HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/20/2008 (2)PUBLIC WORKSHOP
DRAFT EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT
OCTOBER 20, 2008
1. CALL TO ORDER.........................................................................................1
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.......................................................................1
3. PRESENTATIONS AND PUBLIC DISCUSSION...................................2
REVIEW OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EVALUA TIONAND
APPRAISAL REPORT......................................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 2
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT................................................................................................3
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT................................................................................................10
CONSER VA TION ELEMENT....................................................................................................13
COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT.....................................................................................14
POTABLE WATERSUB-ELEMENT.........................................................................................16
HOUSINGELEMENT..............................................................................................................17
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT.................................................................................18
4. WRAP UP AND DIRECTION TO STAFF..............................................20
5. ADJOURNMENT.........................................................................................21
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
October 20, 2008
PUBLIC WORKSHOP OF THE INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, held
a Public Workshop at the County Commission Chambers, 1801 27th Street, Vero Beach,
Florida, on Monday, October 20, 2008, to review the Draft Evaluation and Appraisal
Report. Present were Chairman Sandra L. Bowden, Vice Chairman Wesley S. Davis,
Commissioners Joseph E. Flescher, Peter D. O'Bryan, and Gary C. Wheeler. Also
present were County Administrator Joseph A. Baird, County Attorney William G. Collins
II, and Deputy Clerk Athena Adams.
Chairman Bowden called the meeting to order at 1:32 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairman Bowden led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
1
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
3. PRESENTATIONS AND PUBLIC DISCUSSION
REVIEWOFINDIANRIVER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT
INTRODUCTION
Community Development Director Bob Keating provided background and
description on the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), which he described as an on-
going process that is mandated by the State, and is due on December 1, 2008. He
announced that this is the first of two public Workshops, the second of which would be
on Thursday, October 23, 2008, if all business is not addressed today.
Through a PowerPoint Presentation Director Keating outlined the Elements
of the Comprehensive Plan that are being revised, noting that he would address seven of
the fifteen elements, but would rather they be not addressed in complete detail. He
detailed State law requirements for the EAR, which requires that the Local Planning
agency (Planning & Zoning Commission) prepare the Report, and noted that staff has
worked closely with them over the years. Staff has taken certain elements of the EAR to
various County committees and has received valuable feedback. On October 9, 2008 the
Local Planning Agency (PZC) reviewed the Report and recommended that the Board
approve the EAR.
Director Keating outlined the EAR components, stating that each of the
fifteen EAR components has the same format: the first two sections are an inventory or
conditions at the time the Plan was last updated, and the third section is an analysis of
those conditions. He said the most important parts of each of the EAR Elements are the
evaluation of objectives, which outlines whether they were or were not met; reasons why
they were not met; whether policies were implemented or not and why they were or were
N
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
not implemented. He discussed the goals, objectives and policies of the EAR and
provided statistics for an overall objective, pointing out that there are 129 objectives for
2008, 96 of which were achieved, 17 partially achieved, and 16 were not achieved.
Staff determined and recommended that 14 of these objectives should be
maintained; 109 should be revised; 6 should be deleted, and 6 new ones be added.
Within this Element are 806 policies, 717 of which are implemented, 11 partially
implemented, and 78 not implemented. Staff's proposal is to maintain 574 of those,
revise 177, delete 55, and add 116 new ones. Director Keating disclosed that throughout
the process, going to the various Committees and the PZC, staff has invited public
comments on all the EAR elements and have received a lot of comments.
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
Brian Freeman, Senior Planner, through a PowerPoint Presentation
reviewed this Element and highlighted some of the existing conditions, as they are
currently. On the matter of annexations in the County, over the past 10 years, nearly
24,000 acres of land were annexed into the City of Fellsmere, (over 37 square miles) and
832 acres (just over 1 square mile) by the other four (4) municipalities combined. He
pointed out that looking at the reduction and build -out potential that has occurred since
1998, there has been a couple of contributing factors, like the annexations highlighted
and that single family residential development occurs at densities that are below the
maximums that are allowed by the Future Land Use (FLU) Map. He noted that the
County is nearly 50% built -out with just over 55,000 residential units that are allowed by
the Comprehensive Plan and FLU Map, and this includes areas inside and outside the
Urban Service Boundary.
3
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
Looking at commercial lands, Mr. Freeman said there are 34 commercial
and industrial nodes in the unincorporated County, and in 2007 those nodes were 43%
developed, meaning there were 2,394 acres of developed commercial industrial lands out
of a total of 5,538 acres. Based on that analysis, staff felt there were sufficient
commercial and industrial, as well as, residential designated lands land within the
County.
Mr. Freeman provided EAR analysis of the conditions, and outlined the
Future Land Use objectives and policies. He also summarized the major issues which
include retention of rural lands (natural and agricultural areas), the possibility of low
density suburban sprawl, the disconnections between adjacent uses (sidewalks and
streets), and the need to limit commercial strip development within the County. He
presented the objectives and policies in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) stating that
there are a total of 20 objectives in this Element, and since 1998, 13 which were
achieved, 2 are expected to be achieved by their respective target dates, 2 were partially
achieved, and 3 were not likely to be achieved by their target dates.
There are a total of 141 Policies in this Element, of which 125 were
implemented, 1 was partially implemented, and 15 were not implemented. Staff
recommended that 113 policies be maintained as structured, 28 new policies be added, 22
of the existing policies be revised, and 6 of the existing policies be deleted. Other
changes recommended were:
Objective 1: "Compact Low -Density Development" (has been achieved):
staff recommends that this objective be revised to extend the target date to 2030. Within
this objective are 45 policies, 39 are recommended to be maintained, 4 to be revised, 2 to
be deleted, and proposed that 5 new ones be added.
4
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
He highlighted Policy 1.26 that is being recommended for deletion, stating
that it is a policy that aims to promote mixed-use development within the County, but has
been overall, ineffective; hence staff's recommendation for deletion of this policy, and
that there be new policies established, which will be discussed under Objectives 5 and 18.
Looking at other existing policies being proposed for revision, Mr.
Freeman highlighted Policies 1.34 and 1.35. Both relate to the County's New Town
Policy that affects the agricultural areas of the County. The changes recommended are to
increase the density within New Town areas from 1 to 2 units per acre and also to limit
the overall number of New Towns that could be developed within the County. The last
change recommended is that New Towns be prohibited in the Agricultural -3 areas, which
is the westernmost portion of the County. He also highlighted other proposed changes to
Objective 1.
Objective 4: "Efficient Mix of Uses to Reduce Traffic Demand" (it is
anticipated staff will not achieve this objective): staff recommended a revision of the
objective's target date to 2030 and to target within 10% of 2005 levels for per capita trips
and minutes per trip. There are 4 existing policies in this Objective, and it is
recommended that 1 be maintained, 3 be revised, and the 3 new policies being proposed,
are to limit dead-end streets, increase inter -connections between adjacent developments
where appropriate, and to promote the use of traffic calming measures where necessary.
An increase in the construction of sidewalks, particularly in residential areas, was also
recommended.
Objective 5: "Diversity of Development" (it is anticipated that the County
will not achieve this Objective). Staff's recommendation: a revision of the objective's
target date to 2010 and to target within 25% of the County's housing units in either multi-
family or traditional neighborhood design projects. There are 8 existing policies in this
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
Objective; 5 are proposed to be maintained as structured, 3 to be revised, and 1 new
policy has been proposed. Mr. Freeman highlighted the revision to Policy 5.8 which
addresses agricultural planned developments, and presented staff's recommendation to
revise this Policy to establish a minimum common open space requirement of at least
50% for agricultural PDs.
Objective 6: "Agricultural Protection" (this Objective was achieved):
staff recommended a revision of the objective's target date to 2015 and to establish a
new target of 110,000 acres of active agricultural lands for the year 2015. There are five
policies in this Plan, three (3) of which are proposed to be maintained, two (2) to be
revised, and an addition of six (6) new policies are proposed. He described the proposed
new policies and staff's recommendation for each.
Objective 18: "Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND): staff
recommended a revision of the objective's target date to 2020 with 10% of target to be
maintained. It is not expected that this objective will be achieved. There are three (3)
policies in this Objective, two (2) are proposed to be maintained, and one (1) to be
revised, with a proposal to add one (1) new policy. He highlighted and described the
policies to be maintained, revised, and the new addition.
Objective 9: this is a new policy to expand some corridor standards
countywide, and to add a new policy that requires architectural design guidelines for
certain types of residential single-family development within planned development
projects. Another policy recommendation was to modify the buffer and open space
requirements for single-family residential developments.
Commissioner O'Bryan, commenting on Objective 1 (Compact Low -
Density Development) noted that our current density is 1.23 units per acre and the
31
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
recommendation was for 1.75 units per acre, and questioned how we would get there with
our current buffer requirements, and how we would come up with the extra density.
Director Keating explained that this objective is oriented towards
encouraging in -fill, and as long as we in -fill developments within the Urban Service Area
instead of sprawling it outside, we would get higher density inside, not high, but higher.
Commissioner O'Bryan presented his views on the following Policies and
Objectives:
(1) Commenting on the revised Policies 1.34 and 1.35, which recommended that
we double the density bonus from 1 -unit to 2 -units per acre, asked if the 2" d
unit per acre could be tied and only via a TDR (Transfer of Development
Rights) program. Under the new policy for industrial and commercial zoning,
he asked if we could, at some point, create a biotech zoning that would be
more appropriate for those types of spin-off businesses so that we can create a
node and know that certain businesses would not be in there.
(2) Objective 4, the inter -connections between adjacent neighborhoods, he knew
that from an EMS point of view it was desirable to have traffic flow from
neighborhood to neighborhood, and thought a lot of residents would be
opposed if their neighborhoods become a shortcut between two roads.
(3) Objective 5, "Diversity of Development," asked why not leave our current
target for TNDs at 30% and keep working hard to achieve it instead of
lowering the target.
7
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
(4) Objective 6, he thought the policy/concept for bio -fuel processing plants was
great and staff might want to limit that to AG -2 and AG -3 only and not have
the conflict.
(5) Under the Policy for construction of reservoirs, he asked if staff was talking
about above ground reservoirs with dykes or just talking about calling a
mining pit a reservoir. He saw a big difference and felt we needed to specify
if we are talking about above ground or ground water.
(6) Objective 18.3 , "Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND)", wanted to see
more definitions in it, because he thought the current wording "To facilitate
TND project east of I-95 the county shall allow portions of TND projects to be
located outside of the urban service area." needed to be clearly defined, as
"parcel and portions" were too vague. He said, looking at how Liberty Park
was done, where they took densities from the inside and transferred it to the
outside, he did not think that was good planning. He would rather see the
60% tied into as -built on site; so that 60% or more of the project density has to
be built inside the Urban Service Area (USA) and the less dense portions of
the TND are outside the USA.
Vice Chairman Davis, based on comments from Commissioner O'Bryan
regarding changes, asked for Director Keating's opinion, from a planning perspective,
because he did not know whether the Liberty Park project would have been able to stay in
those ramifications had that actually been a part of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
Director Keating, responding to comments regarding the Liberty Park and
the 60% inside the Urban Service Area, thought if it had been done with Liberty Park
they would have had a poor design, and they would have had some of the higher density
8
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
development on the east side of 66th Avenue split off from the rest of the project.
Regarding some of the other suggestions by Commissioner O'Bryan, Director Keating
felt they could be done.
Commissioner Wheeler also talked about Liberty Park's design within the
Urban Service Line (USL), as well as, expense of property in and outside the USL. With
the New Town changing from 1 to 2 units per acre, and to transfer that density into the
New Town, he asked how that would be done and the two units per acre would be
determined. He also talked about traffic calming and asked what some of the ideas to
create traffic calming were or what other traffic calming would be available. He
questioned how they would define 50% for Agricultural Planned Developments and what
that would include. Under Objective 6, he remarked that when looking at 8 lots of
affidavits of exemption rather than 19, he felt there would still be a demand for
ranchettes.
Chairman Bowden complimented staff on the wonderful job they have
done without a consultant.
The Chairman opened the floor to public discussion.
Peter Robinson, Laurel Homes, referred to comments from Commissioner
O' Bryan about eliminating the problems of dead-end streets, and believed that we need to
create a defensible neighborhood, and one of the main ingredients to a defensible
neighborhood was having dead-end streets. He alluded to crimes in neighborhoods
where people have many avenues of escape, and recommended that the County allow
people to live on cul-de-sacs and to allow people to have a protection for themselves.
6
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
Regarding the Affidavit of 8 versus 19 exemptions, Mr. Robinson said the original 19
came about because it was determined that that was right under two hundred (200) trips
and these were on dirt roads. He believed that when we go to paved roads we kill the
ranchettes economically. He thought we should focus on the issues of foreclosed homes,
and vacant lots if we are going to do an evaluation, and that now was the time to look at
our statistics and land use.
Commissioner Wheeler said he was one of the proponents to keep the 19
units affidavit of exemption versus 8 and spoke about people living on dirt roads who
want the County or taxpayers to pick up additional cost or maintain those roads, which
was a concern of his. Discussion ensued with Mr. Robinson regarding people living on
private roads and whose responsibility it was to maintain those roads.
There were no other speakers and the Chairman closed the public input
session.
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
Phil Matson of the Indian River County Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO), through a PowerPoint presentation, outlined the objectives and
goals of the Transportation Element, specifically Objectives 1, 2 and 9. He pointed out
that they have achieved ten (10) of their thirteen (13) objectives; one was not achieved,
and two were not yet due.
(Clerk's Note: Vice Chairman Davis exited the meeting at 2:35p.m.)
10
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
Mr. Matson disclosed that 57 of the 61 Policies in this Element were
implemented, and they were recommending maintenance of most of these policies.
However, they are recommending that sixteen (16) policies be revised and ten (10) be
deleted. Mr. Matson further updated the Board on the following objectives:
Objective 1: "Adequate Transportation System", Mr. Matson
acknowledged that there are no existing roadway capacity deficiencies within the County.
He noted that this objective has been achieved; recommended retaining this objective;
and outlined the achievements pertaining to levels of service. Policy revision
recommendations were: (1) review of impact fees every 3 years (not 2); and (2) impose
all or part of the EMS Gas Tax by 2010.
Objective 2: "Safety", Mr. Matson stated that this has not been achieved,
but pointed out that the high relative crash -rate intersections would be less than the five
that we had in 2001. Policy additions to this Objective were bike/pedestrian safety
strategies, ITS, and engineering for an aging population.
Objective 9: "Adequate Transit Service", Mr. Matson said between 2001
and 2006 the number of one-way passenger trips will increase annually by an average of
10%, from 167,000 to more than 270,000, and they have exceeded their highest
expectations on this Objective. He described the advantages of bus level of service
while comparing our current level of bus service, and recommended that the Objective
should be changed to measure transit level of service indicators, including headways,
hours of operation, and serving TD populations. New Policies under this Objective
would include bus stop provision, city contributions, ITS (arrival Notification: Signal
pre-emption, etc.). Two new Objectives would be system maintenance and preservation,
and airport access, which are required by Rule 9J-5. They are looking to tighten up their
policies on right-of-way acquisition/eminent domain, among others.
11
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
Objective 10: "Land Use", staff would look at the jobs housing balance
issue. He then invited questions.
Commissioner O'Bryan, commenting on the TDMs, said he has had people
asking if we could set up some parking rides out at I-95, SR 60, and CR 510.
Chairman Bowden invited comments from the public.
Peter Robinson, Laurel Homes, had questions regarding changing eminent
domain (under Objective 9), and wanted to know what exactly had staff planned to do.
Attorney Collins explained how the process may be handled; mentioned
laws to be followed; and cautioned against codifying procedures that needed some
flexibility.
Mr. Robinson thought it was interesting, that in the first Land
Development Report it was mentioned how trips are lengthened and people are taking
longer trips, but in this Report it is mentioned that people are not driving as much, and we
are not getting as much gas tax. He felt one of the weaknesses we have still today is we
work with national standards. He also felt we needed to determine more about trips and
what people are taking as trips, because we live a different lifestyle than many other
areas. On the issue of traffic calming, he felt we needed to watch what we are doing,
whether we were calming traffic or building congestion.
12
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
CONSERVATIONELEMENT
Roland DeBlois, Chief of Environmental Planning, provided a summary of
the major issues, which included protection, improvement of water quality in the Indian
River Lagoon and St. Sebastian River, protection of ground water quality and quantity,
sustainability of natural systems, conservation of wildlife corridors / greenways, and
management of conservation lands. He noted that there are twelve (12) Objectives in this
Element, nine (9) of which have been achieved and three (3) were partially achieved.
Under Policies implementation, eighty-three (83) policies were implemented and nine (9)
were not.
Chief DeBlois pointed out that the Committee for a Sustainable Treasure
Coast had their own recommendations, and staff was looking to adopt a policy to adopt
some of those recommendations through that regional Committee, particularly related to
various tools to conserve natural resources in the County. He thereafter presented staff's
proposal for revised /new policies —commercial and miscellaneous uses.
Commissioner O'Bryan commenting on Objective 2 (surface water
quality) and talk about a regular maintenance program for the onsite disposal systems,
basically septic tanks, repeated the old adage, "if it's not broken, don't fix it", because he
thought going into some regular required "pump out thing" might just be a cost to
homeowners that is not justified. He felt we needed to make sure that a regular
maintenance system is something that is doing good, not just creating additional cost to
homeowners.
Under new policies, funding for hiring an additional management staff,
Commissioner O'Bryan thought this was one year we have been very lacking in funding
the maintenance and management of our conservation lands, and we needed to come up
with a more dedicated funding source, so we have the manpower and the tools to
13
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
maintain these lands, to improve our conservation land management program, and to
eliminate using it for mitigation.
Commissioner Wheeler agreed with Commissioner O'Bryan, but
questioned if there has been a problem in this County with septic systems. Chief DeBlois
said there has been a kind of regional concern about it, as far as documented failure and
pollution from it, but was not aware of any particular problem areas. He promised to
look into the matter.
Chairman Bowden did not think there was a problem with septic tanks and
was not aware of any. She talked about the maintenance plan and programs of the
conservation lands and wanted to make sure that, particularly, Lost Tree Islands do not
turn into Disney World, meaning, they should not put villages there, but put the
minimum, so people can see, years from now, what natural life and habitat exist there.
Peter Robinson reiterated comments about septic tanks, pointing out that
there were areas where septic tanks do not work, and it was not really an issue.
COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
Roland DeBlois, Chief of Environmental Planning, explained that under the
State requirements, coastal counties are required to have a Coastal Management Element,
and in Indian River County (where it applies) the coastal zone was based on the Indian
River Lagoon watershed, which actually covers about half of the County. This Element
overlaps with other Elements of the Plan, and particular focus was on coastal/marine
resources protection, manatee protection, public access to coastal resources, limit on
expenditures, and natural disaster planning. He presented a comparison from 1988 to
14
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
present, outlining the progress made, the objectives and policies fulfilled and
implemented, the objectives for beaches and dunes, and the proposed new/revised
policies for public access and miscellaneous.
Chief DeBlois noted that in this Element, there are fourteen (14) objectives,
twelve (12) of which were achieved, and two (2) were not achieved. There were ninety-
three (93) policies implemented, and seven (7) were not implemented. He focused on
particular objectives, like beaches and dunes, and public access. He mentioned that a
good portion of this Plan reflects policies and objectives that were adopted in the
Manatee Protection and Boating Safety Comprehensive Management Plan.
Under Objective 4, Dunes and Beaches, there is an objective to conserve
natural functions of beach and dune systems, and staff's position is that this has
essentially been achieved with the implementation of the beach preservation plan, which
includes the sea turtle habitat plan. Staff is looking at a new revised policy, to evaluate
the current location of the County's dune stabilization setback line westward; and the
State is exploring adopting a Florida Beaches Habitat Conservation Plan so that after
natural disasters there would be a plan in place to deal with endangered species issues.
Chief DeBlois stated that it has been proposed to require oceanfront development to hook
up public sewer where available, and staff is proposing that the County require new
developments to hook up to sewer if it is within a certain distance from existing lines
where available.
Under Objective 8, Public Access, Chief DeBlois stated that we have an
objective to, by 2010, increase public access by at least five access points in the County
to natural resources, and we have achieved this over the past 10 years. Under new
Policies, staff is looking at revisions to boat access and ramps, to establish a policy for
the County to seek funds to construct a boat ramp at the Gifford dock road. Staff is also
15
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
looking at setting a specific timeframe for access improvements at the Captain Forrester
Hammock Preserve, and to seek funding for the Archie Smith Fish House under the
working waterfront program. The Marine Advisory Committee has recommended that
we establish a policy with formal procedures on marine debris or derelict vessel removal
procedures, including procedures to secure funding (e.g. FEMA)
There were no questions or comments from Commissioners or members of
the public.
POTABLE WATER SUB -ELEMENT
Sasan Rohani, County's Long Range Planning Chief, outlined conditions
for potable water from 1995-2006. He discussed design capacity, projected demand,
policies implementation, new policies, objectives achievement, PW -sub -element
objectives, water conservation, alternative water supply, brine disposal, and new policies
under new Objective 9. Mr. Rohani disclosed that the capacity and demand of the
County's Plants increased from 9.5 MGD to 12.07 and from 4.4 to 9.7 MGD
respectively; and the number of private plants decreased from 29 to 3; the number of
customers increased and they are providing more water to more of the subdivisions with
undersized lots; the service area expanded; and they noticed that per capita water usage
increased, which reasons he explained.
This Element has 7 Objectives, six (6) of which were achieved, and one
was not achieved. The seven objectives are to be revised, and two new ones are to be
added. There are 38 policies in the Element, 37 of which were implemented and one not
implemented (Policy 4.7). It is proposed that 36 policies be maintained; two policies be
revised, and 11 new ones to be added. Staff recommended a new Objective, that by 2018
16
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
at least 18 MGD of the demand comes from another source besides the Florida Aquifer;
and to do that staff is recommending policies (under objective 8) that by 2010 the
Utilities Department has to identify a viable alternative source; by 2012 obtain all
necessary permits; by 2013 complete all construction plans; and to be built by 2015.
Under Objective 9, Brine Disposal, the recommended new policy is that by
2015 all reverse osmosis water treatment plant direct brine discharges into the Indian
River Lagoon or into connecting tributaries to the Lagoon will be eliminated.
Mike Hotchkiss responded to questions from Attorney Collins who was
curious about comments regarding brine discharge, deep well or marshes, as well as,
ocean outfall, and whether there that was where the salt is; and whether that would work
or not.
Commissioner O'Bryan, commenting on the new objectives for alternative
water supply and brine disposal, thought the proposed timelines were quite aggressive,
and needed to be approached more slowly.
There was no public input.
HOUSING ELEMENT
Sasan Rohani, Long Range Chief, provided background on this Element,
which include the IRC 2005 cost burden, changes between 2000 to 2006 in median
housing cost and income, workforce housing issues, housing affordable ratings, current
AH strategies, housing price changes balancing ACT, new housing strategies, housing
17
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
programs (assisted units), policies implementation, objectives and achievements, and mix
of dwelling unit types.
Under this Element there are ten (10) objectives, seven (7) of which have
been achieved, two (2) partially achieved and one (1) was not achieved. Staff is
recommending that nine (9) objectives be revised and one (1) be maintained. There are
51 Policies, with 46 implemented, 1 partially implemented and 4 not implemented. Staff
is also recommending that 42 policies be maintained, 7 be revised, 2 be deleted and 11
new policies be added. Mr. Rohani then presented a summary of Objective 1 and
explained why it was not achieved.
Commissioner O'Bryan, commenting on Objective 1, where the target was
not met for owner occupied, and renters were paying less than the 30%, thought that
instead of changing those percentages and lowering the bar, they could be looking at
ways of how we could achieve those existing numbers. He felt it was our job not to just
lower the bar but to find solutions. He recommended that we find a way to hit those
original targets and get those numbers down.
There was no public input.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
Bill Schutt, Senior Planner, through a PowerPoint presentation, described
the economic development conditions from 1995 to 2007. He explained what those
conditions mean to the County, and described County target industries and incentives, as
well as how the local incentives worked. Besides incentives, there are plans to develop
the areas as a research coast (Research Coast Initiative). He reviewed the Element's
18
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
objectives and policies, policies implemented, the seven objectives for economic
development, and presented recommended new policies and policy changes.
Mr. Schutt stated that from 1995 to 2007 the unemployment rate within the
County has decreased from 9.7% to 5.5%, most recently due to the housing boom.
During said timeframe, median household income and per capita income increased, but
low wages remained, reflecting on the predominance of the service industries. Citrus
acreage also decreased from 66,561 to 40,191; the number of citrus packing housing
decreased from 20 to 12; and the number of hotels decreased from 44 to 31. He said the
County has program incentives to attract target industries, and have used incentives to
retain Piper Aircraft and nine other companies. There is also an initiative to develop the
area as a research coast to attract/create life -signs and biotech and other similar
industries, which include the Treasure Coast Counties, the Workforce Development
Board of the Treasure Coast, and Okeechobee County, as well.
Under this Element, 4 objectives were achieved, 1 was anticipated to be
achieved by target date, 1 was not achieved, and 1 is measurable. It is recommended that
seven (7) objectives be revised and 1 new objective be added. There are 43 Policies to be
maintained and six to be revised. It is recommended that 28 policies be maintained, 14
be revised, 7 be deleted, and 5 new ones be added.
Mr. Schutt elaborated on Objective 2, Diversified Economic Growth,
which is anticipated to be achieved, and recommended that the target date range be
revised to 2010 and 2015 and to target an increase of 1,000 jobs. Under Objective 4,
Encourage Economic Development, which has been achieved, he recommended that it be
revised to include a target date of 2015 and a target of having at least two additional
industrial/ business/tech; and Parks with sufficient land and infrastructure to
accommodate new or expanding businesses.
19
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
Staff's recommendations for new Policies and Policy Changes are to refine
the target industry list, facilitate the development of large lot business/technology parks,
and increase the County's average annual wage target to be more consistent with the
State's.
Commissioner O'Bryan, on the idea of a research coast, liked the idea of
having a biotech zoning; believed it gives credibility and could be used for marketing;
and was something to consider.
Director Keating, in response to Commissioner O'Bryan's inquiry, said one
of the proposed policy initiatives in this Element was to address the allowance of taller
and bigger buildings, so at this point it was not specific and delineated; it would be
"flushed out" next year when the Comprehensive Plan is amended.
There was no public input.
4. WRAP UP AND DIRECTION TO STAFF
Director Keating, in conclusion, announced that it would not be necessary
to have the second Workshop that was scheduled for Thursday, because all the Elements
were covered at this Session. He noted that staff has to have this Report delivered to the
Department of Community Affairs by December 1, 2008, and consequently staff has
scheduled the EAR Adoption Hearing to be held at the Board's regular Meeting of
November 18, 2008.
20
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
n
n
Commissioner Flescher expressed appreciation for the time, effort, and
consideration given to this issue.
Director Keating, at the request of Commissioner Flescher, reminded
everyone that information on this issue was available on the County's website, and to
provide input, individuals could call the Office of Community Development, write or e-
mail comments via the County's website.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business the Chairman declared the Workshop
adjourned at 3:52 p.m.
ATTEST:
Je . Barton, Clerk
Minutes Approved:
October 20, 2008
Public Workshop
JAN 13 2009
Wesley S. Davis, Vice airman
For: Sandra L. Bowden, Chairman
21
8 136 PG 024