawful process that these folks [Riverkeeper and Sierra Club] initiated."
Opponents criticized the mitigation package because Goodman has agreed to provide free right of way for a future St. Johns County road through an 800-acre parcel of its mitigation land that is one of the largest tracts in the company's conservation package in the permit application.
Ken Wright, a lawyer representing St. Johns Riverkeeper, said the board should reject the permit application because neither the district's staff nor Stampelos had considered how the future road "smack down the middle" of the land would diminish its environmental value.
"We know a road is going to go through there," said Peter Belmont, representing the Sierra Club. "All the pretending in the world's not going to change that."
Board member William Kerr said that if St. Johns County did decide in the future to build the road, the water management district would be able to obtain more land and even money in exchange for giving the county permission to use a strip of the conservation land for the road.
Kerr and Graham were joined by Ometrius Long and John Sowinski in favor of the permit.
Three board members -- Clay Albright, Leonard Wood and Duane Ottenstroer -- recused themselves because of business dealings with previous owners of the mitigation land or because of previous forestry work on mitigation land.
The Army Corps of Engineers previously rejected an application by Goodman to build on the wetlands. The corps uses different rules and regulations than the water management district in reviewing applications. Goodman is appealing the decision.