Martin County's wide-open spaces are primed for the same kind of development

They are ranchers, farmers and developers, many of whom are wealthy and influential Palm Beach County businessmen, and they own most of Martin County's rural, developable land.
More than ever, Martin County residents want to know what they plan to do with it.
With rural land disappearing to the north and south, Martin County's wide-open spaces are primed for the same kind of development pressure experienced in Palm Beach and St. Lucie counties, and throughout South Florida.
Will they continue farming the largely agricultural tracts, at a time when hurricanes and citrus canker have wreaked havoc on their livelihood? Will they sell to developers
looking to the future, when growth restrictions could be eased enough to allow development now blocked by what might be Florida's strictest rules against urban sprawl? Or will they sell to the state, increasing Martin County's already large inventory of publicly held land?
Most of the county's largest private landowners say they don't plan to sell, and many of the farmers want to continue doing what they've always done: working the land.
But they also want to keep their options open, and that's what conservationists fear. Rising property values could tempt them to sell.
"My farm is profitable now, but somebody might make my children the right offer in the future," said Steve Barney, whose family owns the 3,800-acre Calusa Creek Tree Farm and Ranch west of Hobe Sound. "They should get to have maximum value."
For others, the time to act is now.
Colorado-based Caulkins Oil Co., which grows citrus on 3,300 acres near Indiantown, is losing money and wants to sell its land and get out of farming, said George P. Caulkins III, the company's managing partner.
"We're not farmers, and we don't have dirt under our fingernails," Caulkins said. "These days we are writing checks to cover our expenses. We're talking to people (about) selling our property, and it is not impossible that somebody will make us a good offer."
Those offers could soar if Martin County loosens the rules on development outside its urban service boundary, which roughly follows Florida's Turnpike and Bridge Road. To the west and south of that line, water and sewer service is not allowed, and 20-acre "ranchettes" are generally the densest development permitted under the county's comprehensive plan, its blueprint for growth.
But in a split vote in September, county commissioners decided to hire a consultant to study new ideas for Martin's rural land.
One popular possibility involves "clustering," which would allow developers to build pockets of homes and businesses as long as land around them is preserved. Some landowners would be paid to keep their property empty, in exchange for providing denser development in other areas where it isn't currently allowed.
Several of the county's largest landowners are members of the Martin County Agriculture League, a lobbying group headed by land surveyor Chappy Young. He advocates allowing clustering to preserve the value of farmers' land, which he says the county's strict regulations are hurting.
"We've lost some of our land value through the efforts of the county," Young said.
Many of the landowners say clustering makes more sense than the current rules.
"Five- or 20-acre lots are not considered by planners today to be responsible land use that close to the coast," said Knight Kiplinger of Washington, D.C., whose family owns a 3,500-acre farm west of Palm City. "Martin County has to decide... if it is going to follow the best practices, which tend to follow clustering."
Barney said the county's 20-acre limit will lead to urban sprawl because homeowners will buy the large plots and wait until the county allows dense development, then subdivide and sell. County Commissioner Michael DiTerlizzi said the 20-acre limit has led to sprawl in other Florida counties.
"Western Dade County had 20-acre ranchettes. They are now 20-acre subdivisions," DiTerlizzi said. "You and I might not see it, but your grandchildren will see it."
Michael Busha, executive director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, called 20-acre lots a "holding pattern" that eventually leads to sprawl but said residents won't trust clustering without strict rules.
"I don't believe 20-acre lots is the final resolution for the future of Florida," Busha said. "But it's because we've done such a poor job of land planning in the first third of the county that everyone is nervous."
Opponents of clustering have accused the large farmers of "land-banking" — buying up land and then lobbying to allow denser development so they can sell to developers at a higher price.
The urban service boundary benefits farmers by keeping neighbors that might object to agriculture away from their farms, said Donna Melzer, chairwoman of the Martin County Conservation Alliance.
"It's only when they put on that other hat of the developers that they would support clustering," she said. "They are taking the position that 'it is just a matter of time and I want to make the maximum profit.' "
Many landowners say that's not their plan.
"We're not developers," said Wayne Carlton of Fort Pierce, whose family owns the 6,600-acre Bull Hammock Ranch. "Our family has raised cattle on that land since 1947. We plan to just continue in the ag business."
The Palm Beach County-based Fanjul brothers, a politically influential sugar family, want to buy more land because of hurricane damage to their sugar crops, said Gaston Cantens, vice president of Florida Crystals Corp., one of the Fanjuls' companies.
"Rather than selling off land, we need more land for cane," Cantens said.
Kiplinger, who owns prime land in Palm City across the county line from Port St. Lucie, said his family has no immediate plans to sell. But he thinks it's his right to do so.
"What's wrong with land-banking and selling off land?" Kiplinger said. "There's a place for that."
Young said the farmers don't just want to increase the density allowed on their land to sell it. They also want to use that allowable density and increased land value to borrow more money to keep their farms going.
"Citrus is in the pits, and you can't go out and buy 4,000 acres in Martin County and pay the mortgage with cattle today," Young said. "Land is an asset, just like your portfolio is an asset you can borrow against."
As the large farmers consider their future, developers also have accumulated large rural tracts.
Otto "Buz" DiVosta, founder of Palm Beach Gardens-based DiVosta Homes, owns about 4,500 acres near Kanner Highway where developer Tom Kenny has proposed building Harmony Ranch, a subdivision of homes on 20-acre lots. DiVosta's former business partner, Clifford Burg, owns about 2,000 acres where he has proposed two subdivisions of homes on 20-acre lots.
The trust controlled by the family of deceased Palm Beach County-based developer David Minkin owns about 1,900 acres in Martin County. Prescott E. Lester, Minkin's grandson, said the family bought the land thinking it would an ideal location for development.
"We're always looking for where the growth is going to be," Lester said. "The growth is taking longer than we expected to get to that land."
With or without development, there's another major player in the quest for Martin's rural land.
Florida officials have identified about 52 square miles that they want to buy for Everglades restoration. Randy Smith, spokesman for the South Florida Water Management District, said his agency is looking for willing owners.
Property owners like Barney, whose Calusa Creek land is in an area the state wants, said they believe the county is trying to devalue their land by restricting development so the state can buy it cheaper.
"If you don't have the ability to hold land and not have it confiscated by the king, you have nothing," Barney said.
Allowing clustered developments would give landowners a way to make a profit on their land and donate more for conservation, Barney said.
"I would give the land away for conservation, but I would want something in return," Barney said. "The more density you give somebody, maybe they'll give you more acres in return."
Caulkins said he would like to sell land for preservation, but developers will probably offer him more money.
"It would be tough to go to my partners and justify to them selling to the county for less money," Caulkins said.
The consultants working on the Martin County growth plans are gathering public opinion from private groups and government agencies. In November, they will report their findings to the county commission, which will then decide whether the county's rules should be changed.
In a county where growth issues are kindling for controversy, that vote could be one of Martin County's most highly contested decisions in years.
In the meantime, the county's largest landowners are in no rush to sell.
"We're not bad guys at all," Barney said. "Most of us have been stewards of the land for decades. I think there's a plan out there that can make everybody happy."