Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/03/2006 (2) INDEX TO MINUTES OF PUBLIC WORKSHOP OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MARCH 3, 2006 PROPOSED NEW TOWN POLICIES 1.CALL TO ORDER........................................................................................ 1 2.INVOCATION ............................................................................................... 1 3.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE...................................................................... 2 4.COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ............................................................. 2 5.QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS ........... 3 6.PUBLIC COMMENTS................................................................................. 3 7.ADJOURNMENT ......................................................................................... 7 March 3, 2006 1 Public Workshop Proposed New Town Policies March 3, 2006 PUBLIC WORKSHOP OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSED NEW TOWN POLICIES The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, met in th Special Session at the County Commission Chambers, 1840 25 Street, Vero Beach, Florida, on Tuesday, March 3, 2006, at 2:00 p.m. to discuss proposed New Town Policies. Present were Chairman Arthur R. Neuberger, Vice Chairman Gary C. Wheeler, and Commissioners Sandra L. Bowden, Wesley S. Davis and Thomas S. Lowther. Also present were County Administrator Joseph Baird, County Attorney William G. Collins II, Executive Aide to the Board Kimberly Massung, and Deputy Clerk Maria I. Suesz. 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Arthur R. Neuberger called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. 2. INVOCATION Planning Director Stan Boling delivered the Invocation. March 3, 2006 1 Public Workshop Proposed New Town Policies 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Gary C. Wheeler led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Director Stan Boling was looking for direction whether the Board wants to move forward with the Comprehensive Plan amendments submitted to the Department of Community Affairs in staff’s 2006 January submission, or whether the Board wants to delay the process. The Comprehensive Plan amendments are needed to change the New Town Policies allowing development of “new towns” outside the urban service area only` under certain conditions. He reviewed the possibilities of how a “new town” can occur in the urban service area and the benefits, and pointed out how a “new town” can create a small town atmosphere. Mr. Boling referred to page 5 of the backup and reviewed the summary of changes submitted to DCA as follows: 1.Minimum project sizes are increased to reflect currently accepted planning standards for minimum “new town” sizes (must accommodate about 5,000 dwelling units and commercial, recreation, and institutional uses.) 2.Potential new locations are related to the size and location of specific AG-1 and AG-2 areas. Current separation distance criteria are eliminated. “New towns” are eliminated from AG-3 areas. 3.Density bonuses are related to AG-1 and AG-2 land use designations. A higher bonus is proposed for the higher density AG-1 areas; a lower bonus is proposed for the AG-2 areas. 4.Maximum acreages for lands used for new towns are established, and are related to AG-1 and AG-2 areas based on their size and potential for new town locations. 5.The maximum number of potential units from new towns is significantly reduced. March 3, 2006 2 Public Workshop Proposed New Town Policies 6.Up to 25% of new town project area is allowed to be non-contiguous “sending areas”. Such sending areas will have zero density and will become managed green space. 7.Required percentages of various land uses within new towns, and requirements for affordable and/or workforce housing, are modified to reflect currently accepted planning standards. 8.Requirements for common open space and greenbelt areas are increased and provided with more specificity to reflect currently accepted planning standards. 5. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Commissioner Bowden said the Board needed to hear the total ramifications of having a “new town.” Staff responded to Commissioner Wheeler’s questions regarding the location for new towns, benefits of having Agriculture Planned Developments (Ag PDs), and density. Discussion ensued by the Commissioners regarding the need for flexibility on policies for Ag PDs. 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS George Hamner, member of the Planning and Zoning Commission,spoke in favor of the “new town” concept. He, too, wanted to hear the overall advantages of a “new town”. He felt terms needed to be defined. He was particularly concerned how much space is allocated for commercial services. He liked the idea of all development occurring together, but he thought it needs more review. Joseph Paladin , as a member of the Conservation and Rural Lands Committee, handed out a brief statement defining the overall purpose and objectives of his Committee (copy on file). Also as a member of the Growth Awareness Committee, he mentioned that they want March 3, 2006 3 Public Workshop Proposed New Town Policies the Board to identify the specific areas for development, green space, etc. so the Committee can review the specifications before action is taken. Peter O’Brien , a County resident since 1984, expressed several concerns about the potential of “new town” concept changing the quality of life in Indian River County. He strongly opposed increasing density. He proposed that the existing density could be maintained by eliminating the 25% green space requirement and letting the developer build out units to the maximum protecting the land from future changes. Commissioner Davis wanted to see a policy that would keep the homeowners association fees affordable. George Christopher, member of the Planning and Zoning Commission,said he and Jeff Bass want to form a committee composed of 50% percent landowners and fifty percent of diverse interested parties in the community to develop a master plan to serve the “new town”. This plan would be viable to landowners and projected on population growth. The committee would hire a national planner to develop the plan. He asked the County to fund the cost for the consultant and the Board to table this item for consideration and review. Jeff Bass emphasized his vision of having a land management plan. Mr. Hamner also encouraged the Board to table this item. Attorney Collins advised that the Board couldn’t take action at a workshop. In response to Commissioner Davis’s question regarding the significance of the open window with the Department of Community Affairs, staff stated that they intend to take th other amendments to the DCA on March 15and they would have no problem putting this off until next January. Commissioner Wheeler was in favor of delaying this item. March 3, 2006 4 Public Workshop Proposed New Town Policies Mr. Christopher Discussion ensued between the Commissioners and regarding Mr. Christopher funding and who would select the consultant. mentioned that the Citrus League offered to provide the funding. Doug Bournique, Indian River Citrus League, supported their idea. John Higgs , 2504 Waxmyrtle Way, thought this to be a worthwhile proposal, but he saw many problems. (Clerk’s note: The Chairman called for a brief recess at 3:29 p.m. and he reconvened the meeting at 3:40 p.m. with all members present.) Dr. Richard Baker, , President of the Audubon Societygave aPowerPoint presentation (copy on file) asking the Board to table this issue. He wants the Board to approach new growth in the direction the Committee for Sustainable Treasure Coast (CSTC) recommended for planning a new town concept, as listed: 1.Not to hurry unless they do it right, 2.Need a diverse committee to plan with the help of a facilitator, 3.Need an anchor college or industry, 4.Must be big enough to support a Wal-Mart. Chuck Mechling, President of Pointe West, said they are planning a town center area and he felt their plan is a component that the Board could use. Peter Spike, representing the CSTC, said his committee spent two years studying the “new town” concept and their report will be available in two weeks. He advised that the items in the report should be incorporated into the process of adopting Comprehensive Plan amendments. It deals with consequences to the rural land use pattern. The plan has to address the following three criteria: have a way to transfer development rights, combine future agriculture revenue, and be greater than the land preservation. March 3, 2006 5 Public Workshop Proposed New Town Policies There was a question and answer period regarding Mr. Spikes comments. Anthony Donadio , President of the Indian River County Chamber of Commerce, read Executive Director of the Chamber of Commerce Penny Chandler’s letter (copy on file) supporting preserving and refining the new town concept recognizing the public benefits associated with adequate infrastructure, natural habitat, agriculture, and public assurances of open space in perpetuity. Greg Burk represented members of the American Institute of Architects, and he strongly recommended that they put an architect on the committee in order to consider design as an important part. He brought with him a book titled “Livability 101” that addresses quality of life and recommended the Commissioners read it. th Nancy Offutt announced that on March 7 St. Lucie County is having a workshop on town villages and countryside. th Lex Kromhout, 4150 11 Place SW, a citrus grower, recommended that the Board work on the problem of clusters in the LDRs. He urged the Board to read the report from the Sustainable Treasure Coast, and consider Ag PDs as Commissioner Davis suggested. Bob Swift , 6400 Glendale Road, defined sustainability as looking at three factors: social equity, economic ability and environmental protection, and all of the issues talked about would be addressed. In doing some research, he was surprised he was listed in opposition to “new towns” at a previous meeting and he assured the Board there was nothing farther from the truth. He thought what Mr. Bass and Mr. Christopher laid out a great idea and he hoped the Board would embrace it and he certainly would support it. Bea Gardner felt there was no reason to rush a decision and asked the Board to take a year or two to review. The Chairman stated that was exactly what they are doing by holding this public hearing. March 3, 2006 6 Public Workshop Proposed New Town Policies Ruth Myers , Director of Resource Development for Sustainability of the Audubon Society, read sections of the CSTC’s report and hoped the Board would take advantage of every opportunity to support the process of alternative action fully. Joseph Paladin asked what direction the Board would take if they do not adopt Mr. Christopher’s offer to form a committee. Discussion continued among the Commissioners and all agreed they wanted to review this issue further. The Chairman recommended George Christopher and Jeff Bass form their committee as a private sector group. He felt the speakers today would be good as representatives. He stated they are not rushing to take action, and perhaps in three or four years they may get this issue resolved. Administrator Joseph Baird asked for a list of names of members on the committee and suggested Director Keating and Director Boling attend to give the Board guidance. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, on Motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Board adjourned at 4:41 p.m. ALL BACKUP DOCUMENTATION, RESOLUTIONS, AND ORDINANCES ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AND ARE HEREBY MADE A PART OF THESE MINUTES March 3, 2006 7 Public Workshop Proposed New Town Policies ATTEST: _________________________________ ________________________________ Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk Arthur R. Neuberger, Chairman Minutes Approved: _________________ BCC/MIS/2006Minutes March 3, 2006 8 Public Workshop Proposed New Town Policies