HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-252A (08)Indian River County
2030 Comprehensive Plan
A . . Ml
Indian River County Community Development Department
Adopted: October 12, 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
DEFINITIONS
PAGE
1
EXISTING CONDITIONS
3
• Historical Trends in Housing Development
3
• Housing Production
4
• Estimates of Housing Type, Tenure and Occupancy
4
•Age of Housing
8
•County Regulations and Programs
10
•SHIP and HHR Programs
12
ANALYSIS OF HOUSING CONDITIONS
18
•Housing Affordability
18
•Projected Housing Needs
24
•Special Housing Needs
25
•Substandard Housing Conditions
27
•Over -Crowded Conditions
28
•Infrastructure and Community Development Characteristics
28
•Homeownership
29
•Historically Significant Housing
33
•Group Homes
35
-Public and Private Coordination
37
-Land Requirements to Accommodate Future Housing Needs 39
Housing Strategy Analysis
Community Land Trust
Private/Public Housing Trust Fund
Community Development Corporation (CDC)
Employer Assisted Housing
New Construction Technologies
GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
EVALUATION & MONITORING PROCEDURES
41
43
44
45
46
47
57
60
LIST OF TABLES
PAGE
TABLE 7.1
Trends In Housing Unit, Tenure/Occupancy 1960-2005 Indian River County
3
TABLE 7.2
Residential Building Permits Indian River County 2000-2005
4
and 2000 - 2008
TABLE 7.3
Occupancy, Tenure, Type of Housing Indian River County 1990, 2000 and 2005
5
TABLE 7.4
Inventory of Mobile Home Developments, Unincorporated Indian River County
7
TABLE 7.5
Age of Year -Round Housing Units - 2005 Indian River County
10
TABLE 7.6
SHIP Program Summary
14
TABLE 7.7
HHR Program Summary
14
TABLE 7.8
Subsidized Housing Projects — Unincorporated Indian River County
15
TABLE 7.9
Subsidized Housing Projects in Municipalities Within Indian River County
16
TABLE 7.10
Housing Affordability Ratings
20
TABLE 7.11
Indian River County Housing Affordability Ratings
21
TABLE 7.12
Indian River County 2005 Cost Burden (Owner and Renter)
23
TABLE 7.13
Indian River County 2005 Cost Burden by Income Group
24
TABLE 7.14
Housing Need - Indian River County
25
TABLE 7.15
Percentage of Elderly Head of Households — Indian River County
26
TABLE 7.16
Projected Number For Housing For Elderly (65+)
26
(41% of Total Housing Units)
TABLE 7.17
Projected Number for Low -Income Disabled Households (10% of Total Housing
27
Units)
TABLE 7.18
Foreclosure Activities — July 2008
30
TABLE 7.19
Group Homes in Unincorporated Indian River County 2005
36
TABLE 7.20
Number of Group Home Beds Needed - Unincorporated Indian River County
36
TABLE 7.21
Land Requirements to Meet Future Housing Needs — Indian River County 2005-2030
39
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
PAGE
TABLE 7.22 Housing Element Implementation Matrix 58
TABLE 7.23 Housing Element Evaluation Matrix 62
List of Figures
FIGURES
PAGE
7.1 Major Residential Areas (2007) 6
7.2 Mobile Home Parks & Developments 9
7.3 Subsidized Housing in Unincorporated Indian River County
7.4 Housing Conditions, Major Concentrations of Substandard
Housing in Indian River County
17
32
7.5 Historic Housing in Indian River County 34
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
INTRODUCTION
Along with water, sewer, roads, bridges, and schools, housing is an important component of a
community's infrastructure. As such, local governments have a responsibility to ensure that the
housing system meets the needs of its residents.
Unlike most infrastructure components, however, housing is provided primarily by the private
sector. Even though the private sector constructs most housing units, local governments have a
responsibility to ensure that the local housing market functions effectively and that the housing
needs of the community are met. By so doing, local governments can enhance economic
development and maintain quality of life.
In 1968, the federal government established the national housing goal of "a decent home and a
suitable living environment for every American family". Since then, that goal has been the guiding
force for local government housing policy.
DEFINITIONS
The following definitions are provided for terms used in the housing element.
Affordable Housing - Housing occupied by a household paying not more than 30% of its gross
income for housing cost. Such cost for owner -occupied housing includes mortgage principal,
interest, taxes, and insurance. Housing cost for renter -occupied housing includes contract rent.
Affordable Housing Dwelling Unit
A housing unit that has a market value less than:
two and a half times the county's annual median household income; or
A housing unit that has a monthly rent less than:
one twelfth (1/12) times 30% of 80% of the county's annual median household income
Affordable Housing Project - A project that contains at least 60% affordable housing dwelling
units.
Household - All persons, collectively, who occupy a housing unit as their usual place of residence.
Median - A value in an ordered set of values, below and above which there is an equal number of
values.
Municipalities - This term includes the following incorporated places within Indian River County:
1
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
City of Vero Beach, City of Sebastian, City of Fellsmere, Town of Indian River Shores, and Town of
Orchid.
Unincorporated County - The entire geographic area of Indian River County, except for
municipalities.
Indian River County; County; or Countywide Area - Combined geographic areas of
municipalities and unincorporated county.
Seasonal and Migratory Units - Housing units occupied only during certain seasons of the year or
held for occupancy by migratory workers employed in farm work during the crop season.
Substandard Housing - A housing unit which has one or more of the following characteristics: (1)
lacks complete plumbing facilities; or (2) lacks any heating facilities; or (3) has sufficient structural
damage that it does not meet minimum housing code requirements.
Tenure — The occupancy characteristic of a housing unit. A housing unit is either owner -occupied
or renter -occupied. A housing unit is owner -occupied if the owner or co-owner lives in the unit even
if it is mortgaged or not fully paid for. All other occupied units are classified as "renter -occupied",
including units rented for cash and those occupied without payment of cash rent.
Vacant - A housing unit that no one lives in, unless the occupants are only temporarily absent. New
units not yet occupied are counted as a dwelling but considered vacant when windows and doors are
in place, finish floors are laid, and the building exterior is weatherproof.
Year-round Units - Housing units available or intended for occupancy at any time of the year. A
unit in a resort area occupied either on a year-round basis or occasionally throughout the year is also
considered as year-round.
2
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
EXISTING CONDITIONS
• Historical Trends in Housing Development
Prior to 1960, fewer than 10,000 residences existed in Indian River County. Of that number, more
than half had been built in the decade from 1950 to 1960. As shown in Table 7.1, the county's
housing stock increased from 9,703 units in 1960 to 73,798 units in 2005. These figures were
derived from the decennial censuses conducted in 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000, as well as a
2005 county planning department estimate.
TABLE 7.1
TRENDS IN HOUSING UNIT, TENURE/OCCUPANCY 1960-2005
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Source: 1990 Decennial Census * Planning Department estimates
In 2000, 3 7.3 1 % of all housing units were located within the municipalities of Indian River County.
At that time, approximately 66% of all housing units were owner -occupied, approximately 19%
were renter -occupied, and the remaining units were reported as vacant. Overall, the percentage of
owner -occupied units versus renter -occupied units is comparable for the municipalities and the
unincorporated county.
Community Development Department Indian River County
YEAR ROUND
UNITS
Year
Total
Vacant
Total Year
Owner
% of Year
Renter
% of Year
Non-
% of Year
Housing
Seasonal &
Round
Occupied
Round
Occupied
Round
seasonal
Round
Units
Migratory
Housing
Housing
Housing
Vacant
Housing
Units
Units
Units
Units
Units
1960
9,703
749
8,954
5,890
65.8
2,357
26.3
707
7.9
1970
14,008
328
13,680
8,973
65.6
3304
24.2
1,379
10.2
1980
29,417
1,094
28,323
17,582
62.1
5,749
20.3
4,992
17.6
1990
47,128
4,749
42,379
28,561
67.4
9,496
22.4
4,322
10.2
2000
57,902
5,293
52,609
38,115
65.82
11,022
19.03
3,472
6.5
2005*
73,798
6,745
67,053
48,707
66.00
14,022
19.00
4,324
6.4
Source: 1990 Decennial Census * Planning Department estimates
In 2000, 3 7.3 1 % of all housing units were located within the municipalities of Indian River County.
At that time, approximately 66% of all housing units were owner -occupied, approximately 19%
were renter -occupied, and the remaining units were reported as vacant. Overall, the percentage of
owner -occupied units versus renter -occupied units is comparable for the municipalities and the
unincorporated county.
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
• Housing Production
From 2000 to 2005, the number of housing units in the county increased from 57,902 units to 73,798
units, an increase of 27.45%. In that same period, the number of housing units in the unincorporated
county increased from 36,298 units to 48,188 units, an increase of 32.75%. Between April 1, 2000
and December 31, 2008, 20,789 residential building permits were issued within the entire county.
Table 7.2 shows residential building permit activity within the county.
As shown in Table 7.2, single-family housing construction has increased much faster than multi-
family housing and mobile homes. While single-family units comprised 63% of all housing units in
2000, they totaled 81% of all residential building permits issued between 2000 and 2008. During
that same period, mobile homes constituted only 2% of residential building permits.
TABLE 7.2
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
2000-2005 and 2000-2008
Total Residential Units and
Permits
Total Housing Units
Census 2000
(April 1, 2000)
April 1, 2000 to
December 31, 2005
Residential Permits
April 1, 2000 to
December 31, 2008
Residential Permits
Single -Family Units
36,240
12,398
16,930
Multi-FamilyUnits
14,792
3,1751
3,503
Mobile Homes
6,870
323
356
Total Residential Building
Permits Issued since April 1, 2000
N/A
15,896
20,789
Total 2005 units = 2000 units plus residential building permits issued since April 1, 2000 = 73,798
Total 2008 units = 2000 units plus residential building permits issued since April 1, 2000 = 78,691
• Estimates of Housing Type, Tenure and Occupancy
Table 7.3 provides information on housing type, tenure and occupancy for 1990, 2000 and 2005.
In 2005, there were 73,798 housing units in the county. Of those units, 48,188 (65.29%) were
located in the unincorporated county, while 25,610 units (34.70%) were located in the
municipalities. Countywide in 2005, there were 48,638 (65.90%) single-family units; 17,967
(24.34%) multi -family units, and 7,193 (9.74%) mobile homes. In that same year, 48,707 (66%)
housing units were owner occupied units; 14,022 (19%) were renter occupied units, and the
remaining 11,069 (15%) were vacant (vacant for sale, rent, seasonal, others).
4
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
TABLE 7.3
OCCUPANCY, TENURE, TYPE OF HOUSING
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
1990, 2000 and 2005
Source: 1990 Census, University of Florida estimates, Planning Department estimates
O Total Housing Units
As indicated in Table 7.2, the total number of housing units in the county increased by the 15,896
(27.45%) during the period 2000-2005. Of the 15,896 new housing units, 11,890 units were located
in the unincorporated county, while 4,006 were located in municipalities. Figure 7.1 shows location
of the major residential areas within the county.
5
Community Development Department Indian River County
1990
%
2000
%
2005
POPULATION
90,208
100
112,947
100
130,041
100
Housing Units (Total)
47,128
100
57,902
100
73,798
100
Municipalities
17,768
37.70
21,604
37.31
5,610
34.70
b. Unincorporated
29,360
62.30
36,298
62.18
8,188
65.29
county
Housing Type
Single -Family
27,305
57.93
36,240
62.58
48,638
65.90
Multi -Family
13,019
27.63
14,792
25.54
17,967
24.35
Mobile Home
6,804
14.43
6,870
11.86
17,193
9.75
Housing Tenure
1. Total Year -Round
38,057
80.75
49,137
84.85
62,729
85.00
Occupied Units
a. Owner occupied
28,561
38,115
8,707
b. % of total occ. units
75.04
65.82
66.00
c. Renter occupied
9,496
11,022
14,022
d. % of total occ. units
24.95
19.03
19.00
2. Total Vacant Units
9,071
19.24
8,765
15.13
11,069
15.00
Household Size (persons per
.37
D
2.25
2.25
11
household)
Source: 1990 Census, University of Florida estimates, Planning Department estimates
O Total Housing Units
As indicated in Table 7.2, the total number of housing units in the county increased by the 15,896
(27.45%) during the period 2000-2005. Of the 15,896 new housing units, 11,890 units were located
in the unincorporated county, while 4,006 were located in municipalities. Figure 7.1 shows location
of the major residential areas within the county.
5
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
1. Vero Reach Highlands
2, Osla Park
3. Dixie Hgights
4. Garden Grove
S. Grove isle
6. The Moorings
7. Vista Royale
& Vista Gardens
S. Whispering Palms
10. Pine Tree Park
Major Residential Areas
11. Vista Plantations
12. Indian River Estates
13. Paradise Park
14, Victory Park
15. Vera Lake Estates
16. Sebastian Highlands
17. Reifections
1R. Pelican Point
19. Windsor
20. Sea Oaks
21. Castaway Cove
31. Tripsnn Trail
22. Johns Island
32. Echo Lake
23, Grand Harbor
33. Maderia Isle
24. Indian River Club
34, Trillium
25. Indian River Apt,
35, Woodfield
26. Stonebridge
36. Waterway Village
27. The Laurels
28. Rent Pines
29. Falcon Trace
31i. Millstone banding
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
O Types of Units
Table 7.3 identifies vacant units, as well as the three types of year-round housing units, in the county
for 1990, 2000 and 2005. In 2005, single-family homes comprised 65.90% of all year-round
housing units within Indian River County; multi -family homes comprised 24.35%, and mobile
homes comprised 9.75%.
In 2005, 7,193 mobile homes were utilized as year-round dwelling units in the county. At that time,
more than 90% of all mobile homes were located in the unincorporated county. A significant
number of these mobile homes are located in 8 mobile home parks along S.R. 60, east of I-95.
While figure 7.2 shows the location of mobile home developments in the county, Table 7.4 provides
an inventory of mobile home developments.
O Tenure and Occupancy
In 2000, the U.S. Census Bureau reported that there were 49,137 year-round housing units
countywide. Of those, owner -occupied, renter -occupied and vacant units comprised 65.82%,
19.03%, and 15.13%, respectively, of all year-round residences. At that time, owner -occupied units
outnumbered renter -occupancy by approximately three to one.
TABLE 7.4
INVENTORY OF MOBILE HOME DEVELOPMENTS
UNINCORPORATED INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Name
No. of Units/Sites'
Conforming/Nonconforming
1. A.A. Be S/D
2. Aspen Whispering Palms
198 Units/145 Temp. Tr.
Conf.
3. Aspen Whispering Palms, Two
130 Units/112 Temp. Tr.
Conf.
4. Blue Cypress S/D
75 Units/100 Lots
Conf.
5. Breezy Villa e S/D
113 Units
Conf.
6. Carlana Park
8 Units/2 Temp. Tr.
Non -Conf.
7. Ron's Island Court
10 Units
Non -Conf.
8. Coachland Court
33 Units
Non -Conf.
9. Cottages, The
8 Units/1 Tem . Tr.
Conf.
10. Connecticut Tr. Park
8 Units/12 Temp. Tr.
Non -Conf.
11. Countryside North
Countryside South
645 Units
287 Units
Conf.
Conf.
12, Dixie Highlands S/D
39 Units
Non -Conf.
13. Don McDonald State Park
2 Units/29 Camp Sites
Non -Conf.
14. Dunn Runnin
8 Units
Non -Conf.
15. EI -Capitan MHP
39 Units/6 Temp. Tr.
Conf.
16. Emerald Farms Trailers
5 Units
Non -Conf.
17. Farrar MHP
4 Units
Non -Conf.
18. Fellsmere Farms
96 Units
Conf.
19. Haven View S/D
28 Units
Non -Conf.
20. Heritage Village
436 Units
Conf.
21. Heron Cay
601 Units
Conf.
22. High Ridge MHP
71 Units
Conf.
23. Hilltop Mobile Court
7 Units
Non -Conf.
24. Hobo Park
6 Units
Non -Conf.
25. Holiday Village MHP
128 Units
Conf.
26. Indian River Acres
59 Units
Conf.
27. Indian River Twin Est.
33 Units
Conf.
7
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Name
No. of Units/Sites('
Conforming/Nonconforming
28. Industrial Park
11 Units
Non -Conf.
29. Inlet Trailer Park
Non -Conf.
30. Irby Lane Trailer Park
4 Units
Non -Conf.
31. Johnsons Coral Gem MHP
8 Units
Non -Conf.
32. Karr River Land MHP
8 Units
Non -Conf.
33. Kentucky Kolonel Kotta e
6 Units/4 Tem . Tr.
Non -Conf.
34. Kittys Trailer Park
13 Units
Non -Conf.
35. K.O.A. RV Park
5 Units/] 20 Temp. Tr.
Conf.
36. Lakewood Village
376 Units
Conf.
37. Lazy Village
11 Units/3 Tem . Tr.
Non -Conf.
38. McCullers Trailer Park
6 Units
Non -Conf.
39. Midway Estates
204 Units
Conf.
40. The Cottages
8 Units/1 Temp. Tr.
Conf.
41. Mobile Villa
24 Units
Conf.
42. New Horizons
100 Units
Conf.
43. North Carolina Park
7 Units
Non -Conf.
44. Palm Gardens S/D
30 Units
Conf.
45. Palm Paradise Park
48 Units/25 Temp. Tr.
Conf.
46. Palmer Motel & Tr. Park
26 Units
Non -Conf.
47. Pickerills Trailer Park
8 Units
Non -Conf.
48. Ranchland Trailer Park
108 Units
Conf.
49. Ron's Island Court
10 Units
Non -Conf.
50. Royal, Harold Tr. Park
14 Units
Non -Conf.
51. Runyon, Maggie Tr. Park
16 Units
Non -Conf.
52. Sago Palm Tr. Park
11 Units/1 Temp. Tr.
Non -Conf.
53. Sebastian Inlet
51 Ternp Tr.
Non -Conf.
54. Shady Rest MHP
117 Units
Conf.
55. Silverwood Tr. Court
13 Units
Conf.
56. Southgate Village
109 Units
Non -Conf.
57. Squire Village MHP
29 Units
Non -Conf.
58. Sunshine Travel Resorts
300 Units
Conf.
59. Su -Rene, MHP
79 Units
Non -Conf.
60. Tanglewood Village
123 Units
Conf.
61. Tom Sawyer Gardens
13 Units
Conf.
62. Tranquil Hall II Tr. Pk.
14 Units
Conf.
63. Village Green
782 Units
Conf.
64. Vining Trailer Park
13 Units
Conf.
65. Wabasso Mobile Tr. Park
37 Units
Non -Conf.
66. Westgate S. Trailer Park
8 Units
Non -Conf.
67. Westgate Trailer Park
13 Units
Non -Conf.
68. Wilkerson, B.G.
8 Units
Non -Conf.
69. Winter Beach Tr. Park
8 Units
Non -Conf.
70. Woodlawn Manor MHP
94 Units
Conf.
71. Youngs Mobile Homes
14 Units
Non -Conf.
72. 43rd Ave. Trailer Court
9 Units
Non -Conf.
(') Authorized by the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
Source: Indian River County Planning Department
Age of Housing
As shown in Table 7.5, a significant amount (91.63%) of county's housing stock has been erected
since 1960. The remaining housing (8.37%), totaling 6,227 units, is 46 years of age or older. Many
8
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
9
Community Development Department Indian River County
FIGURE 7.2
1. A.A. Berry Subdiuisioa
_�
Mobile Home Parks and pv
loll
2 Aspen Whispering Palms
, me.
n is 3. Aspen Whlgm*g Palms 11
4. Bore Cypress
S. Breezy Village
G. Carlene Park
7. 8G Wilkerson
e. Coachlad Cour
9. Connecticut Trailer park
4 0
10. Countryside North
-
64 3
11. Vero Palm Estates
Sf
3 0 Ir 23
12, Ammrold MaCColrekl Park
- � 26 r
13. Fisher's CornerTraSlar Park
14. Chrism Trailer Park
1 8 +k1 }
15. Emerald Forms Traders
16. Forpsr MAIN Now Park
1 2
117. Number removed
�¢
18. Haran Vow
V
1B. HM" Village MONO How Park
0 5
[n
20. Heron Coy Mobile Home Park
'+ 2
21. High Ridge MOWN, Hems Park
�4 1 e 1 3
22. HN[mp Trailer Park
36
23. Hobo Park
0
41 0
24. Holiday Village
61.
2$. Inle[ Troller Park
CR 572
5 5
D
26. hilted River Twin Estates
�.5 15
n 27. I dus[rial Park
4
1A 28. Karr Riaer Land Mobile Home Park --
e t
*
29. Irby Lane Trager Park
QR 510 72 1 33
} 30. Coral Gem Mobge Home Park
x' 31. EI Capitan Mobao Home Auk
42
32, Kentucky Kmlwwl Katlages
9
33- laly's Trader Park
34- K.O.A. AV Park
4 4
35, Lakawcod Village
u
36. Lazy Village
R
37. Trailer Park
Bl 7\ ,
3
M]dwaers
38. Midway Estates
S
2 1r40.
G
39. man al f kies
Mo68e Villa
41. New Horizons
q 0
.3e
42, Brchud Park
.G + 453
y
43. Pah Cudens SohfiyWon
O 6 - {2 7
41ST S
N
44. Palm Pora�ase Park
4
45- Palmer Mold & Trailu
4
46. Pickerilla Trager Park
47, RanchWd Motile Nome Park
B 5 47 6 1
46. Number removed
SR 60
i I
49. ""Traau Park
50. Saga Palm Trailer Park
10
51. Sehastian ode[
11
3 5
5 a
52. Shady Rest Mobile Home Park
2!0 R .
4
S
53. SJyelwoed Traaer Park
1 8TH T
3 7
54. Southgate Village
55. Squire Vi aye
a
B
3 56. Encore l Sunhuret Park
57. "One
H.-
68. Tanglewamd Village
OSLO R6 N
59. Tom Sawyer Park
2
60. Tiongrrd Hag 0
�-SrB
5 S'B
4
61. Village Green
62. Vining Trarller Park
3 63. Wabasso Mobda Trader Park
64. RWertand
t
E5.. WeatgalaTrailerPark
Vl< 86. Citrus Park Villose
67, Wiater Besclo Trailer
88. Woodlawrimmm
Jan. 2007
9
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
of those older housing units, if not maintained adequately and upgraded with new electrical and
plumbing facilities, may be in need of rehabilitation to provide safe and sanitary housing for the
occupants and to prevent blighting influences on nearby properties. With only 8.27 percent of the
countywide housing stock in that category, however, age related housing deficiencies are not a
severe problem within the county.
TABLE 7.5
AGE OF YEAR-ROUND HOUSING UNITS - 2005
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Year Built
Age as of 2005
Total Year Round Housing Units
% of Total
2000-2005
Less than 5 years
15,896«)
21.54
1990-1999
6 —15 years
14,409°
19.52
1980-1989
16-25 years
19,4610)
26.37
1960- 1979
26-45 years
17,805°�
24.13
1940-1959
46-65 years
5,076('
6.88
1939 or earlier65years
or more
1,151(1)
1.56
Total
73,798
100
Sources:
(1) 1990 U.S. Census
(2) Building permit records - Indian River County and Municipalities
Additional housing data are provided in Appendices "A" and `B"
• County Regulations and Programs
To address local housing problems, the county has established several housing programs and enacted
various regulations. In addition, the county has reviewed all of its ordinances and regulations to
determine if any ordinances or regulations unnecessarily increase housing costs. Where appropriate,
regulations and ordinances were revised to facilitate the provision of affordable housing within the
county.
Following is a summary of the county's current affordable housing incentive strategies, regulations,
and programs.
Expedited Permitting
The county expedites permits, as defined in s. 163.3164(7) and (8) F.S., for affordable housing
projects to a greater degree than permits for other projects (see housing element policies 1.5 and
1.6).
10
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Density Bonus
The county provides affordable housing density bonuses for planned affordable housing
development projects, allowing eligible affordable housing projects to receive up to a 20% density
bonus (see housing element policy 2.3).
Small Lot Subdivisions
Section 971.41(9) of the LDRs provides regulations for small lot affordable housing subdivision
projects. Through reduced lot sizes and reduced setbacks, small lot subdivision projects have higher
unit yields per acre, and consequently lower costs per unit, than standard subdivisions. In a regular
RS -6, zoning district, for example, average yields will be about 2.5 units per acre. In a small lot
subdivision in the same zoning district, the yield can be up to 5 units per acre. To ensure the long-
term affordability of units in small lot subdivisions, all sale and rent prices for units in small lot
subdivisions are restricted for 10 years.
Accessory single-family dwelling units
Section 971.41(10) of the LDRs provides regulations for accessory single family dwelling units. On
residentially zoned lots, the construction of an accessory dwelling unit is allowed subject to the
provisions of section 971.41(10). The standards and requirements of this section are intended to
make inexpensive dwelling units available to meet the needs of older households and single member
households.
Multi -Family Dwelling Units in Conjunction with Commercial Development
Section 911.10 of the LDRs allows for the development of multi -family dwelling units in
conjunction with commercial development projects. Generally constructed as second and third floor
apartments over a first floor, street frontage commercial space, these units can have a reasonable rent
since the price of land is included with the commercial development.
Housing Cost Impact Review Process
As part of the adoption process for any county regulation which could affect housing costs, county
planning staff prepares a Financial Impact Statement to assess the anticipated impact of the proposed
regulation on the cost of housing (see housing element policy 1.7). This allows for decisionmakers
to assess whether a proposed regulation's advantages outweigh its housing cost impacts.
Surplus County Owned Land Inventory
The county's general services department maintains an inventory of all surplus county -owned land,
including county owned foreclosed properties that could be used for affordable housing. Whenever
the county proposes to surplus these properties (see housing policy 2.4), the county notifies for-
profit and non-profit affordable housing developers of the availability of the properties.
11
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Zero Lot Line Subdivisions
Section 915.15 of the LDRs allows for development of zero lot line subdivisions and other projects
which vary from conventional zoning district requirements. Through the county's planned
development (LDR section 915) process, affordable housing projects with smaller lots can be
constructed.
Some of these allowances, such as the 20% affordable housing density bonus, the accessory single-
family dwelling unit provision, the allowance of multi -family dwelling units in conjunction with
commercial development, and the provision for zero lot line subdivisions, have been used by developers
to construct affordable housing in the county. For example, the density bonus provision has helped
some developers obtain funding from the state's Low-income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program.
This has produced some much needed affordable rental housing within the county.
• SHIP and HHR Programs
Indian River County's Local Housing Assistance Program (LHAP) has been in effect since June of
1993. This program is funded with money from the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program
(SHIP) and with loan repayments from the county's revolving SHIP loan program. All funds are
deposited in the county's affordable housing trust fund. As structured, the county's LHAP provides
downpayment/closing cost loan assistance, rehabilitation loan assistance, impact fee/capacity charge
loan assistance, emergency disaster repair loan assistance, and land acquisition loan assistance to
extremely low income, very low income, low income, and moderate income households.
Each year, the county earmarks a portion of its SHIP funds for Habitat for Humanity (HFH) clients.
This earmarking is beneficial to HFH and to the county. Overall, SHIP funds pay more than 50% of the
cost of building each HFH home, thereby allowing HFH to build more units. Since HFH constructs new
housing units for extremely low, very low, and low income households, HFH helps the county meet
state requirements that mandate at least 30% of SHIP funds be utilized by very low income households
and 30% by low income households. Also, HFH helps the county meet the requirement that at least
75% of the funds be used for construction.
Between 2000 and 2005, the amount of SHIP assistance per applicant was increased to address the
substantial increase in housing prices that occurred during that period. For example,
downpayment/closing cost assistance for very low income households was increased from $15,000 to
$50,000 between 2000 and 2005 and was then decreased to $30,000 in 2007. Although this per
applicant increase in SHIP funding allowed more very low income and low income households to
qualify for home purchases, that higher funding resulted in fewer applicants being assisted. With the
amount of rehabilitation assistance per housing unit increased, the county's program ensured that all
code and safety issues were addressed with owner occupied housing rehabilitation projects.
After the 2004 hurricanes, the county was awarded a one time allocation of Hurricane Housing
Recovery (HHR) funds. As structured, HHR assistance strategies are similar to SHIP assistance
strategies. Unlike the SHIP program, however, HHR funds may be used, and in Indian River County
12
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
have been used, to assist qualified households with replacement of existing homes and mobile homes
that were destroyed through the 2004 hurricanes. Also, HHR assistance was used to rehabilitate existing
rental units and to match other state and federal funds for building new affordable housing projects.
As structured, SHIP and HER loans are deferred payment loans that applicants do not have to pay back
until they sell their assisted unit. Generally, SHIP loans are subordinated to a first mortgage on an
assisted unit. If a SHIP recipient refinances his first mortgage and receives cash back, however, the
county will not subordinate its SHIP loan to the refinanced first mortgage, and the SHIP loan must be
paid back.
As of April 2009, almost 22% of SHIP and HHR loans had been paid back. Those SHIP/HHR funds
revert to the main housing trust fund and are available to assist other applicants. Although funds
derived from repaid SHIP loans are available to assist other applicants, SHIP loan repayments associated
with cash out refinancings reflect a problem. Almost invariably, a cash out refinancing leaves a
household with more debt, higher payments, and an increased probability of foreclosure. To discourage
that practice, the county, in 2008, revised its Local Housing Assistance Plan to impose a simple annual
interest rate of 3% on SHIP loans to very low and low income households and 5% on SHIP loans to
moderate income households. Those interest charges are forgiven after 10 years for VLI and LI
households and after 20 years for MI households.
Another housing program used by the county is the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Program, a federal program that, in Florida, is administered by the Department of Community Affairs
(DCA). In Indian River County, the CDBG program has been used to rehabilitate or replace 24 existing
homes for very low and low income families. For non -entitlement communities such as Indian River
County, those funds are provided through a competitive application process.
Through its Local Housing Assistance Program, the county provides assistance to very low, low, and
moderate income households. As of April 14, 2009, 902 households had received assistance from the
county's program. As structured, the county's Local Housing Assistance Program works through a
partnership of lenders, builders, contractors, real estate agents, non-profit organizations, and the county.
In addition to the households assisted through the local housing assistance program, 471 households
have received assistance through the county's Hurricane Housing Recovery (HHR) program, while 24
households have received assistance through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
housing rehabilitation program.
The following tables provide a summary of SHIP and HHR assistance as of April 14, 2009.
13
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Table 7.6
SHIP Program Summary
State FY
(July I-
June 30)
Amount of
SHIP
Allocations
(State funding
only)
SHIP
Repayments
and other
Program
Incomes 11
F7 11
Number of
Loans
Approved by
FY
Number and % of Loans Approved by Income Category by FY
VLI % LI % MI %
1
92-93
$250,000.00
Number and % of Assisted Units for Approved Loans by Income Category
41
13
31.71%
17
41.46%
11
26.83%
93-94
$250,000.00
$14,563,228.00
37
12
32.43%
18
48.65%
163
18.92%
94-95
$250,000.00
30
11
36.67%
13
43.33%
20.00%
95-96
$565,773.00
$14,358.95
58
19
32.76%
35
60.34%
6.90%
96-97
$632,136.00
$29,887.06
74
34
45.95%
35
47.30%
6.76%
97-98
$622,455.00
$50,489.83
65
22
33.85%
36
55.38%
10.77%
98-99
$903,723.00
$76,289.63
64
23
35.94%
37
57.81%
6.25%
99-2000
$749,773.00
$62,361.43
45
19
42.22%
21
46.67%
11.11%
2000-01
$1,205,592.00
$94,288.47
74
27
36.49%
35
47.30%
12
16.22%
2001-02
$1,023,335.00
$117,946.26
70
26
37.14%
34
48.57%
10
14.29%
2002-03
$1,195,168.00
$263,472.59
84
40
47.62%
36
42.86%
9.52%
2003-04
$955,048.00
$429,002.84
66
32
48.48%
22
33.33%
12
18.18%
2004 -OS
$916,659.00
$780,843.50
54
23
42.59%
17
31.48%
14
25.93%
2005-06
$930,319.00
$776,332.65
46
22
47.83%
17
36.96%
15.22%
2006-07
$1,209,521.00
$571,296.01
45
13
28.80%
17
37.79%
15
33.33%
2007-08
$1,231,134.00
$381,135.31
40
17
42.50%
42.50%
15.00%
09
YTD
$1,244,807.00
$16,873.75
8
TOTAL
$14,143,307.00
$3,644,578.28
902
359
39.80%
410
45.45%
133
14.75%
ELI - Extremely Low Income, VLI - Very Low Income, LI - Low Income, MI - Moderate Income
Table 7.7
PHIR Program Summary
State FY (July
Amount of
Number of
1 -June 30)
HHR
Assisted Units
Number and % of Assisted Units for Approved Loans by Income Category
Allocations
(State Funding
for Approved
Loans YTD
ELI % VLI % LI % MI %
Only) 11
2005/06-
2008/09
$14,563,228.00
471
97
20.59%
175
37.15%
163
34.61%
36
7.64%
• Other FundinglHousing Assistance Programs
Besides SHIP and HHR assisted units, there are 2,634 subsidized rental housing units within the county
(Figure 7.3). These units were produced through federal and state housing programs such as the Low
Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, the state bond program, and others (Tables 7.8 and 7.9).
14
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Table 7.8
SUBSIDIZED HOUSING PROJECTS
UNINCORPORATED INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Total Multi -Family Rental Units Set -Aside: 2,078 Units
Total Single -Family Rental Units Set -Aside: 61 Units
*LIHTC: Low Income Housing Tax Credit
15
Community Development Department Indian River County
DATE
PROJECT NAME
PROJECT #
NUMBER OF UNITS
TYPE OF SUBSIDY
YEAR
RESTRICTED
LENGTH OF
SET-ASIDE
APPROVE
PERIOD
RESTRICTED
D
BEGAN
PERIOD
Victory Park
100
Farmers Home
1989
11/4/88
20 years
Administration
Sunset Apartments
96110114
36
LIHTC*
1997
3/25/98
50 years
Orangewood Park
100
Farmers Home
1992
9/5/91
20 years
Administration
Gifford Grove
94010142
61 (single-
LIHTC
1993
6/13/96
30 years
family
rental)
Indian River
94110154
180
LIHTC
1994
2/9/96
50 years
Apartments
Kyles Run
95110062
200
LIHTC
1996
12/11/97
50 years
Gardenia Gardens
96040048
80
HUD Project/Elderly
1998
3/26/98
40 years
Housing Project
River Park Place
97080124
144
LIHTC/Elderly
1997
6/24/99
50 years
Housing Project
Lindsey Gardens Ph. I
96030057
96
LIHTC
1997
6/17/99
50 years
2002
Lindsey Gardens Ph.
2002040003
State Bond Program
4/27/04
30 years
II
72
The Club at Vero
96030057
184
State Bond Program/
1998
8/15/01
30 years
Elderly Housing
Project
Woods of Vero
98010133
176
State Bond Program
2000-01
9/4/01
38 years
The Walker Avenue
96120101
172
State Bond Program
2000
9/4/02
30 years
Club
Briar Wood of Vero
45
LIHTC
1989
9/14/89
15 years
Beach
Pinnacle Groves
2001120128
234
State Bond Program
2003
1/18/05
30 years
The Palms of Vero
259
State Bond Program
2003
5/31/05
30 years
Beach
Total Multi -Family Rental Units Set -Aside: 2,078 Units
Total Single -Family Rental Units Set -Aside: 61 Units
*LIHTC: Low Income Housing Tax Credit
15
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Table 7.9
SUBSIDIZED HOUSING PROJECTS
IN MUNICIPALITIES WITHIN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
Total Multi -Family Rental Units: 495 Units
Total subsidized housing units in the county and municipalities = 2,078 + 61 + 495 = 2,634
16
Community Development Department Indian River County
DATE
PROJECT NAME
MUNICIPAL
NUMBER
TYPE OF SUBSIDY
YEAR
RESTRICTED
LENGTH OF
ITY NAME
OF
APPROVED
PERIOD BEGAN
RESTRICTED
UNITS
PERIOD
Sandy Pines
City of
45
LIHTC
1993
6/12/96
30 years
Sebastian
Grace Landing
City of
69
LIHTC (Elderly)
1996
4/29/98
50 years
Sebastian
Pelican Isles
City of
150
LIHTC
2003
8/16/2005
50 years
Sebastian
Sonrise Villas
City of
160
LIHTC (farmworkers
2003
8/16/2004
50 years
Fellsmere
housing)
Whispering Pines
City of
71
HUD and U.S. Dept.
2003-04
9/24/01
20 years
Fellsmere
of Agriculture
(farmworkers
housing)
Total Multi -Family Rental Units: 495 Units
Total subsidized housing units in the county and municipalities = 2,078 + 61 + 495 = 2,634
16
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
17
Community Development Department Indian River County
Fig 7.3
SUBSIDIZED HOUSING
IN UNINCORPORATED
INDIAN RIVER C UNTY
s
1. VICTORY PARK
2. SUNSET APARTMENTS
3. ORANGEWOOD PARK
4. GIF'FORD GROVE
P
5, INDIAN RIVER APT$
6. KYLES RUN
7. GARDINIA GARDENS
i c
8. RIVER PARK PLACE
9. LINDSEY GARDENS
10. THE CLUB AT VERO
11. WOODS OF VERO
12. WALKER AVENUE CLUB
CR 512
13. BRIARWOOD OF VERO BEACH
14. PINNACLE GROVES
15. THE PALMS OF VERO BEACH
c:I1ti
`
of
Pill irir
p
A
N
�
7
tG�
Ati
S
o
3
y
fC1
! 0
45TH ST
1 4
tQ
41ST ST
3 13'
°7
O
0
CK►
1z
SR U
q
1001
11
.1s
8TH ST
0
j
�
a
C ht
fti
ill
� p�j11
11 * 6}
SOURCE: IRC PLANNING DEPT.
IRC HOUSING AUTHORITY
DATE: May 2006
17
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
ANALYSIS OF HOUSING CONDITIONS
Until recently, the county's population was growing at a relatively fast rate. That growth, however,
slowed significantly starting in 2007.
Between 2000 and 2005, the county's population increased by 17,094 persons, or 15.13%. For
2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005, the county's population increases were 2.45%, 2.10%, 2.52%,
4.67%, and 2.53%, respectively. For that type of growing population, one of the most important
issues that the housing element must address is providing an adequate supply and mix of housing for
the growing population.
Probably more than any other issue addressed by the comprehensive plan, housing radically changed
between 1995 and now. During that time, housing production increased significantly, then declined.
Along with the increase in housing production came a significant increase in housing costs. Those
cost increases created a number of housing problems and issues. With the recent downturn in the
housing market, however, housing costs have moderated and even declined. Following is an
analysis of housing conditions within Indian River County.
• Housing Affordability
Basically, housing affordability is the relationship between housing cost and household income. The
components of housing affordability are median housing value, median monthly rent, and median
household income.
• Housing Cost
According to census information, the median sales price of housing units in Indian River County
increased from $78,800 in 1989 to $104,000 in 1999, an increase of 32%. Also, median monthly rent
increased from $505 per month in 1989 to $615 per month in 1999, an increase of 28%. During that
same period, median household income increased from $28,961 to $39,635, an increase of 26%. (Note:
the census median household income figure is different from the HUD median household figure
provided in Table 7.11). These housing costs and income figures indicate that, in the 1989 to 1999
period, income increases generally kept pace with increases in housing costs.
According to the Florida Association of Realtors, the median housing sales price for the Ft. Pierce — Port
St. Lucie Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), including Indian River County, grew from $79,200 in
January, 2000 to $261,500, in January, 2006, a 230% increase (Table 7.11). During that time period,
median household income increased from $47,700 to $55,500, an increase of only 16%. That means
that, in that period, the median price of homes outpaced median income by more than 14 fold. As
expected, the significant increase in housing costs compared to the much lower increase in household
income produced housing affordability problems.
The significant increase in housing costs between 2000 to 2006 can be attributed to a number of factors.
These factors range from the real estate market to government regulation and include many others. It is,
18
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
however, important to consider the components of housing cost, because addressing housing cost is one
way to address the housing affordability problem.
Of all the factors affecting housing cost, market demand is probably the most significant. In coastal
Florida, there has long been a high demand for housing from affluent retirees and second home buyers.
This demand has increased the cost of land and housing units in the coastal areas of Florida more than in
non -coastal areas. During the 2004 to 2006 period, however, market demand was more influenced by
investors, speculators, and sub -prime lending practices. These factors resulted in artificially inflated
demand for housing and a corresponding increase in housing prices.
While market demand was a significant component in the 2000 to 2006 housing cost increases, other
components contributing to the rise in housing prices included construction cost increases, property
insurance increases, and high property taxes. After the hurricanes of 2004 and 2005, property insurance
rates doubled or tripled. Construction costs, particularly concrete prices and roofing material prices, also
significantly increased after the hurricanes. With the increase in housing values, property taxes
significantly rose for those residents not protected by the Save Our Homes law.
Also affecting housing cost is government regulations. Regulations increase development costs and
thereby the cost of housing. Some of these cost increasing regulations include enhanced landscaping
and buffer requirements, additional open space requirements, and new bonding requirements. Finally,
government imposed impact fees also raise housing costs.
Just because government regulations and fees increase housing cost, however, does not warrant
eliminating those regulations or fees. Most regulations address safety or aesthetics, while fees cover
costs incurred by feepayers. If regulations are eliminated, community goals may not be met. If fees are
eliminated, costs are shifted to other payers.
Recently, housing costs have declined. By January 2009, the median sale price for homes had decreased
to $114,900, a 56% reduction from January 2006. While housing costs significantly decreased from
2006 to 2009, median household income for the county increased from $55,500 to $58,300 during that
period.
- Household Income and Housing Cost
According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC)'s 2006 Outreach report, the Fair
Market Rent (FMR) for a two-bedroom apartment in Indian River County was $734 in 2006. In order to
afford this level of rent and utilities without paying more than 30% of its income for housing, a
household must earn $2,247 monthly, or $29,360 annually. Assuming a 40 hour work week, 52 weeks
per year, this level of income translates into a hourly wage of $14.12 for a one worker household.
In Indian River County, a minimum wage worker earns an hourly wage of $6.40 in 2006. To afford the
Fair Market Rent (FMR) for a two-bedroom apartment, a minimum wage earner must work 88 hours per
week, 52 weeks per year. Or, a household must include 2.2 minimum wage earners working 40 hours
per week year-round in order to make the two bedroom FMR affordable.
19
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
At this time, the estimated mean (average) wage for a renter in Indian River County is $10.22 an hour.
In order to afford the FMR for a two-bedroom apartment at this wage, a renter must work 55 hours per
week, 52 weeks per year. Working 40 hours per week year-round, a household must include 1.4
workers earning the mean renter wage in order to make the two-bedroom FMR affordable.
Currently, the monthly Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payment for an individual in Indian River
County is $603. If SSI represents an individual's sole source of income, $181 in monthly rent is
affordable, while the FMR for a one -bedroom apartment is $575.
With the current decrease in housing prices and a decrease in the number of housing units being sold, the
supply of rental units has increased and rents have gotten lower, making rents more affordable.
- Affordability
One measure of housing affordability is the home price/household income ratio, or housing cost as a
percentage of income. The table below from the Central Florida Workforce Housing Toolkit relates the
home price/household income ratio to housing affordability.
Table 7.10
Housing Affordability Ratings
Rating
Home Price/Income Ratio
Housing Cost as % of Income
Severely Unaffordable
5.1 and more
51 % or higher
Seriously Unaffordable
4.1 to 5.0
41%to 50%
Moderately Unaffordable
3.1 to 4.0
31 % to 40%
Affordable
3.0 or less
30% or less
Source: Central Florida Workforce Housing Toolkit
Based on the methodology from the Central Florida Workforce Housing Toolkit, the median sales
price/household income ratios for Indian River County were calculated. As table 7.11 indicates, the
prices of homes in the region were affordable through 2003. By 2005, however, home prices had
become seriously unaffordable. In 2009, median housing prices decreased, and housing prices are
now affordable again.
In 2005, 2006, and 2007, affordable housing had become a significant issue for the region's
workforce. With then current housing prices, households with one full-time worker or even two full-
time workers often could not afford to live in the community where they worked. Consequently, many
of the region's workers, including teachers, firefighters, service workers and others vital to the
community, found themselves priced out of the housing market. That condition, however, does not
exist at this time due to the recent decrease in housing costs.
Even though Indian River County is now affordable based on its home price/income ratio, it is
possible that the 2003 to 2007 affordability problems could occur again. Because those 2003 to 2007
affordability problems affected most of coastal Florida and because those problems can be attributed
20
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
to circumstances not subject to local control, such as high market demand, lax lending practices,
availability of sub -prime loans, and sales to investors and speculators, there is little that a local
government can do to address those conditions and mitigate affordability problems.
Table 7.11
Indian River County Housing Affordability Ratings
Year
Median Household
Income
Median Home Price
(January)
Home Price /
Income Ratio
Affordability Rating
2000
$47,700
$79,200
1.66
Affordable
2001
$48,400
$98,200
2.03
Affordable
2002
$52,400
$109,200
2.08
Affordable
2003
$50,900
$141,600
2.78
Affordable
2004
$52,400
$171,200
3.27
Moderately Unaffordable
2005
$53,250
$228,800
4.30
SeriouslyUnaffordable
2006
$55,500
$261,500
4.71
Seriously Unaffordable
2007
$54,100
$241,000
4.45
Seriously Unaffordable
2008
$57,000
$175,300
3.07
Moderately Unaffordable
2009
$58,300
$114,900
1.97 J
Affordable
Source: - Median Household Income HUD
- Median Single Family Existing Homesite Price, Florida Association of Realtors (Ft. Peirce — Port St. Lucie Metropolitan Statistical Area including Indian
River County)
- Operation and Maintenance Cost
One way to make housing more affordable is to reduce ongoing housing operation and maintenance
costs by making housing units more energy efficient. One mechanism designed to make houses more
energy efficient is the "Green Building" program.
Green Building is the practice of creating and using processes, from siting to design, construction,
operation, maintenance, and renovation, that are environmentally responsible and resource -efficient
throughout a building's life cycle. Overall, the green building program has several major benefits.
These include:
• Environmental Benefits
o Enhances and protects biodiversity and ecosystems
o Improves air and water quality
o Reduces waste streams
o Conserves and restores natural resources
21
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
• Economic Benefits
o Reduces operating costs
o Creates, expands, and shapes markets for green produce and services
o Improves occupant productivity
o Optimizes life -cycle economic performance
• Social Benefits
o Enhances occupant comfort and health
o Heightens aesthetic qualities
o Minimizes strain on local infrastructure
o Improves overall quality of life
To promote energy efficiency, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides several programs.
These programs are:
EPA and U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Star® program. This
program promotes partnerships with homebuilders, office building
managers, product manufacturers, and many other organizations to
improve the energy efficiency of homes, buildings, and various building
components and appliances.
o Energy Star for New Homes is a partnership focused on new
home construction
o Energy Star for Home Improvement provides information and
resources for energy-efficient home renovation
o Energy Star for Business is a program to help businesses
improve their buildings' energy performance
• EPA's Green Power Partnership. This program provides information
about renewable power sources, the benefits of using them, and how to
participate in the Partnership.
• EPA's Heat Island Reduction Initiative. This program works with
communities and other partners to reduce the heat island effect caused
by urban patterns of development.
o Cool Roofs provides information about energy saving roofs
o Green Roofs provides information about water and energy
saving vegetated roofs
22
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
In the future, the county's policy should be to promote "green building" programs that make houses
more energy efficient. This will reduce operational costs and make housing more affordable.
- Cost Burden
Generally, households needing assistance are those households in the extremely low and very low
income categories. Those are households with annual incomes less than $24,999. According to the
Census, 14,698 Indian River County households were in those two income categories in 2000. Because
of high housing costs, many of those 14,698 households may have housing affordability problems.
Based on the definition of affordable housing, a housing unit is affordable if a household's monthly
housing expenses do not exceed 30% of the household's gross income. For owner occupied households,
housing cost includes principal, interest, taxes, and insurance. According to the Census, 5,881(21.60%)
owner households within the county were paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing in
2000.
For renter households, housing cost includes contract rent and some allowance for utilities. In 2000,
4,414 (40.30%) renter households within the county were paying more than 30 percent of their income
for rent. In some cases, this represents an affordability problem, but in other cases this represents people
choosing to spend a higher percentage of their income to obtain better housing.
According to the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, 13,577 Indian River County households paid
more than 30% of their income for housing in 2005. In that same year, 5,066 of those households paid
more than 50% of their income for housing. Table 7.12 provides a break down of cost burden between
homeowners and renters.
Table 7.12
Indian River County
2005 Cost Burden (Owner and Renter)
Source: Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing
Table 7.13 provides a breakdown of cost burden by income group.
23
Community Development Department Indian River County
Households paying between 30-50% of
income for housing
Households paying more than 50% ofincome
for housing
Total
Owner households
5,747
3,113
8,860
Renter households
2,764
1,953
4,717
Total
8,511
5,066
13,577
Source: Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing
Table 7.13 provides a breakdown of cost burden by income group.
23
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Table 7.13
Indian River County
2005 Cost Burden by Income Group
Household income as percentage of Area
Median Income (AMI)
Households paying between 30-50% of income
for housing
Households paying 50% or more of
income for housing
Total
(ELI) Less than 30% AMI
764
2,178
2,942
(VLI) 30 — 50% AMI
2,531
1,970
4,501
(LI) 51 — 80% AMI
1,796
434
2,230
81-120 % AMI
3,420
484
3,904
Total
8,511
5,066
13,577
ELI: Extremely Low hicome, VLI: Very Low Income, LI: Low Income, MI: Moderate Income Source: Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing
Most likely, the 13,577 households identified in Table 7.13 are having housing affordability problems.
Of those 13,577 households, 9,673 are extremely low income, very low income, or low income. Those
9,763 very low and low-income households are surely having housing affordability problems.
During the 2005-2007 period, when housing prices so significantly outpaced household income, housing
experts recognized that, even though a limit of 30% of a household's income allocation for housing costs
was a good social goal, that 30% allocation limit may not always be economically feasible. In fact, most
financial institutions now consider 35-40 percent of household income as a better measure of how much
income could be spent for housing costs.
With a 30% allocation limit, a household can purchase a house with a mortgage that is approximately 3
times its household gross annual income. In those cases where households do not have any other debt
and can allocate more income for housing cost, they can purchase a higher priced home. With a 40%
allocation limit, however, a household could purchase a house with a mortgage approximately 4 times
the household's gross annual income. Consequently, a 40% front end ratio may be an appropriate
measure for moderate income and workforce households, since they have more disposable income.
Given the fact that housing costs are significantly lower now then during the 2005-2007 housing boom,
the workforce housing affordability problems of that period have significantly lessened. As with the
pre -housing boom period, housing affordability is again mostly a low/very low/extremely low income
problem. Consequently, the county's affordable housing policies should focus on those groups.
The above information indicates that there is a need for additional assistance to very low and low
income households. In the future, the county should continue to apply for any federal and state funding
that could assist very low and low income households within the county.
• Projected Housing Needs
Housing need is defined as the number of new dwelling units that must be constructed within a certain
timeframe to accommodate a projected future population. For Indian River County, the University of
Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) population projections are used to project
24
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
the number of future households and, consequently, the number of units needed to house those
households. Assuming a 15% rate for seasonal and vacant units, the total needed units are then
calculated. For years 2010, 2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030, the total number of additional units needed was
determined by subtracting existing units from projected units. Based on those projections, an additional
26,839 units must be constructed between now and 2030.
As in the past, virtually all of the housing units needed by 2030 will be constructed by the private sector.
As such, market demand will dictate the pace of housing construction through 2030, and no county
policies are needed to ensure that overall housing needs are met. While overall housing need will be met
by the private sector, government assistance will be needed for those households in the lowest income
categories.
Table 7.14
Housing Need
Indian River County
*Source: University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR)
• Special Hausinp Needs
In determining housing needs, there are several population categories that warrant particular
consideration. These are the elderly, the low income disabled, and farmworkers. One population
category that warrants special consideration from a housing needs perspective is the elderly. The
following table shows the percentage of Indian River County households headed by a person 65 or older
as reported by the 1990 census, the 2000 census, and the 2005 Shimberg Center for affordable housing
estimate.
25
Community Development Department Indian River County
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
A. BEBR Population Projections*
142,300
155,000
169,300
183,400
196,900
B. Average Household Size
2.25
2.25
2.25
2.25
2.25
C. Number of Households (pop. - house size)
63,248
68,888
75,244
81,511
87,511
D. Seasonal and Vacant Units (15% of total)
9,487
10,333
11,286
1 12,226
13,126
Total Housing Units Needed (C+D)
72,735
79,221
86,530
93,737
100,637
Existing 2005 single family and mobile home units
55,831
55,831
55,831
55,831
55,831
Existing 2005 Multi -family Units
17,967
17,967
17,967
17,967
17,967
Total 2005 Units
73,798
73,798
73,798
73,798
73,798
Housing Unit Needed (demand -current number of units)
1 -1,063
5,423
12,732
19,939
26,839
*Source: University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR)
• Special Hausinp Needs
In determining housing needs, there are several population categories that warrant particular
consideration. These are the elderly, the low income disabled, and farmworkers. One population
category that warrants special consideration from a housing needs perspective is the elderly. The
following table shows the percentage of Indian River County households headed by a person 65 or older
as reported by the 1990 census, the 2000 census, and the 2005 Shimberg Center for affordable housing
estimate.
25
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Table 7.15
Percentage of Elderly Head of Households
Indian River County
1990 Census 2000 Census 2005 Shimberg
Percentage of Households headed by a personof65orolder 1 28.75% 36.09% 41%
Compared to other areas, Indian River County has a high percentage of elderly households. According
to the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, elderly households, in 2005, constituted 27% of all
households statewide, while elderly households constituted 41 % of all county households.
In Indian River County, future housing needs for elderly households (65+) were projected by utilizing
Shimberg Center figures which indicate that, in 2005, 41 % of households were headed by an elderly
person. The following table shows the projected number of elderly households within the county
through 2030.
Table 7.16
Projected Number for Housing for Elderly (65+)
(41% of Total Housing Units)
2010
1 2015
1 2020
1 2025 1
2030
Elderly households (County Total) 1 29,821
1 32,480
1 35,477
1 38,432 1
41,261
While the number of elderly households in the county is high, many of these elderly households are
affluent retirees who do not have housing affordability problems. Consequently, the county targets its
housing assistance resources to very low, low, and moderate income elderly households. By targeting
assistance to very low, low, and moderate income households generally, the county also provides
assistance to elderly households which fall in those income categories and need assistance. For
example, the county's SHIP program assisted 169 elderly households between 1993 and 2007. As
needed, the elderly household special need category is being served with the county's existing programs,
and the county's policy should be to continue providing such assistance in the future.
A second special need category is low-income disabled persons. In 2000, there were 5,899 low-income
households in Indian River County that included at least one person aged 15 or older with a disability.
Those households had incomes below 60% of the area median. In 2000, the 5,899 low income disabled
households represented 10 % of total households.
Based on the 10% figure, the number of low-income disabled households was projected through 2030.
Those projections are shown in Table 7.17. It should be noted that some of those households might be
included in the elderly household projections provided above. As with other low income groups, low
income disabled households are eligible for SHIP and similar program assistance. Through the SHIP
program, the county provides assistance to very low and low-income disabled households. In the past,
that assistance has included rehabilitation loans and grants to make homes handicapped accessible.
Going forward, the county's policy should be to continue providing such assistance.
26
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Table 7.17
Projected Number for Low -Income Disabled Households
(10% of Total Housing Units)
2010
2015
1 2020
2025
1 2030
County Total 1 7,273
7,922
1 8,653
9,373
1 10,063
Another special housing needs group is farmworkers. According to the Schimberg Center for
Affordable Housing's 2004 "The Need for Farmworker Housing in Florida" report, there were 2,622
farmworker households in Indian River County in 2002. Those 2,622 farmworker households
represented 4,271 persons. Up until 2008, there were 2 farmworker housing camps having a capacity of
835 units within the county. Also, there are two rural development farmworker housing projects
(Orangewood Park and Victory Park) with 100 units each. While those projects house a number of
farmworkers, a majority of the county's farmworkers live in single-family units or mobile homes within
or around the City of Fellsmere. Due to the decline in citrus production within the county, it is assumed
that farmworker housing needs will decline over time. As a matter of fact, one of the county's
farmworker camps closed in 2008 due to a decrease in demand.
As part of its overall housing strategy, the county has in the past targeted some of its housing assistance
funds for farmworker housing units. The county also has worked with private agricultural growers to
identify needs for farmworker housing and to assist farmworkers in satisfying those needs. Because of
the decrease in agricultural acreage and the reduction in agricultural employment, there will not be a
need for additional farmworker housing in the near future.
• Substandard Housing Conditions
According to 2000 census data, most of the county's housing units (more than 91%) were built after
1960. Because less than 9 percent of the county's housing was built before 1960, there are not many age
related problems with the county's housing stock.
Between 1990 and 2000, the number of units lacking complete plumbing facilities decreased from 206
to 108, and the number of units with no heating facilities increased from 456 to 477 during that time.
These figures indicate that the number of substandard units has declined over time.
Figure 7.4 shows those areas of the county having concentrations of sub -standard housing units. Those
areas include Gifford, Oslo, West Wabasso, and unincorporated Fellsmere. Generally, those areas are
characterized by low incomes, substandard housing, and inadequate infrastructure.
Even though substandard housing is not a major problem within the county, it is a problem in the areas
identified above. In the past, the county has provided rehabilitation loans through the State Housing
Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) program, the Hurricane Housing Recovery (HHR) program, and the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program to property owners within the county to repair
27
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
their housing units and make their houses safe for occupancy. Besides rehabbing substandard units
through its various housing programs, the county has also addressed substandard conditions by razing
vacated substandard units where those units could not be rehabilitated and providing households living
in substandard units with new housing. In the future, the county's policy should be to continue to
provide SHIP rehabilitation loan assistance to qualified households.
• Overcrowded Conditions
Another housing condition that must be considered is overcrowding. Between 1990 and 2000, the
number of occupied housing units with more than 1.1 persons per room increased from 1,016 to 1,431.
Generally, overcrowded conditions occur when families cannot afford to rent or buy a home large
enough to accommodate their entire family. As housing costs increase, more people tend to share the
same unit, and overcrowding occurs. Generally, households that live in overcrowded units also face
housing affordability problems.
Through SHIP, HHR, and other federal and state programs, the county has increased the affordable
housing stock and has reduced the county's problem with overcrowded conditions. Since more
affordable housing is needed, the county should continue to provide assistance through its SHIP
program as well as other federal and state programs to qualified households.
• Infrastructure and Community Development Characteristics
Within the county, there are some older neighborhoods with inadequate infrastructure. These
neighborhoods lack paved roads, adequate drainage facilities, and centralized water and sewer. When
the county retrofits a neighborhood to provide those improvements, the funding is usually derived
through an assessment. With this process, benefiting property owners pay some or most of the cost of
the improvement. For many neighborhoods, however, this is not a viable solution because the
homeowners in the neighborhood cannot afford to pay for assessments.
Besides assessments, there are other sources of funding for infrastructure improvements. Among those
sources is the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. In the past, the county has
utilized CDBG funds to make infrastructure improvements in the Wabasso and Rockridge areas.
Although the CDBG program is a good funding source for infrastructure improvements, the program is
competitive and has limited funds. Also, project ranking criteria make it difficult for Indian River
County to obtain CDBG funding.
Among the areas that have infrastructure deficiencies are some portions of Wabasso and Oslo; limited
areas in Gifford; and a small area adjacent to the City of Fellsmere. Also, subdivisions such as Vero
Lake Estates, Pinetree Park, Paradise Park, and others have infrastructure deficiencies. While
infrastructure improvements have been made in some of these areas, there are still infrastructure
deficiencies in the county.
In areas with a high concentration of low to moderate income households, the county utilizes state and
federal grant programs to address infrastructure deficiencies. In the future, the county should apply for
28
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
appropriate state and federal funds to provide needed infrastructure to areas with a high concentration of
low to moderate income households. For other areas, the county should continue its policy to assess
residents for the cost of infrastructure projects in their neighborhood, so that the people benefiting from
these projects pay most of the project cost. In the future, the county should continue to offer its utility
and roadway assessment programs.
• Homeownership
An important factor in improving neighborhoods is increasing the percentage of home ownership.
Generally, homeowners maintain their property and their neighborhood better than renters. One
advantage of the SHIP and HHR programs is that both focus on homeownership. In Indian River
County, 66% of all units are owner -occupied, while only 19% are renter occupied. The remaining units
are vacant. In the future, the county should continue to maintain its SHIP program with emphasis on
homeownership.
• Foreclosures
When the downturn in the housing market began in late 2006, sales of new housing units declined,
and housing values fell. Because of the sub -prime mortgage problem, the re -setting of adjustable
rate mortgages, the abandonment of units by investors and speculators, as well as lowered housing
demand, the number of foreclosures began to increase at about that time.
In 2008, the number of foreclosures increased significantly throughout the country. According to
Realty Trac, Inc., Florida had the second highest number of foreclosure filings in the nation in July
2008. Generally, foreclosures occur in stages. These stages are:
• Notice of Default (NOD)
• Lis Pendens (LIS)
• Auction Notice of Trustee Sale (NTS)
• Notice of Foreclosure Sale (NFS)
• Real Estate Owned (REO)
Table 7.18 shows the July, 2008 foreclosure activity levels in the Nation, State, and Indian River
County.
29
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Table 7.18
Foreclosure Activities
July 2008
Jurisdiction
NOD
LIS
NTS
NFS
REO (fore-
closed proper-
ties owned by a
bank)
Total
1 of every X number
of households
received foreclosure
filing (rate)
State or
IRC/
National
Average
IRC/State
Average
U.S.
55,601
55,042
57,145
27,088
77,295
272,171
464
N/A
N/A
Florida
29,708
91
9,818
6,267
45,884
186
IRC
[o:=
170
lo=
62
3
235
316
1.47
0.59
Source: Realty Trac, Inc.
As indicated in that table, one out of every 464 households nationwide was in some stage of
foreclosure during the month of July, 2008. During that same time period, the state's foreclosure
rate was one out of every 186 households, while Indian River County's foreclosure rate was one out
of every 316 households. According to the Table 7.18 information, the July, 2008 foreclosure filing
notice rate for Indian River County was 1.47 times the national rate and 0.59 times the state rate.
That indicates that Indian River County's foreclosure filing rate is higher than the national rate, but
lower than the state rate.
Generally, a high number of foreclosures creates several problems. First, foreclosures create
housing affordability problems for those households whose homes are foreclosed on. Second,
foreclosed properties often are not maintained, turn into neighborhood eyesores, and adversely affect
the value of adjacent houses. Third, foreclosed properties usually sell at lower than the actual value
of a house; therefore, foreclosures affect the value of other houses in the neighborhood. Finally,
foreclosures also impact banks, often reducing credit provided by banks to individuals. Overall,
those 235 properties within the county that are in different stages of foreclosure will negatively
impact the owners of those properties as well as the entire community.
Since foreclosures became a problem in 2008, the county has obtained CDBG Neighborhood
Stabilization Program (NSP) funding to assist the county in addressing the local foreclosure
problem. Those funds will be used to purchase foreclosed housing units, rehabilitate those units, and
sell or rent the units to low/moderate income households. Going forward, the county's policy should
be to continue to participate in the Neighborhood Stabilization Program.
Housing Conditions Summary
Currently, housing conditions, particularly the relationship between housing cost and household income,
are in a state of flux. This applies to the country as a whole, but more so to the State of Florida and
Indian River County.
Until the housing boom of 2004-2006, housing cost and household income generally grew in sync. Prior
30
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
to the boom, housing problems primarily affected the low and very low segments of the population. In
the pre -2004 period, workforce housing was generally affordable to the workforce.
In the 2004 to 2006 period, however, housing cost and household income diverged significantly.
Consequently, there were more housing affordability problems in the moderate income category, and
there was an emphasis on addressing workforce housing issues. With the recent decrease in housing
prices, however, it appears that the housing cost increases in the 2004 to 2006 period were unsustainable
and that housing has returned to levels more in line with the historic relationship between housing cost
and household income.
With the recent housing cost decreases, the housing issue focus has shifted back to very low and low
income households, with less emphasis on moderate income households and workforce housing. This
will allow resources to be concentrated on a smaller segment of the population, with the result being that
a higher percentage of the smaller segment can be assisted.
In terms of housing assistance strategies, there are generally two types. One type is monetary assistance,
where a household can be provided grants or loans for purchasing housing or rehabilitating a
substandard housing unit or where a household is provided an ongoing rental subsidy. Another type of
housing strategy is where actions are taken to reduce the cost of housing. These actions can involve
increasing densities, providing affordable housing density bonuses, or implementing inclusionary zoning
requirements. Some of those strategies are discussed in the next section.
Of the strategies being used in Indian River County, the most successful is the Habitat for Humanity
model. This model combines housing cost reduction with monetary housing assistance. In addition,
Habitat for Humanity provides homebuyer education and on-going mentoring.
With Habitat for Humanity projects, housing unit costs are reduced by building small, no -frill houses on
small lots. Costs are further reduced by the use of volunteer workers, sweat equity from Habitat clients,
and donated materials. Even with those cost reducing initiatives, Habitat clients receive county SHIP
loans for almost half of the cost of their housing unit.
More importantly, Habitat for Humanity focuses its efforts on the population segments which are most
housing disadvantaged. These are primarily very low and low income households. In the future, Indian
River County should continue to support Habitat for Humanity and other non-profit housing
organizations, continue to provide assistance to Habitat clients, and encourage other non-profit housing
organizations to provide housing assistance in the manner that Habitat for Humanity does.
31
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Figure 7.4
32
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Historically Significant Housing
Currently, there are only two single family housing units in Indian River County that are listed on
the National Register of Historic Places. These are the Judge Henry F. Gregory House and the
Theodore Hausmann Estate. While those are the only two houses in the county that have national
register designation, there are other historic properties in the county.
To identify historic structures, Indian River County, in 1989, completed a survey of buildings 50
years and older in the unincorporated county. That survey identified 284 properties, almost all
buildings, meeting the 50 year old criterion. For that survey, a record of each property was made,
including location, condition, integrity, and surroundings. Properties were also photographed and
identified by legal description and address.
As shown on Figure 7.5, most historic buildings were located in the unincorporated county's 5
census designated places. In terms of condition, the county's historic properties survey indicated
that, of the 284 buildings, 9 (3.2%) were in excellent condition, 198 (69.7%) were in good condition,
65 (22.9%) were in fair condition, and only 12 (4.2%) were deteriorated. Of those 284 properties,
262 (92.3%) were private single family residences, 7 (2.5%) were apartments, and other 15 (5.2%)
were non-residential buildings. There is no recent survey to indicate the existing condition of these
historical buildings.
While the survey determined that there were no buildings in the unincorporated county that should
be considered for inclusion on the National Register, the survey recommended that another survey
be undertaken to evaluate archaeological resources and sites.
The survey findings, however, do not imply that the 284 historic buildings are not important or
worthy of preservation. Because the buildings provide a valuable insight into development of the
county, the survey included recommendations for actions that the county could take to maintain the
integrity of those structures. In the future, the county should continue to provide rehabilitation loan
assistance to income qualified households who own historic houses.
33
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
34
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
• Group Homes
Indian River County classifies group homes by categories based on permitted occupancy rates.
There are four categories of group homes defined by county code. The categories are:
LEVEL I - Occupancy up to (8) residents
LEVEL II - Occupancy up to (12) residents
LEVEL III - Occupancy up to (20) residents
Residential Center - Occupancy up to (21) or more residents
Generally, group homes are defined as residential facilities which are designed to provide some form
of specialized care such as physical, social, or emotional support. In Indian River County, most of
the group homes are for elderly individuals.
Table 7.19 identifies the location of group homes in the unincorporated County.
In the past, the county has taken steps to permit the development of group homes and foster care
facilities in residential districts. According to county regulations, group homes are permitted in
single-family and multi -family residential districts when meeting all Environmental Health
requirements. Depending on the district and class of group home, a special exception or
administrative permit may be required; however, some districts permit certain classes of group
homes by right.
As to foster care homes, those which meet Environmental Health licensing requirements are
permitted within a wide range of single-family and multi -family districts. In the past, the county has
made reasonable efforts to accommodate foster care homes. Going forward, the county should
continue to ensure that sites for foster care homes will be available in any of several zoning
classifications.
In the future, congregate living arrangements and small group homes are likely to become more
popular and gain even greater acceptance. It can be expected that an aging population faced with
increased housing and medical costs will take advantage of the economic and social advantages
offered by such living arrangements. Consequently, the county's policy should be to continue to
allow group homes within its residential areas.
35
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
TABLE 7.19
GROUP HOMES IN UNINCORPORATED
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
2005
Elder's in Touch
12 beds (Level I)
Florida Baptist Retirement Center
41 beds (residential center)
Hibiscus Manor Retirement Home
72 beds (residential center)
Indian River Women's Group Home
12 beds (Level II)
Indian River Estates
100 beds(residential center)
(total care facility)
83,822
Isle of Vero (Fountains)
50 beds (residential center)
National Heal Corp.
216 beds (residential center)
White Dove
12 beds (Level II)
Alterra Clare Bridge Cottages
36 beds (residential center)
Alterra Sterling House
42 beds (residential center)
Aurora II
8 beds (level I)
Courtyards of Vero Beach
28 beds (residential center)
Green Gables
26 beds (residential center)
Merritt Gardens
104 units (residential center)
Orchid Island Manor
24 beds (residential center)
Pelican Gardens
50 beds (residential center)
The Place at Vero Beach
116 beds (residential center)
Stewart's Adult Living Facility
5 beds (Level I)
Total Beds
Source: Indian River County, Planning Division
859 beds
In the unincorporated portion of the county, existing group homes have a capacity of approximately
859 beds. As shown in Table 7.20, projections indicate that more group home beds will be needed
for years 2010, 2020, and 2030. Generally, group homes are provided by the private sector. For
group homes to be provided, however, the county must continue to permit group homes within all
residential zoning districts and approve site plans for the group homes that meet the county's
minimum regulations.
TABLE 7.20
NUMBER OF GROUP HOME BEDS NEEDED
UNINCORPORATED INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
YEAR
POPULATION
2005
83,822
2010
98,114
2020
119,164
2030
135,375
Source: Indian River County (projected based on the same ratio as 2005)
# OF GROUP HOME BEDS
859(l.02%)
1000
1215
1380
36
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
• Public and Private Coordination
In Indian River County, the future housing needs of the middle and upper income population
categories can be readily met by the normal functioning of the building/financing/regulatory
markets. On the other hand, the housing needs of persons and families in the very low and low
income groups cannot be met without a concerted effort by the private residential development
industry, lending institutions, municipal and county governments, and special interest organizations
devoted to improving the quality and affordability of housing.
Generally, experts on urban development agree that the quality of a community's housing (and
neighborhoods) is an excellent indication of the social, physical, and economic stability of the
community. Normally, community pride is evidenced by well -kept homes.
For that reason, zoning was initially established to protect neighborhoods and to provide safe and
sanitary living environments through the provision of open space standards and density limits.
Subsequently, housing maintenance codes were developed and adopted by communities as a means
of assuring adequate maintenance of housing and to prevent blight caused by gradual deterioration
of housing.
One means of addressing those issues in Indian River County is for county government to provide
leadership in assuring (1) high maintenance standards for housing; (2) prevention of overcrowding;
(3) preservation of existing housing in sound condition, especially housing of distinctive character;
(4) removal of blighted and unsafe housing; and (5) provision of housing at an affordable cost for
people in lower income groups.
Without assistance to reduce housing costs for those in the lower income groups, several conditions
could occur in the County. Overcrowding in existing housing could increase, resulting in code
enforcement problems and neighborhood deterioration. Households having insufficient income to
meet housing, food, and other essential needs could suffer from health and welfare problems,
resulting in indirect costs to the community. Finally, the lack of affordable housing could lead to a
decline in the labor supply for lower -paying employment classes. For those reasons, it is important
that Indian River County utilize a wide range of means to reduce housing costs. Addressing
regulatory standards and providing incentives for housing development are some of the most
effective ways to do so.
While providing housing is primarily a function of the private sector, there is much that the County
can do to set the framework and create the environment for the private sector to meet housing needs
at lower costs, without sacrificing community character and acceptable standards of housing quality.
37
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Within Indian River County, a wide range of sites, from in -fill sites in moderate -cost older
subdivisions to high-value waterfront locations, are available for new housing development. The
inventory of sites ranges from lots in low-density single-family neighborhoods to sites zoned for
medium density multi -family and condominium development.
Infrastructure is also available in the county, and system capacities are expanded as necessary to
meet the demands of new urban development. Along with adequate infrastructure, a full range of
mortgage/financial services are also available in the county to serve housing consumers.
Currently, Indian River County has permitting procedures for housing development and utilizes
generally standard code requirements, impact fee programs and enforcement practices. For existing
units, a property maintenance code applies within unincorporated Indian River County. There is,
however, no ongoing systematic program of housing inspections in older areas of the county.
In terms of housing construction permitting, those services for the unincorporated county and the
City of Vero Beach are centralized within the county administration building. Under normal
circumstances, application and plan review procedures do not cause delays, and county requirements
are conducive to efficient processing.
In Indian River County and other Florida communities, it is difficult to provide affordable housing
because of the need to improve infrastructure systems concurrent with development projects. As a
component of total housing cost, land cost generally increases to include necessary infrastructure
improvement costs. That occurs even though the county does not require inordinately high standards
for off-site improvements, and the improvements required are considered to be the minimum
necessary to assure safe, adequate, and serviceable neighborhoods.
Generally, existing housing is more affordable than newer housing, but existing housing may require
additional expenditures for upgrading and rehabilitation. For that reason, financial assistance or
incentives from publicly -financed programs or regulatory programs geared to existing housing offer
the most feasible means of achieving affordable housing in a high-growth area such as Indian River
County.
The following activities offer significant potential for strengthening and improving the delivery of
affordable housing in Indian River County.
• Regular field surveys of housing conditions to identify and classify areas suitable for
code enforcement, spot clearance, neighborhood -wide housing conservation
programs, and in -fill development possibilities.
• Information sharing directed toward builders, developers, and realtors, and
encouragement to undertake projects in areas where lower land costs enable lower
housing costs.
38
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Encouragement of development of "no-frills" starter homes in areas suited for small -
lot housing having convenient access to transportation, employment, and utility
services.
In the future, the county should continue to perform these tasks. Also, the county should maintain
its policy of expediting permits for affordable housing development near transportation,
employment, and utility services.
Land Requirements to Accommodate Future Housing Needs
The approximate acreage required to meet the projected housing needs through the year 2030 is
indicated in Table 7.21. Presently, the County has ample land to meet those projected residential
acreage needs. That includes the many platted, unbuilt on lots that have utilities available, as well as
the large vacant, unplatted tracts that can be readily developed by the extension of urban services.
Both the Potable Water and Sanitary Sub -elements describe the County's plant capacity for
accommodating increased demand, and the County has an ongoing program to extend facilities and
services to meet needs.
TABLE 7.21
LAND REQUIREMENTS TO MEET FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
2005-2030
TYPE OF UNIT
%ALL TYPES
UNITS
ACRES
Single -Family Low Density (assumes 2.4 units per gross acre)
50
13,832
5,763
Single and Multi -Family Medium Density (Assumes 4 units per gross acre
average)
30
8,299 IL074
Multi -Family Medium/High Density (Assumes 8 units per gross acre
average)
20
5,538
692
TOTAL
100
27,669 ii
8,529
Source: Indian River County Planning Division
Note: The percentage distribution is based on the assumption that the present lot sizes for single-family low density
development will decrease slightly in future years; that mobile homes will be included in the Single and Multi -
Family group (density of 4 units average per gross acre); and that the maximum density for multi -family units
will not change in future years, resulting in an average density for this housing group of 8 units per gross acre.
39
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
HOUSING STRATEGY ANALYSIS
Throughout the state and the country, there are various strategies that have been used by local
jurisdictions to address housing problems and needs. These strategies have advantages and
disadvantages. Some of these strategies could be appropriate for Indian River County. Following is an
analysis of strategies that are appropriate for Indian River County.
40
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Community Land Trust (CLT)
One tool to provide homeownership opportunities to households that would otherwise be renters is a
Community Land Trust. A Community Land Trust (CLT) is a nonprofit organization that seeks to
preserve housing affordability over the long term. A CLT preserves housing affordability by selling
homes to low or moderate income families, but retaining ownership of the land under these homes. The
CLT then leases the land to a homeowner for 99 years, while the homeowner owns the structure.
Buyers of land trust homes agree that, when they move, they will sell their home to another low or
moderate income family at an affordable price. Consequently, resale of CLT units is limited to income
eligible households, and resale prices are limited to keep CLT units affordable for the next homebuyer.
By owning the land under the house, the land trust ensures that the subsidy is retained for the benefit of
subsequent families. Therefore, the owner of a CLT unit may share in the equity produced by the sale of
a CLT unit, but will not realize a market rate of return.
According to the Central Florida Workforce Housing Toolkit, some of the most established CLT's are
Durham, North Carolina; Burlington, Vermont; The New Town, Tempe, Arizona; Sawmill,
Albuquerque, New Mexico; Middle Key, Florida; and Hannibal Square, Winter Park, Florida.
Generally, CLTs are used:
In fast-growing areas, where the price of real estate is escalating rapidly. They can be used in
gentrifying areas to preserve a community's character. Limits on resale prices ensure that some
housing remains affordable, even in these areas.
In disinvested neighborhoods, where CLTs can be used to increase owner occupancy, decrease
absentee ownership, improve the physical condition of housing and stabilize the community.
Such CLTs assist not only the buyers of the CLT homes, but also existing homeowners in the
area, who likely are lower income families.
■ In expensive resort communities, where CLTs can provide housing for the community's
workers.
Benefits:
- Provides permanent stock of affordable & workforce housing
- Lowers housing cost
- Provides some return of equity
- Provides for deduction of mortgage interest payments
- Provides financial stability (no fear of rent increase)
- No cost to the county
41
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Issues:
- Better for a household than renting, but not as good as traditional home ownership
- Resale restriction limits ability of the owner to utilize full equity
- Resale formula must be prepared carefully to provide some benefit to homeowner without
making the house unaffordable for the next homebuyer
- Mechanics of resale (direct sale or through CLT) are complicated and must be established
upfront
- Payment of ad valorem taxes and insurance are additional costs that an owner of a CLT
home must incur that a renter does not
Conclusion:
A CLT is an effective method of providing affordable homeownership opportunities. Although CLTs
are generally established by private non-profit groups, local governments usually assist non-profit
housing groups that are willing to form CLTs. This assistance may involve providing technical
assistance or providing surplus properties appropriate for affordable housing and others. In the future,
the county should support any non-profit housing organization seeking to establish a CLT by providing
surplus lands appropriate for affordable housing, when available, and technical assistance as needed.
42
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Private/Public Housing Trust Fund
Housing Trust Funds generally are established through an ordinance or legislation passed by a county,
city, or state legislature. Two steps are necessary to create a Housing Trust Fund. First, a revenue
source must be dedicated to the Housing Trust Fund, or other obligations that create revenue must be
established. Second, the Housing Trust Fund must be created as a separate and distinct entity that can
receive and disburse funds. Currently, the county has a housing trust fund for SHIP program funds and
an HER trust fund for HHR program funds.
A private/public housing trust fund may be established by a city or county to collect public and private
funds that may be used to assist income eligible households with the provision of affordable housing.
Any such private/public trust fund in Indian River County would be separate from the SHIP trust fund.
Benefits:
- Can provide gap financing (low interest loan or grant) for low income households
- No cost to the county, unless the county decides to contribute to the trust fund
- Local governments that cannot provide affordable housing within their jurisdictions could
contribute to a trust fund
- Could be used as match to get other federal or state funds
- Additional funding for provision of Affordable or Workforce Housing (gap financing or
leveraging other funds).
Issues:
No major issues
Conclusion:
Establishing a private/public housing trust fund could facilitate the provision of more affordable
housing. Within Indian River County, high cost barrier island towns that cannot provide affordable
housing within their jurisdiction could contribute to a private/public affordable housing trust fund. Also,
private parties, businesses, and developers could contribute funds to this trust fund. For those reasons,
the county should establish a private/public housing trust fund separate from its current SHIP and HHR
trust funds.
43
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Community Development Corporation (CDC)
Community Development Corporation (CDC) is a broad term referring to a not-for-profit organization
that is incorporated to provide programs, offer services, and engage in other activities that promote and
support a community. CDCs usually serve a geographic location such as a neighborhood or a town.
They often focus on serving lower-income residents or struggling neighborhoods. They can be involved
in a variety of activities, including economic development, education, and real estate development.
These organizations are often associated with the development of affordable housing.
Activities:
Benefits:
Issues:
■ Real estate development
- affordable housing
■ Economic development
-small business lending
-small business technical assistance
-small business incubation (i.e. provision of space at low or no cost to
start-up businesses)
■ Education
-early childhood education
-workforce training
■ Non profit incubation
■ Youth and leadership development
■ Advocacy
■ Community Planning
• Community Organizing
Facilitating development of affordable or workforce housing
Advocating for affordable housing
No cost to the county
No major issues
Conclusion:
An active CDC can assist with provision of affordable housing. In the future, the county should provide
technical assistance to any not-for-profit organization proposing to form a CDC.
44
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Employer Assisted Housing
Employer Assisted Housing (EAH) is an initiative whereby employers can assist their employees in
purchasing a home; in exchange, the employer is guaranteed that the participating employee will remain
with the company for a designated period of time. While the employee benefits as he/she receives
substantial assistance in obtaining a home, the employer benefits as the program is an effective
recruitment tool and aids in the retention of employees.
Employers who wish to assist employees with housing can undertake any number of activities,
including: providing (or partnering with another agency to provide) homeownership education and
counseling services; providing down payment assistance, closing cost assistance and/or second mortgage
financing as a grant, a low or no -interest loan or a forgivable loan; offering an employee a savings plan
with the employer making a matching contribution; providing a mortgage guarantee to assist employees
with securing financing; or acquiring property to rent to employees, either at a market or subsidized rate.
Employer assisted housing programs generally are used in areas where housing prices are high and/or
unemployment is low, and in areas where one employer is dominant.
Benefits:
Issues:
Provision of affordable or workforce housing
Effective recruitment and retention tools for large private and public employers
Additional cost to employer
Conclusion:
Employee assisted housing is an effective program to provide affordable housing for workers and to
retain those workers for longer periods. The county should promote this program by informing major
private and public employers of the possibilities and benefits of establishing an employer assisted
housing program.
45
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
New Construction Technologies
New construction technologies (such as modular homes, etc.) and new green building programs may be
utilized for the provision of affordable housing. In some cases, new construction technologies can
expedite the construction of new affordable homes and be more cost effective.
Benefits:
Decreases housing cost
Expedites housing production
Issues:
- None
Conclusion:
This is an effective way of reducing housing cost. Currently, the county allows new construction
technologies, including green building programs, and expedites permits for affordable housing projects.
46
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES
Goals, objectives, and policies considered appropriate for assuring an adequate and affordable
supply of housing in the county, conservation of the housing stock, prevention of blight and removal
of blight -housing, and identification of roles and responsibilities for achieving stable housing
conditions in the county are set forth in the following section.
GOAL 1
A housing supply which permits all households to enjoy safe, healthful, and affordable living
accommodations which meet accepted standards of affordability and which are located in pleasant
environments where a sense of civic pride and personal well-being can be achieved.
OBJECTIVE 1 HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
By 2020, the number of owner -occupied households paying more than 30% of their income for
housing will be less than the 19% of owner -occupied households paying more than 30% of their
income for housing in 2000, while the number of renter -occupied households paying more than 30%
of their income for rent will be less than the 39% of renter -occupied households who paid more than
30% of their income for rent in 2000.
POLICY 1.1: By 2015, all codes, ordinances, regulations, policies and procedures regarding
residential development review and construction shall be reviewed by the Community Development
Department staff to determine their impact on housing development costs. Those components which
unnecessarily increase the cost of housing without impairing the health, sanitation, fire safety,
structural integrity and maintenance requirements shall be eliminated.
POLICY 1.2: The county shall encourage infill development by providing infrastructure to infill
areas, removing blighting influences, stabilizing neighborhoods, and providing private developers
with information regarding available funding.
POLICY 1.3: The County shall coordinate with the Florida Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to
identify federal, state and other sources of funding, such as Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funds and Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program funds, earmarked for very low, low,
and moderate income housing and actively pursue those funds for local use by applying for funds
when appropriate. The county shall also assist and support private applicants applying for these
funds.
POLICY IA: The county shall continue to participate in housing bond programs (such as the
47
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
Escambia County bond program) in order to provide below market rate loans to very low, low, and
moderate income households for home purchases. The county shall inform financial institutions of
the availability of the bond programs.
POLICY 1.5: By 2012, the county shall, establish a web based permitting process.
POLICY 1.6: The county shall take all necessary steps to eliminate delays in the review of
affordable housing development projects. In order to define delay, the county hereby establishes the
following maximum timeframes for approval of projects when an applicant provides needed
information in a timely manner:
• Administrative approval - 5 days;
• Minor site plan - 5 weeks;
• Major site plan - 6 weeks;
• Special exception approval - 13 weeks.
Whenever these review times increase by 150% or more due to the work load of the review staff, the
county will begin prioritizing the review of affordable housing development project applications. In
prioritizing affordable housing development project applications, staff will schedule affordable
housing project applications for review before other types of project applications to ensure that
maximum review timeframes are not exceeded for affordable housing projects.
POLICY 1.7: As part of the adoption process for any county regulation which could affect housing
development, county planning staff shall prepare a Financial Impact Statement to assess the
anticipated impact of the proposed regulation on the cost of housing. When proposed regulatory
activities are anticipated to increase the estimated cost per unit for the development of housing, the
Financial Impact Statement shall include an estimated increased cost per unit projection. The
financial impact statement then will be reviewed by the Professional Services Advisory Committee,
the Planning and Zoning Commission, and, if possible, the Affordable Housing Advisory
Committee. Those groups shall consider the regulation's effect on housing cost in making their
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. The Board of County Commissioners will
consider the financial impact statement in making its final decision on the adoption of any proposed
regulations.
POLICY 1.8: The county shall expedite permits for housing projects utilizing new construction
technologies, including green building programs and Energy STAR® Program.
POLICY 1.9: The county shall support housing developments near transportation hubs, major
employment centers, and mixed use development by expediting the permit process for these types of
housing projects.
48
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
OBJECTIVE 2 BALANCED HOUSING MARKET
Within its residential areas, Indian River County will have adequate sites to accommodate current
and anticipated housing demand for all income groups and groups with special housing needs.
These sites shall have an appropriate land use and zoning designation which allows for a balanced
housing market with a mixture of housing types, including mobile and manufactured homes.
POLICY 2.1: The county shall maintain and enforce its adopted local fair housing ordinance to
ensure equal housing opportunity in accordance with Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 and
the Florida Fair Housing Act, Chapter 760.020, F.S.
POLICY 2.2: Indian River County shall continue to designate on its future land use plan map
sufficient land area with adequate density to accommodate the projected 2020 population.
Accordingly, the county's Future Land Use Map residential designations vary in density from 1 unit
per acre to 10 units per acre. All of this residentially designated land is located within the Urban
Service Area where adequate infrastructure is available to accommodate a wide variety of housing
types, including mobile homes, farmworker housing, housing for very low, low, and moderate
income households, and group homes and foster care facilities. As structured, the county's land use
designations accommodate housing units with a wide range of costs and physical characteristics (lot
sizes, setbacks, and land use mixes). These future land use map designations are situated to allow for
residential development that has:
Proximity to public transportation, employment centers, recreational
facilities, and community services such as shopping, personal services,
schools, daycare facilities, and health care facilities; and
2. Compatibility with adjacent land uses and existing neighborhoods.
The County's Residential Land Use Districts
Net Maximum Type of Residential
District Acres Density Development
M-2
1071
10
MF, SF, Mobile Home, Farmworker housing, Group homes
M-1
5158
8
MF, SF, Mobile Home, Farmworker housing, Group homes
L-2
13532
6
MF, SF, Farmworker housing, group homes
L-1
12574
3
MF, SF, Farmworker housing, group homes
R
956
1
SF, Farmworker housing, group homes
49
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
POLICY 2.3: The county shall provide technical assistance to existing and future community
development corporations.
POLICY 2.4: The county's general services department shall, pursuant to section 125.379 F.S.,
maintain an inventory of all surplus county -owned land and foreclosed properties that are
appropriate for affordable housing and dispose of those properties consistent with section 125.379
F.S. requirements.
POLICY 2.5: The county shall maintain its affordable housing density bonus provision for planned
development projects, allowing eligible affordable housing projects with a market value of
affordable housing units not no exceed 2 %2 times the county's median household income, to receive
up to a 20% density bonus based on the following table.
Very Low
Density Bonus
Additional Density Bonus for
Range of Possible
Income (VLI)
(Percent
Providing Additional Buffer and
Density Bonus
and Low
increase in
Landscaping based on one of the
Percentage
Income (LI)
allowable
following options (percent increase
(Percent increase
Affordable
units)
in allowable units)
in allowable
Units as
Percentage of
units)
Option I
Option II
Project's Total
Units
Material equal to
Material equal
a 20' wide Type
to a 25' wide
C buffer with 6'
Type B buffer
opaque feature
with 6' opaque
along residential
feature along
district
residential
boundaries and 4'
district
opaque feature
boundaries and
along roadways
4' opaque
feature along
roadways
More than 30%
10%
5% or
10%
10-20%
POLICY 2.6: The county shall maintain its current transfer of density provisions through the
planned development process.
POLICY 2.7: The county shall provide for the creation and preservation of affordable housing for all
50
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
current and anticipated future residents and households with special housing needs including rural
residents and farmworkers by allowing affordable housing in all residential areas, rehabilitating
existing units with SHIP funds, utilizing CDBG funds for housing rehabilitation and neighborhood
revitalization, and undertaking other measures to minimize the need for additional local services and
avoid a concentration of affordable housing units in specific areas.
OBJECTIVE 3 IMPROVED PROPERTY MAINTENANCE/ELIMINATION OF
SUBSTANDARD HOUSING CONDITIONS
By 2015, the number of sub -standard housing units (units lacking complete plumbing and units with
no heating facilities) will be 10% less than the number of sub -standard units identified in 2010
census.
POLICY 3.1: The Indian River County Property Maintenance Code shall continue to be the county's
standard for public health, safety, and welfare with regard to occupancy limits based on unit size,
provision of adequate plumbing facilities, and prevention of exterior physical deterioration. This
code will be enforced by the building division and code enforcement section staffs.
POLICY 3.2: The county shall do a periodic inventory of housing conditions, as permitted by
funding and staffing, on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis to identify units suitable for
concentrated code enforcement, rehabilitation, demolition, or other actions to achieve a suitable
residential environment.
POLICY 3.3: In areas with a high percentage of substandard housing units, the county shall provide
property owners with consumer information and technical assistance on new housing products and
their applications in order to encourage improved housing maintenance.
POLICY 3.4: The county shall improve the appearance of housing units within low income
neighborhoods by participating in the World Changers Program.
POLICY 3.5: The county shall offer rehabilitation loan assistance through its local housing
assistance program, cooperative ventures with non-profit groups, or Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) type programs to effect spot removal of blighted structures and blighting influences.
POLICY 3.6: The County shall continue to apply its SHIP program "Minimum Standards for
Rehabilitation of Residential Properties" to all SHIP rehabilitation work activities.
POLICY 3.7: The county shall work with community based organizations to inform and encourage
people to rehabilitate their home by utilizing the county's local housing assistance program.
51
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
OBJECTIVE 4 HOUSING ASSISTANCE/HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
Annually, at least 40 income eligible households will receive assistance through county's local
housing assistance program.
POLICY 4.1: The Board of County Commissioners shall request the Housing Authority to provide
an annual report of its activities to the Board of County Commissioners by July 1 of each year. The
report shall also identify the agency's objectives regarding the number and types of recipients the
Authority is able to serve annually.
POLICY 4.2: The Board of County Commissioners shall evaluate the annual activity report
prepared by the Housing Authority and take appropriate actions through funding, policy revisions,
and program initiatives to assist the authority to support, augment, and facilitate assistance to
households who are unable to provide housing within acceptable cost limits of 30% of gross
household income, or who require rehabilitation, financial, and/or technical assistance to assure safe,
healthful, and affordable housing.
POLICY 4.3: The county shall maintain its current policy of financing water and sewer capacity
charges for newly constructed housing units.
POLICY 4.4: The county shall maintain its Housing Trust Fund which provides below-market
interest rate financing, for downpayment/closing cost loans, impact fee/capacity charge loans,
rehabilitation loans, land acquisition loans, emergency/disaster loans, and Low Income Housing Tax
Credit (LIHTC) program matching grants for affordable housing units in the county. Disbursements
from the Housing Trust Fund will be revolving loans, with borrowers paying back principal and
applicable interest into the trust, therefore ensuring a permanent source of financing.
POLICY 4.5: The county shall enter into interlocal agreements with any county municipality which,
because of unusually high property values or coastal high hazard area constraints, cannot meet its
affordable housing needs within its jurisdiction, and desires to contribute to the Housing Trust Fund.
The amount and method of payment will be established prior to execution.
POLICY 4.6: The county shall maintain its affordable housing partnership with financial institutions
for leveraging State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP) funds.
POLICY 4.7: The county shall encourage increased home ownership by providing
downpayment/closing cost loan assistance to eligible very low income, low income, and moderate
income households through the county's local housing assistance program.
POLICY 4.8: The county shall utilize all appropriate federal, and state subsidy programs for
provision of affordable housing within the county by supporting private developers who are applying
52
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
for funding from programs such as the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program.
POLICY 4.9: The county shall require all applicants for downpayment/closing cost loan assistance
from the Indian River County Local Housing Assistance Program to attend a homebuyers'
educational program workshop as a prerequisite for getting a loan. The homebuyers' educational
program provides useful information to people wanting to buy their own home. Typical subjects
presented are as follows:
• Preparing for homeownership (including budgeting, saving, etc.)
• Shopping for a home
• Obtaining a mortgage (qualifying, processing, etc.)
• Understanding mortgages and the closing process
• Life as a homeowner (includes maintenance and responsibilities)
• Credit and credit reports
POLICY 4.10: The county shall assist non-profit housing organizations in establishing Community
Land Trusts (CLT) by providing technical support to those organizations.
POLICY 4.11: The county shall assist non-profit organizations in establishing Community
Development Corporations (CTC) by providing technical support to those organizations.
POLICY 4.12: The county shall assist employers with establishing employer assisted housing
projects by providing technical support to those employers.
POLICY 4.13: The county shall create a new private/public housing trust fund.
OBJECTIVE 5 IMPROVED INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CHARACTERISTICS
By 2020, the county, through assessment process or grants, will have provided paved roads, drainage
facilities, and/or centralized water systems to at least 5 additional existing subdivisions currently
without sufficient infrastructure.
POLICY 5.1: The county shall apply for federal and state funding such as the Small Cities
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to provide necessary improvements to
neighborhoods with existing infrastructure deficiencies.
POLICY 5.2: The county shall send a memorandum to property owners of subdivisions lacking
infrastructure to inform them of opportunities for obtaining infrastructure improvements to existing
neighborhoods.
53
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
POLICY 5.3: The county shall offer more flexible petition paving requirements for neighborhoods
where at least 50 percent of residents are very low and low income households.
OBJECTIVE 6 SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS
By 2020, The County will have sufficient lands in residential areas to accommodate group homes
and care facilities and will have at least 1,215 beds in group homes and care facilities.
POLICY 6.1: Indian River County shall require group homes and care facilities applicants to obtain
appropriate permits from the State Department of Children and Families.
POLICY 6.2: The county shall provide demographic and technical information to private and non-
profit sponsors willing to develop group and foster care facilities for county residents.
POLICY 6.3: The county shall enact regulations requiring that all foster and group home
developments include barrier -free design features.
POLICY 6.4: The county shall maintain its land development regulations that allow group homes
and foster care facilities in all residential districts. Group homes must obtain a valid license from
the Department of Children and Families and meet all the requirements of Ch. 419, F.S.
POLICY 6.5: The county shall provide supporting infrastructure and public facilities needed for
development of group homes, foster care facilities, and residential care facilities.
OBJECTIVE 7 FARMWORKER HOUSING
Through 2015, Indian River County will preserve the existing farmworker housing stock and ensure
that there will be no net loss in the number of farmworker housing units within the county (in 2009,
farmworker camps in the county had a 414 person capacity).
POLICY 7.1: The county shall provide assistance to private agricultural businesses to secure
funding for construction and/or rehabilitation of farmworker housing. The county's assistance will
include, but not be limited to, providing information regarding rural and farmworker housing needs,
ensuring the availability of lands with sufficient density and adequate infrastructure to support
farmworker housing developments, and providing funding assistance for farmworker housing
development.
POLICY 7.2: The county shall require permanent housing for farmworker households be located in
areas which contain infrastructure necessary for safe and sanitary habitation and in proximity of
other public services and facilities.
54
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
POLICY 7.3: The county shall permit seasonal farmworker housing as an accessory on-site use in
agricultural areas. This housing shall be required to have on-site infrastructure, as required by
county land development regulations.
POLICY 7.4: The county shall provide an outreach program for farmworkers and shall target State
Housing Initiatives Partnership Program (SHIP) funds to provide housing assistance for
farmworkers.
OBJECTIVE 8 HISTORIC HOUSING
By 2020, at least 200 of Indian River County's historic properties will be in excellent or good
condition.
POLICY 8.1: Technical assistance shall be provided by the County staff to individuals and
organizations having individual or collective interests in conserving historic or architecturally -
significant structures, neighborhoods, and areas. Assistance will, at a minimum, include preparation
of applications for the Historic Preservation Grants -In -Aid program administered by the Division of
Archives, History and Records Management Bureau of the Florida Department of State.
POLICY 8.2: The county shall maintain and implement its Historic and archeological resource
protection Ordinance (Ch. 933, LDRs).
OBJECTIVE 9 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
By 2012, Indian River County will have interlocal agreements with the municipalities within the
county to provide housing assistance to very low, low, and moderate income households.
POLICY 9.1: The county shall maintain its local housing assistance programs. As part of this
coordination process, the county will accept funds, land, in-kind services, or other types of payments
for housing assistance purposes from local municipalities which are unable to provide sites for low
cost housing within their jurisdictions.
POLICY 9.2: The county will inform the municipalities within the county of the existence of the
county's housing trust fund and of the opportunity for the municipalities to contribute to the fund in
order to meet their share of county housing needs.
POLICY 9.3: The county shall, as an economic solution to affordable housing, provide incentives as
listed in the Economic Development Element of the plan for job creation and shall coordinate with
the jobs and education partnership program council and Indian River State College for job training
for county residents.
55
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
OBJECTIVE 10 RELOCATION HOUSING
Through the time horizon of the plan, Indian River County will maintain a relocation housing policy
for persons displaced by public action or public activities.
POLICY 10.1: Residents displaced by housing rehabilitation and redevelopment or other publicly -
initiated activities shall be provided with a list of possible housing opportunities and financial
assistance to expedite their relocation.
POLICY 10.2: The Board of County Commissioners shall provide funding to the Housing Authority
on an emergency basis to ensure that households displaced by public action or public activity are
guaranteed adequate housing.
56
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
An important part of any plan is its implementation. Implementation involves execution of the
plan's policies. It involves taking actions and achieving results.
For the Housing Element, implementation involves various activities. While some of these actions
will be ongoing, other activities will be taken by certain points in time. For each policy in this
element, Table 7.22 identifies the type of action required, the responsible entity for taking the action,
the timing, and whether or not the policy necessitates a capital expenditure.
To implement the Housing Element, several different types of action must be taken. These include:
adoption of land development regulations and ordinances, coordination, preparation of studies and
evaluation and monitoring reports, establishment of committees, provision of technical assistance,
provision of funds, and others.
Overall plan implementation responsibility will rest with the Housing Authority and planning
department. Besides its responsibilities as identified in Table 7.22, the planning department has the
additional responsibility of ensuring that other entities discharge their responsibilities. This will
entail notifying other applicable departments of capital expenditures to be included in their budgets,
notifying other departments and groups of actions that must be taken, and assisting other
departments and agencies in their plan implementation responsibilities.
57
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
TABLE 7.22
HOUSING ELEMENT
IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
POLICY #
TYPE OF ACTION
RESPONSIBILITY
TIMING
CAPITAL
EXPENDITURE
1.1
Study/Land Dev. Reg.
BCC/PS
2015
No
1.2
Encourage Infill Dev.
BCC/All Depts.
Ongoing
No
1.3
Identify/Seek funding
PS
Ongoing
No
1.4
Participation in Housing
Bond Programs
BCC/PS
Ongoing
No
1.5
Web Based Permitting
Building
2012
No
1.6
Eliminate Permit Delays
BCC/PS
Ongoing
No
1.7
Financial Impact Statement
PS
Ongoing
No
1.8
Expedite Permits
Building Division
Ongoing
No
1.9
Housing Support
PS
Ongoing
No
2.1
Maintain Fair Housing
Ordinance
PS/BCC
Ongoing
No
2.2
FLU Map Designation
PS/BCC
Ongoing
No
2.3
Technical Assistance
PS/Housing Authority Staff
Ongoing
No
2.4
Identify Surplus Property
Gen. Services Dept.
Ongoing
No
2.5
Providing A.H. Density
Bonus
PS/BCC
Ongoing
No
2.6
Providing for Transfer of
Density
PS/BCC
Ongoing
No
2.7
Creation and Preservation of
Affordable Housing
PS/BCC
Ongoing
No
3.1
Maintaining Housing Code
PS/BCC
Ongoing
No
3.2
Survey
PS/Code Enf. Off.
Ongoing
No
3.3
Education/Public Info.
PS/Bldg. Dept.
Ongoing
No
3.4
Improve Neighborhood
Appearance
PS/Worldchangers Program
Ongoing
No
3.5
Rehabilitation Loan
PS/BCC
Ongoing
Yes
58
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
POLICY #
TYPE OF ACTION
RESPONSIBILITY
TIMING
CAPITAL
EXPENDITURE
Assistance
3.6
Apply SHIP Minimum
Rehabilitation Standard
PS
Ongoing
No
3.7
Encourage Rehabilitation
PS
Ongoing
No
4.1
Annual Report
Housing Authority
Annual
No
4.2
Evaluate
BCC
Annual
No
4.3
Financing Water & Sewer
Capacity Charges
BCC/Utilities Staff
Ongoing
No
4.4
Housing Trust Fund
BCC/Planning
Ongoing
No
4.5
Interlocal Agreements
BCC/Municipal
2012
No
4.6
Maintaining Affordable
Housing Partnership
PS/Financial Ins./Others
Ongoing
No
4.7
Increased Home Ownership
PS
Ongoing
No
4.8
Utilize Fed. & State Funds
PS/BCC
Ongoing
No
4.9
Homebuyer Educational
Workshop
PS/Financial Ins./Others
Ongoing
No
4.10
Assist with Creation of CLT
PS/Non-Profit
Ongoing
No
4.11
Assist with Establishment of
CTC
PS/Non-Profit
Ongoing
No
4.12
Assist with Employer
Assisted Housing
PS
Ongoing
No
4.13
Private/Public Housing Trust
Fund
PS/Budget
Ongoing
No
5.1
Application for Funding
PS
Ongoing
No
5.2
Public Information
PS
Ongoing
No
5.3
Flexible Petition Paving
BCC/Pub. Works
Ongoing
No
6.1
Coordination
BCC/HRS
Ongoing
No
6.2
Providing Information
PS
Ongoing
No
6.3
Land Development Reg.
PS/BCC
1998
No
6.4
Maintaining LDRs
PS/BCC
1998
No
59
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
POLICY #
TYPE OF ACTION
RESPONSIBILITY
TIMING
CAPITAL
EXPENDITURE
6.5
Providing Infrastructure and
Public Facilities
BCC/Utilities/Public Works
Ongoing
Yes
7.1
Technical Assistance
PS
Ongoing
No
7.2
Farmworkers Housing with
Sufficient Infrastructure
PS/BCC
Ongoing
No
7.3
Accessory On-site Housing
PS/BCC
Ongoing
No
7.45
Outreach Program
PS
Ongoing
No
8.1
Technical Assistance
PS
Ongoing
No
8.2
Ordinance Maintenance
PS/BCC
Ongoing
No
9.1
Maintaining LHAProgram
BCC/PS
Ongoing
No
9.2
Letter of Encouragement
BCC/PS
Ongoing
No
9.3
Creation of Jobs and Job
Training
BCC/EDC/Chamber of Comm.
Ongoing
No
10.1
Relocation Assistance
BCC/PS/Pub Works
Ongoing
No
10.2
Emergency Funding
BCC/Housing Authority
Ongoing
No
BCC = Board of County Commissioners
PS = Planning Staff
EVALUATION & MONITORING PROCEDURES
To be effective, a plan must not only provide a means for implementation; it must also provide a
mechanism for assessing the plan's effectiveness. Generally a plan's effectiveness can be judged by
the degree to which the plan's objectives have been met. Since objectives are structured, as much as
possible, to be measurable and to have specific timeframes, the plan's objectives are the benchmarks
used as a basis to evaluate the plan.
Table 7.23 identifies each of the objectives of the Housing Element. It also identifies the measures
to be used to evaluate progress in achieving these objectives. Most of these measures are
quantitative, such as adopted land development regulations, number of applicants provided housing
assistance, unmet housing needs, and others. Besides the measures, Table 7.23 also identifies
timeframes associated with meeting the objectives.
The planning department and Housing Authority staffs will be responsible for monitoring and
evaluating the Housing Element. This will involve collection of data and compilation of information
60
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
regarding met and unmet housing needs.
While monitoring will occur on a continual basis, formal evaluation of the Housing Element will
occur every five years in conjunction with the formal evaluation and appraisal of the entire
comprehensive plan. Besides assessing progress, the evaluation and appraisal process will also be
used to determine whether the Housing Element objectives should be modified or expanded. In this
way the monitoring and evaluation of the Housing Element will not only provide a means of
determining the degree of success of the plan's implementation; it will also provide a mechanism for
evaluating needed changes to the plan element.
61
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
TABLE 7.23
HOUSING ELEMENT
EVALUATION MATRIX
OBJECTIVE # MEASURE TIMEFRAME
1 Percentage of owner 2020
occupied and renter occupied
households paying more than
30% of their income for
housing expenses
2
Adequate sites/Mix of
Ongoing
dwelling unit types
3
Number of substandard
2015
housing units
4
Number of households
Annual
assisted
5
Number of subdivisions
2020
which received infrastructure
improvements
6
Number of beds in group
2020
homes, and care facilities
7
Number of farmworker
2015
dwelling units
8
Number of historically
2020
significant dwelling units in
good or excellent condition
9
Existence of interlocal
2012
agreements
10
Mechanism for relocation
Ongoing
housing units
FACommunity Development\Comprehensive
Plan Elements\CLEANED UP COMP PLAN ELEMENTSMUSING element.doc
62
Community Development Department Indian River County
Comprehensive Plan Housing Element
63
Community Development Department Indian River County