Marion County Evaluation and Appraisal Report

Transcription

1 Marion County Evaluation and Appraisal Report Prepared for: Marion County Board of County Commissioners Prepared by: Marion County Planning Department January 2019

2 1.1 Purpose and Setting The Evaluation and Appraisal Review (EAR) process gives the community a chance to assess the way it has been growing and the way it wants to grow. During, and immediately following the County s last EAR cycle in 2009, the country experienced a major recession, which was felt locally. This resulted in a reduction in the rate of new construction, as well as, a reduction in local planning staff. However, the rate of Future Land Use Amendments remained constant; the Board has considered over 95 FLU amendments since 2010, affecting over 4,000 acres of land. In 2011, statewide reform to growth management also affected local planning and the EAR process. Many of the previously required, analyses, such as, financial feasibility of adopting levels of service, pattern of growth in relation to what was originally anticipated, and assessment of major issues, are no longer required and are not part of this report. At this time, the EAR only requires that local governments review their existing plans to ensure that they are consistent with state statutes and encourages local governments to make changes if necessary to respond to local conditions. Marion County revised its Comprehensive Plan in 2014, following the most significant statutory changes, and the Plan was found to be in compliance with State Statutes at that time. For this EAR effort, the County determined that changes to the Transportation and Intergovernmental Elements were necessary in order to address changes in state statutes since 2011, and staff was directed to update the Future Land Use Element policies related to the Farmland Preservation Area and Urban Growth Boundary to reflect changes in local conditions. The county s first Plan was adopted in 1992 in an environment very different from today. When the original Future Land Use Map was drawn, it was not with the intent of achieving a particular pattern of development as much as to accommodate existing zoning districts, which were speculative to begin with (1998, EAR). Further, it was not until the late 1990s that the County began to provide central water and sewer services in the unincorporated area, so consideration was not given to the long-term costs of expanding and maintaining that infrastructure. The Plan has been amended many times since its adoption in 1992 to improve its effectiveness and to incorporate innovative planning methods. Policies addressing an urban boundary, farmland preservation, transfer of development rights, a community 2

3 redevelopment area and springs protection zones are a few of the improvements. In addition, since 2001, seven corridor studies have been prepared, providing detailed area master plans for most of the County s high growth areas. However, the effectiveness of these policies has been limited, and staff was directed to evaluate ways to improve those related to farmland preservation and the urban growth boundary as part of this EAR cycle. At the BCC s direction, County staff undertook a complete overhaul of the Plan in 2014 in an effort to enhance economic development during the recession. Future Land Use designations were significantly intensified within the Urban Growth Boundary and a number of longstanding policies were removed. Overall, the changes had the effect of expanding the potential area in need of urban infrastructure without sufficient planning or necessary funding to provide such services, during a time when the County s transportation impact fees were suspended. Since that time, the County has reinstated a lowlevel transportation impact fee and is developing a water and wastewater master plan to address long-term needs. Providing urban services to the allocated urban area with the existing planning and funding mechanisms remains the County s greatest challenge in terms of realizing the full development potential of its designated areas. Under previous statutes, the EAR efforts in 1998 and 2009 included a complete analysis of population and development trends and took a hard look back at the Comprehensive Plan s successes and shortcomings, particularly as they related to major issue areas. Community visioning and stakeholder meetings were held as part of the 2009 EAR cycle, and the following statements included in the adopted report:.there is general consensus among those most familiar with the Plan (e.g., the County Commission, planning staff, FDCA, the business community, citizen groups, etc.) that the Plan has major shortcomings and is in need of a major overhaul. The Plan has not been successful in corralling urban sprawl, limiting commercial strip development, dealing with the backlog of platted subdivision lots, stemming the loss of agricultural lands, coordinating land use and infrastructure, and solving other important issues. Another major issue identified for the FLU Element was that the lack of organization, structure and clarity make it difficult to use to make reasoned policy determinations. While the 2014 amendments streamlined the Plan in number of pages and increased the amount of designated urban area, it didn t address major issues identified in the 2009 EAR, reduce inconsistencies or provide clarity in the FLUE. Staff recommends 3

4 developing a more effective method of tracking development entitlements and methodology that is more sophisticated for linking land uses, population and infrastructure. For the 2018 EAR Amendment, staff has proposed policies for Planned Service Areas to direct growth to areas where there will be adequate transportation and water/wastewater infrastructure over the planning horizon. Successful implementation of the PSAs is dependent upon master planning efforts for the expansion of water/wastewater and transportation services. The specific Planned Service Areas will be identified through interdepartmental coordination once the water and wastewater plan is completed, and additional Comprehensive Plan Amendments are expected at that time; anticipated to be around 18 months from this EAR transmittal. Some policies that appear new in this amendment are being reintroduced after deletion in 2014, in order to counteract unintended consequences from their removal. These include Rural Neighborhoods (Policy 2.1.7) and step-down density allowance for areas outside of the urban growth boundary where necessary infrastructure is limited (Policy 2.1.2). Overall, the proposed amendments are intended to provide a clearer distinction between the urban and rural areas, with special attention to the Farmland Preservation Area. Although a complete analysis of population projects, demographics and development trends is not required as part of the EAR process, these tasks should be performed routinely, in order to ensure that the policies in the Plan are meeting their intent, consistent with FS. Staff recommends that this analysis is conducted within the FY, similar to the data analysis and community visioning effort undertaken in While the Plan has its limitations with regard to controlling urban sprawl and strip commercial development, it has had better results managing growth in rural areas. The density in most rural areas is one unit per ten acres and the character of most of these areas has remained agricultural. During the Community Visioning workshops held in 2008, the only near unanimous sentiment was that any future plan must protect the County s rich rural resources. A similar sentiment was expressed during the 2018 EAR cycle, likely in response to recent Plan Amendment approvals for development in the Farmland Preservation Area, and perceived threats to rural areas from FDOT s coastal connector and other, large-scale urban developments. The County s rural areas are a reminder of what many parts of central Florida were like forty or fifty years ago; landscapes that no longer exist in many locales. 4

5 feasible during this EAR process due to limitations on time and The EAR is divided into three sections. Section 1 - Introduction describes the purpose of the EAR, gives a brief community profile, identifies challenges and issues in the current Plan, details the Plan update schedule Figure Marion County s Regional Location and reports on public participation. Section Two Analysis provides cursory review of existing data and contains analysis of population, land use, extent of vacant and developable land and historic development patterns. Again, staff recommends that a more thorough analysis and community visioning is conducted in the next fiscal year. The analysis was not staffing. Section Three- Proposed amendments include the necessary changes to the Transportation and Intergovernmental Coordination Elements in order to reflect changes in state statutes, and changes to the Future Land Use Element to address changes in local conditions. Staff analysis related to the amendments is also provided in this section. 1.2 COMMUNITY PROFILE Marion County is Florida s sixth largest county in terms of area encompassing 1,663 square miles (1,579 square miles of land). It is the seventeenth most populous county, with an estimated 2018 population of 353,898 persons (BEBR, 2018). This represents a population change of about 5.4% over 2010 estimates. With 223 persons per square mile, it ranks thirty-first in Florida in terms of density. Although Marion County s 84 square miles of water area ranks only forty-first of Florida s sixty seven counties, it is nevertheless blessed with genuinely world-class water resources. Silver Springs and Rainbow Springs are the two largest inland springs in North America. Silver Glen Springs is also a first magnitude spring. Some of 5

6 Florida s largest rivers flow through the County or along its borders including the Ocklawaha, Withlacoochee and St. Johns Rivers. Lake George with a surface area of 73 square miles is the second largest lake in Florida and forms part of Marion County s eastern border. Orange Lake, the State s tenth largest lake (surface area 20.6 square miles), forms part of the County s northern border. Lake Weir in the southeastern part of the County has a surface area of 8.9 square miles. The County s neighbors are Alachua County to the north, Putnam County to the north and northeast, Volusia County to the east, Lake County to the east and south, Sumter County to the south, Citrus County to the southwest, and Levy County to the west (Figure 1.2.1). The County is centrally located relative to three of the State s largest cities; Orlando (80 miles), Tampa (98 miles) and Jacksonville (101 miles). Interstate 75 (I-75) bisects the County and is one of the two major north-south highway corridors in the state averaging over 74,000 vehicle trips per day. Four Federal Highways (US 27, US 41, US 301, and US 441) cross north-south through Marion County. Seven State Roads (SR 19, SR 35, SR 40, SR 200, SR 326, SR 429, SR 464, and SR 484) also pass through Marion County. Two north-south rail lines, one of which is the major north-south route extending down the central portion of Florida, join these roadways. The roadways and railroads, in combination with the County s central location, give Marion County a strategic position within Florida. This position is reflected by the designation of four roadways as part of the Florida Department of Transportation s Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS) along with the major north-south rail line that passes through Marion County and the City of Ocala, which is designated part of the Florida Department of Transportation s Strategic Intermodal System (SIS). Through the FIHS and SIS networks, Marion County serves as a gateway to central and south Florida from the north, and to north Florida, Georgia, and Alabama from the south. Regionally, Marion County is situated in north central Florida. It is the sole county in the Ocala Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) which is ranked 14th largest in terms of population of Florida s nineteen MSAs. Between 1990 and 2000, the County s population increased by an average of 6,400 persons per year. Between 2000 and 2009, the yearly increase rose to 7,947 persons per year, but between 2010 and 2018, population grew by only 2,824 persons per year. Between 2008 and 2014, Marion County, along with the majority of the US, experienced one of the worst economic downturns in County history. According the June 2009 employment data issued by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the unemployment rate for the 6

7 Ocala/Marion County MSA had risen to 12.6%. At that time, the County had the 7 th highest unemployment rate in the State. As of September 2018, unemployment was 3.6%. Table 1.3.1: EAR-Based Meeting Schedule Step in Process Significant Dates Workshop(s) with Board of County Oct. 4, 2018/ Nov. 9, Commissioners 2018 Sept. 12, 2018/ Nov. Public Meetings 6, 2018/ Jan. 3, 2019 Public Hearings with Planning Commission Nov. 21, 2018 and County Commission on draft EAR Transmit EAR to FDCA Jan. 15, 2019 Receive Objection, Recommendation and Comments Letter from FDEO within sixty March 2019 days. Within 180 days of Adopt EAR Based Comp Plan Amendments DEO Comments Historically, much of the economic growth in Marion County has been tied with the residential construction industry, mining, and manufacturing. Employment is concentrated within a relatively small number of economic sectors. Service and administrative services represent the largest concentration of employees by industry, though farming, fishing and forestry are also significant employment sectors as of Higher wage industries related to information and professional services only account for a small number of total employees within Marion County. 1.3 EAR Schedule The State mandated schedule calls for Marion County s Evaluation and Appraisal Review (EAR) amendments to be transmitted to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity by February 1, FDEO will issue an Objection, Recommendation and Comments Report within sixty days after receiving the EAR based amendments. Marion County will then have 180 days to adopt EAR-based plan amendments, or they will be considered withdrawn by the agency. The major steps in the EAR process, with approximate dates, are outlined in Table Public Participation Source: FDEO,

8 Marion County Planning and Zoning staff held three public meetings in order to obtain input into the EAR-based Plan Amendments. The first was held on October 4, at the Marion County Growth Services Training Room. The second was November 6, 2018 at the Marion County Freedom Public Library. The third was held January 3, Further, Planning and Zoning staff were available to meet with interested stakeholders at any time during the EAR process. 1.5 Summary Marion County submitted its letter to notify the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity of its intent to modify the Future Land Use Element, Transportation Element and Intergovernmental Coordination Element on January 16, Minor modifications to these elements were anticipated, because the state significantly changed growth management policy in 2011, and the County completed a thorough update to the Plan in 2014, which responded to a number of statutory changes. A summary of significant statutory changes since the County s last EAR is found in Attachment 2. In addition to the required updates, staff was directed to review the FLUE policies related to the Farmland Preservation Area and Urban Growth Boundary, which is encouraged as part of the EAR ( (3), F.S). 2.1 INTRODUCTION Florida Statutes no longer require that certain analytical tasks be conducted in the evaluation and appraisal review; however, it is prudent for the County to evaluate issues such as population changes and projections, development trends, and the ability of our community to meet demands of growth on infrastructure. Staff has conducted a cursory overview of these issues based on available data, provided herein and recommends a more detailed analysis outside of the EAR effort. 2.2 POPULATION ANALYSIS Population analysis is a starting point for many elements of the comprehensive plan. Land use, housing, transportation, infrastructure, and education are some of the elements that rely on existing and projected population to help determine and plan for future needs. Features of each past era contribute to our present landscape. Historic (1900 to 2018) population figures show how the County arrived at its current population. Recent (2008 to 2018) population growth demonstrates the impact of the construction boom and economic recession on Marion County s development 8

9 trends since completion of the last EAR. To some extent, this data can be used to project future (2008 to 2035) population and its distribution. For the purpose of this EAR, a timeline of is used to discuss construction trends when possible, in an effort to normalize the anomalous nature of the past decade s economic and development scenario HISTORIC POPULATION GROWTH Table lists Marion County s and the State of Florida s population and percent change by decade from 1900 to Overall, Marion County has grown by more than 25% each decade since the 1950s; with the most drastic increases occurring between 1970 and 1980 and then again between 1980 and In fact, from 1970 to 2000, the County s population almost quadrupled (375 percent), increasing by 189,886 or an average of 6,329 persons per year. Again, the effect of the recession is shown in the latest population estimates, where Marion County s population has grown only 7% over the past eight years. The same trend can be seen state-wide in Florida except that Marion County has grown in population at a slower rate than the overall state, in contrast to the previous three decades. Less than two percent of the state s population live in Marion County; a trend that has remained consistent over the past 100 years. Table 2.2.1: Comparison of Marion County and State of Florida Year Population Growth Marion County Population Marion County Percent Growth Percent of State Population State of Florida Population State of Florida Percent Growth ,403 NA 4.62% 528,542 NA , % 3.58% 752, % , % 2.47% 968, % , % 2.01% 1,468, % , % 1.65% 1,897, % , % 1.38% 2,771, % , % 1.04% 4,951, % , % 1.02% 6,791, % , % 1.26% 9,746, % , % 1.51% 12,938, % , % 1.62% 15,982, % , % 1.76% 18,801, % 9

10 , % 1.69% 20,840, % Sources: U.S. Census 1900 to 2010 and BEBR 2018 unincorporated area of Marion County captured about 80% of population growth. In this document, we take a conservative approach and utilize 100% absorption of new population into the PROJECTED POPULATION Marion County utilizes the University of Florida s Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) medium population figures as a basis for all population estimates and projections. At the time of the last Evaluation and Appraisal Report, 2009, the total population in Marion County was listed as 279,210. US Census data collected in 2010 revealed a higher population at 331,298. The rate of growth in the County slowed over the past two decades, and BEBR projections indicate that this will continue, with decade-todecade growth over the next twenty-five years at less than 10%, or 27% growth over the planning horizon to 2045 (Table 2.2.2). If past unincorporated area. Year Table 2.2.2: Comparison of Marion County and State of Florida Population Projections Marion County Population Marion County Percent Growth Percent of State Population State of Florida Population State of Florida Percent Growth ,898 NA 1.70% 20,840,568 NA , % 1.69% 21,526, % , % 1.67% 23,061, % , % 1.66% 24,357, % , % 1.66% 25,485, % , % 1.66% 26,492, % , % 1.65% 27,423, % Source: BEBR 2018 trends continue, the unincorporated area will receive the majority of growth. Over the planning horizon ( ), the population is expected to increase by approximately 99,000 people, for a resulting population of 452,935 in There are five municipalities in Marion County, three of which make up our urban cores, and each is able to absorb a portion of this increase. However, between 2000 and 2018, the Housing demand is estimated by dividing the projected population increase by 2.32 persons per household and applying a vacancy rate of 13 percent (U.S. Census 2000). The total is multiplied by 1.25 as a measure to ensure that the housing market is not restricted. Based on these projections, the County would need approximately 46,875 new housing units over the next twenty-seven years. This demand 10

11 will be met through existing inventories and by new housing. As a point of interest, there are currently over 96,000 vacant parcels within existing platted subdivisions in unincorporated Marion County, which supports compliance with Ch F.S., adequate allocation of land uses to meet future demand, as discussed in further detail below. 2.3 CHANGES IN LAND AREA In 2014, the Plan was overhauled in an effort to reduce barriers to construction-based development. This helped to identify true FLU classifications for Developments of Regional Impact, but also resulted in intensification of future land uses for large portions of the area within the Urban Growth Boundary that were previously designated Rural Land. The changes also included re-naming Future Land Uses, and a true accounting of the land use changes is not readily available. However looking at just the rural lands converted to urban under that effort, approximately 3,000 acres were converted to Commercial and Employment Center FLU, while another 10, 813 were converted to Low Residential FLU. Further analysis is needed to determine where the Low Residential designations were part of already-approved DRI scale projects. Ninety-seven FLU Amendments were heard and approved through the normal application process between 2010 and 2018, affecting approximately 4,765 acres. Thirty-one percent of the amendments converted properties from Rural Lands to urban designations. The largest affected area was in the NW extreme of the Urban Growth Boundary with the Golden Ocala/World Equestrian Center Development. To summarize, a minimum of 4,000 acres of rural area was converted to urban area since the last EAR (not including those areas converted to Low Residential), adding to the inventory of lands available for urban development and subject to urban infrastructure needs. 2.4 EXTENT OF VACANT AND DEVELOPABLE LAND As seen in the previous section, the unincorporated area contains the vast majority (96.6 percent) of the County s land area. About onethird of this area is the Ocala National Forest and conservation lands, with limited development potential. However, much of the developable area is still vacant, and there is sufficient vacant developable land to meet the needs of Marion County residents over the planning horizon. Vacant and developable land analysis looks at characteristics of vacant platted subdivision lots and vacant future 11

12 land uses designated on the FLUM. Figure shows vacant residential lands (platted and unplatted) within unincorporated Marion County. Within platted subdivisions, there are currently 96,158 vacant residential parcels. This value does not necessarily reflect the true development potential of the vacant areas as there are often multiple, contiguous platted lots under singular ownership. However, it does represent a reduction from the 2008 EAR calculation of 102,922 vacant lots. The attrition rate of about 675 homes built per year in existing subdivisions relates to an approximate 142 yr timeframe for build-out for existing, platted lots. Since 1998, there have been no residential development projects in Marion County on the scale of medium/high-density, large area communities such as Silver Springs Shores, Marion Oaks or Rainbow Lake Estates, which represent a significant portion of the Figure Vacant Lands with Residential FLU Designation. Vacant Residential Urban Growth Boundary 2018 Principal Streets VACANT SUBDIVISION LOTS One of the legacies of past development approvals is the inventory of vacant platted lots in subdivisions that measure build-out in terms of generations and not years. The County s inventory of vacant subdivision lots includes only existing parcels in platted subdivisions, whereas approved but yet unplatted subdivisions are discussed in Sec undeveloped lots. However, several large subdivisions are completely or almost completely built out. These include Oak Run, Rainbow Springs, Stonecrest, Spruce Creek Preserve, Spruce Creek South, Spruce Creek Golf and Country Club, and The Villages of Marion. All of these developments are age-restricted communities. Residents over the age of 55 account for approximately 40% of Marion County s population. Residents between the age of 18 and 54 make up 38% of the population, and those under age 18 account for 22% INACTIVE SUBDIVISION LOTS 12

13 In 2010, the EAR identified that 53 percent of subdivisions countywide (1,010) could be considered inactive based on having no lots permitted from 2000 to The report identified that, 29,072 lots (28 percent) were in inactive subdivisions, equating to 58,842 acres or 38 percent of all subdivision acres. Almost 60 percent of the vacant subdivision lots were found within four areas; Marion Oaks has the most vacant subdivision lots with 20,778 (20.2 percent) followed by Dunnellon area with 19,735 (19.2 percent), Silver Springs Shores at 10,684 (10.4 percent), and Lake Weir 10,137 (9.8 percent). There are a number of reasons why some of these subdivisions have not built out. These include lack of basic infrastructure such as paved roads, remote location, and poor design and upkeep with few or none of the amenities standard in newer developments. Homes in these older subdivisions have individual wells and/or onsite treatment and disposal systems (OSTDS). When they contain large numbers of vacant platted lots such as Silver Springs Shores and Marion Oaks, they become an environmental concern. In Marion Oaks, only a small part of the subdivision has central sewer. However, Marion County is undertaking a major water and wastewater planning effort, which will address the feasibility of provided in these services to urban areas within the county This analysis was not updated as part of this EAR effort, but is recommended in the future along with other data management updates. A true accounting of these lots will assist with evaluation of the Transfer of Development Rights Program and Antiquated Subdivision policies UNPLATTED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS Between 2010 and 2018, twenty-three Planned Unit Developments were approved. This increased the number of potential residential units by approximately 23,758 and commercial square footage by 8,120,000. Of these approved subdivisions, one residential development has been platted and built, at a total of 5,432 units for the Villages, and about 1 million square feet of commercial retail is under construction as General RV. There are still a significant backlog of approved, yet undeveloped entitlements for both commercial and residential properties that are expected to develop as the population grows VACANT COMMERCIAL LANDS Within Marion County, there are approximately 12,573 acres of commercial designated properties that are vacant or currently used for agriculture. Of these, 9,228 are within the Urban Growth Boundary, representing a development potential of 684M square 13

14 feet of commercial space. Figure shows the vacant commercial properties in unincorporated Marion County. commercial space were constructed annually between 2006 and 2018 (Table 2.5.1). Table Residential Units and Non-Residential CO s Year Total Residential Units Total Non-Residential Square Footage , , , , , , , ,450 Figure Vacant Commercial Lands Vacant Commercial, Employment Center and Commerce District Urban Growth Boundary 2018 Principal Streets 2.5 DEVELOPMENT TRENDS The effect of the economic recession on development trends are seen beginning in 2008 for residential units completed, but took almost another two years (2010) to be realized in commercial construction. For the purpose of this EAR, a 12-year timeline of new development was considered in order to evaluate the years leading up to the recession. On average, 1,734 homes and 437,436 sf of , , , , , , , , , ,013 (represents ) A number of large-scale commercial projects are underway in Marion County, including the World Equestrian Center and General RV, which will total more than 2.5 million square feet in the coming 14

15 year. This represents a five-fold increase in non-residential construction over the previous 12 year average. Even so, with more than 600 million square feet of developable commercial areas, the inventory of vacant commercially designated properties (including Employment Center and Commerce District) is more than adequate to meet future demand over the planning horizon. 2.6 TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM The Transfer of Development Rights program was created in order to encourage conservation in prime farmland, and to address inactive or antiquated subdivisions. The intent is to use Transferable Development Credits (TDCs) to reduce densities/intensities in certain areas of the County while increasing densities/intensities in areas where adequate infrastructure exists. The program was on a successful in path to meeting a goal of 5,000 acres of land in conservation, with over 3,500 acres placed in the program prior to However, no additional lands have been placed in conservation through the program since that time. In terms of utilization, 762 units have been used to obtain approvals for increased density and intensity for urban development, however, none of the projects associated with those credits have been developed. Overall, the major challenges to TDR program implementation relate to lack of demand for TDCs. Major administrative changes to the Comprehensive Plan in 2014 intensified land uses in areas where TDCs could have previously been used, such that they are no longer necessary. Also, there is no mandate to use TDCs for FLU amendments, therefore it is less costly and burdensome to simply request a land use change. Another significant change in 2014 was to remove the requirement that TDCs could only be used where water and wastewater infrastructure was available. This led to utilization of credits for approvals in environmentally sensitive areas where impacts from wastewater to groundwater is a concern. The policy was changed in 2017, which removed the ability to use TDCs in environmentally sensitive areas RECOMMENDATIONS The EAR based amendments include a change to the program to allow TDCs to be utilized to meet up to 25 percent of a project s open space requirement, with Board approval. Staff also recommends future changes the Plan that would allow TDCs to be used throughout the existing urban area, with Board approval, rather than in the limited Receiving Areas as currently shown CHALLENGES 15

16 3.1 BACKGROUND In January 2018, Marion County Staff determined that updates to Transportation Element and Intergovernmental Coordination Elements were required to meet state statutes and the Future Land Use Element to reflect local conditions. The following presents a summary of proposed changes, which are included in Attachment PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Update the following maps to reflect the Ocala Marion County Transportation Planning Organization 2045 Plan. 3.1 Functional Classifications 3.2 Number of Lanes 2018 (Current) 3.3 Number of Lanes Future (2040) 3.4 Transportation Corridors 3.5 Existing Mass Transit 3.6 Rail Corridors 3.7 Existing and Future Bicycle and Pedestrian Network 3.8 Coastal Evacuation Routes 3.9 Airport Layout 3.3 PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT Update Table 1.1 and Policy to reflect the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council instead of the Withlacoochee Regional Planning Council under Regional Agencies. 3.4 PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Universal Edit: 3035 changed to 2045 to reflect the planning horizon. Policies Objective 1.1 Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Supporting Information Intended to remove duplicative language and clarify policy. 16

17 Policies Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy and Policy Supporting Information The county has designated sufficient area to meet future development needs over the planning horizon, consistent with , F.S. The amount of vacant land in each Future Land Use designation meets or exceeds the amount of land required to meet future projections over the planning horizon, based on BEBR growth population through 2045 and construction trends within the 12 years prior to this plan. The policy allows changes to the FLU to further accommodate growth and economic trends. This policy is in line with Policy of the pre-2014 comprehensive plan, and prior, adopted versions. Clarifies that higher densities and intensities will be located in existing urban areas where facilities and services are available in an effort to prevent urban sprawl, consistent with (6)(a)2.h, F.S. Allows new residential development at one category below the FLU designation depicted on the FLU Map in areas outside of the UGB or PSAs. Nothing in this policy prevents an applicant from seeking a FLU Amendment to decrease the residential intensity of a property within the UGB or PSA. This is a reintroduction in limited form of step-down language from the 2013 Comprehensive Plan Section FLU A-2. Adds PSAs to areas where density/intensity bonus programs may apply. Requires that a limited amount of open space is accessible to residents for new residential development. For example, the 350sf open space/lot represents approximately 3% of each acre for a medium residential development. Designed to prevent premature urbanization of agricultural lands, consistent with , F.S. and reinforce the standards for seeking a change to the Rural Land FLU designation. The policy further enables the Board of County Commissioners to require TDRs for conversion of rural lands to an urban designation, consistent with Ch , F.S Policy clarifies that agricultural use may continue as an interim use on lands with urban FLU designations within the UGB and PSAs, however the use cannot be used to limit development of neighboring properties with urban FLU designations. A property owner desiring to utilize urban designated lands for agriculture into perpetuity may seek a Comprehensive Plan amendment to obtain a Rural Lands designation. This policy does not supersede any regulations related to protection of existing agricultural activities. Policy This is a reintroduction of Policy of the 2013 Comprehensive Plan, with additional detail to define Rural Neighborhoods. It enables the BCC to require certain design elements for new development to provide transitional areas between rural neighborhoods and more intense uses. The policy supports LDC Sec D. (Attachment 3) Policy Defines agriculture as a specific land use. 17

18 Policies Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Objective 3.2 and associated policies Objective 3.3 Supporting Information Removes the requirement for a SUP for new construction in neighborhood commercial provided that the use is for an office. Other uses will continue to be considered through the SUP process. Defines that the primary use in Rural Land shall be agriculture or agriculture-related housing, commercial and industrial activities and specifies the number of lots and minimum lot size for family divisions. This language is more permissive than that provided in Ch , FS. In general, edits to these policies are intended to remove unclear or duplicative language and specify whether a FLU is considered an Urban or Rural designation. Within the Low Residential designation, the definition is changed to state that the use is appropriate inside and along the edges of, the UGB. For non-residential designations, increase the allowed residential density to 8 du/ac for Commercial and 16 du/ac for Employment Center FLU, to be consistent with High and Urban Residential FLU, respectively. Intended to specify that agricultural activity may be allowed in the UGB where there is not adequate infrastructure for urban development. Currently, this is approved as individual requests through the SUP process, and that is expected to continue. Note, this policy duplicates and the BCC may consider deleting. Allows expansion of urban land uses outside of the UGB without a need to modify the UGB, unless the request for expansion is within the Farmland Preservation Area. Establishes framework for Planned Service Areas, which are referenced in the existing comprehensive plan (FLU Policy 3.1.2, Sanitary Sewer Element Policy 1.2.7) and to support goals found in the Transportation and Potable Water Elements. The objective and associated elements are consistent with Ch , F.S. The Farmland Preservation Area is already established within the FLU Maps and currently serves as the sending area for Transfer of Development Credits. This new objective specifies the importance of the environmental and agricultural resources in the designated area, establishes elements of the rural character within the FPA, and provides standards for amending the designated area. The standards for amending the FPA require amending the existing urban growth boundary or creating a new UGB and a super majority vote by the Board of County Commissioners. Policy Establishes that toll roads within the FPA and are not in the public interest. The language codifies the County s June 5, 2018 resolution (2018-R-194) against the proposed Coastal Connector. 18

19 Policies Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Supporting Information Establishes that within the littoral zone in an Environmentally Sensitive Overlay Zone, the owner of private property is responsible for vegetation protection in accordance with state regulations. Adds springs protection areas to locations where enhanced onsite treatment and disposal systems may be required. Adds that central water is preferred method to provide water supply. Specifies that when OSTDS is used in a Primary Springs Protection Zone, design standards shall ensure that the system is capable of reducing total nitrogen by 65%. Adds PSAs to existing statement about urban areas. Also clarifies that the policy does not include areas with existing urban FLU designations as of January 1, Clarifies the conversion rate for obtaining Transferable Development Credits from real property that is placed into conservation or divested from development entitlements. The previous language in this policy applied to how the TDCs were utilized once purchased or transferred. Revises TDC utilization rate for non-residential use and includes a new allowance for open space. One (1) TDC will now equal 0.05 acre (2,178sf). Under the current comprehensive plan, TDCs can be used to increase nonresidential intensity (FAR) by up to 25%. This same concept will be applied to allow developers to meet up to 25% of required open space through the use of TDCs. The Board may also consider a change to the residential utilization rate of TDCs, wherein each TDC would equate to a bonus of 2 residential units for affordable housing. In accordance with Policy , staff will continue to analyze the TDR program and provide a full report and recommendations prior to adoption of the EAR based amendments. Any changes to the comprehensive plan as a result of this analysis can be submitted as part of the BCC s routine P&Z schedule. In accordance with this policy, staff will continue to analyze the TDR program and provide a full report with recommendations prior to adoption of the EAR based amendments. Any recommended changes to the comprehensive plan as a result of this analysis will be submitted during the BCC s routine P&Z schedule. 19

20 Changes to Chapter 163, F.S Chapter 163, F.S. Citations Description 2011 [Ch , Laws of Florida] (4) Deletes the exemption for plan amendments to designate an urban infill and redevelopment area from the twice per year amendment limitation of Section (1) Changes Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act to Community Planning Act (2) Expresses the purpose of the act, changing control future development to manage future development consistent with the proper role of local government (3) States the intent of the act is to focus the state role in managing growth to protect the functions of important state resources and facilities (10) Modifies the intent of the legislature with respect to how comprehensive plans and amendments affect property rights (11) Expresses legislative intent to recognize and protect agriculture, tourism, and military presence as being the state s traditional economic base (12) Expresses legislative intent to not require local government plans that have been found to be in compliance to adopt amendments implementing the new statutory requirements until the evaluation and appraisal period provided in section (4) Modifies the provisions for agricultural lands and practices to state that a plan amendment for an agricultural enclave is presumed not to be urban sprawl as defined in section Changes Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act to Community Planning Act and sets forth new and modified definitions, many of which were included in repealed Rule 9J 5.003, Florida Administrative Code (1) Establishes definition for adaptation action area (3) Establishes definition for affordable housing [same meaning as in Section (3)] (5) Establishes definition of antiquated subdivision (7) Establishes definition of capital improvement (9) Establishes definition of compatibility (11) Establishes definition of deepwater ports (12) Establishes definition of density (18) Establishes definition of flood prone areas (19) Establishes definition of goal (22) Establishes definition of intensity (23) Establishes definition of internal trip capture (28) Establishes definition of level of service (32) Deletes definition of financial feasibility (32) Establishes definition of new town (33) Establishes definition of objective (34) Deletes definition of dense urban land areas (36) Establishes definition of policy (38) Amends the definition of public facilities to delete health systems and spoil disposal sites for maintenance dredging located in intracoastal waterways (except sites owned by ports) (40) Changes definition of regional planning agency to the council created pursuant to chapter

21 (41) Establishes definition of seasonal population (42) Changes definition of optional sector plan to sector plan and clarifies the purpose of a sector plan. The term includes an optional sector plan that was adopted before the effective date of the act (45) Establishes definition of suitability (46) Establishes definition of transit oriented development (50) Clarifies the definition of urban service area to delete the term built up and to include any areas identified in the comprehensive plan as urban service areas, regardless of local government limitation (51) Establishes new definition of urban sprawl (2) Modifies requirements for maintaining comprehensive plan, deleting the reference to section and the requirement that proposed plan amendments be submitted to the state land planning agency (3) and (6) Deletes provisions for regional planning agency adoption of plan amendments for elements and amendments not prepared by a local government (7) Deletes provisions for local government challenge of costs associated with preparing a comprehensive plan and related state land planning agency action (11) Deletes provisions for encouraging each local government to articulate a vision of its future physical appearance and qualities of its community (1) (4) Establishes provisions for planning innovations and technical assistance and clarifies the roles of the state land planning agency and all other appropriate state and regional agencies in the process. Requires, upon request by the local government, the state land planning agency to coordinate multi agency assistance on plan amendments that may adversely impact important state resources or facilities. Requires the state land planning agency to provide on its website guidance on the submittal and adoption of comprehensive plans, amendments and land development regulations, prohibiting such guidance from being adopted by rule and exempting such guidance from section (1)(a) (4) Modifies areas of authority under this act with respect to joint agreements and intergovernmental coordination between cities and counties and planning in advance of jurisdictional changes (5)(d) and (6) Modifies military base compatibility provisions to not require that commanding officer comments, underlying studies and reports be binding on the local government. Requires the affected local government to be sensitive to private property rights and not be unduly re strictive on those rights in considering the comments provided by the commanding officer or designee (9) Modified to require that any local government comprehensive plan that has been amended to address military compatibility requirements after 2004 and was found in compliance be deemed in compliance until the local government conducts its evaluation and appraisal review pursuant to section and determines that amendments are necessary (1) Modified to include significant portions of repealed Rules 9J and 9J 5.005, Florida Administrative Code, with respect to the principles, guidelines, standards and strategies to be set forth in required and optional elements of the comprehensive plan and requirements for basing these elements on relevant, appropriate and professionally accepted data (2) Deletes financial feasibility requirements (3)(a) 4 Modifies provisions for preparing the capital improvements element to require the schedule to cover a 5 year period and identify whether projects are either funded or unfunded and given a level of priority for funding. Deletes requirements for financial feasibility. 21

22 (3)(b) Modifies requirements for local government annual review of capital improvements element to no longer require transmittal of the adopted amendment to the state land planning agency and deletes provisions related to sanctions by the Administration Commission, adoption of long term concurrency management systems and financial feasibility (5)(a) Modifies planning period requirements, allowing additional planning periods for specific components, elements, land use amendments, or projects as part of the planning process (6)(a) Modifies requirements for the future land use element to include guidance from repealed Rule 9J 5.006, Florida Administrative Code, relative to general range of density or intensity of uses for gross land area and establishing a long term end toward which land use programs and activities are ultimately directed (6)(a) 2 and (6)(a) (6)(a) (6)(a) 9 and 10 Modifies the standards on which future land use plan and plan amendments are based to include: permanent and seasonal population, compatibility, the need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions, preservation of waterfronts, location of schools proximate to urban residential areas, and other considerations taken from repealed Rule 9J 5.006, Florida Administrative Code. Modifies requirements for the future land use element to accommodate at least the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections of the University of Florida s Bureau of Economic and Business Research for at least a 10 year planning period unless otherwise limited. Establishes requirements for analyzing future land use map amendments using portions of repealed Rule 9J 5.006, Florida Administrative Code. Establishes requirements for the future land use element and map series, including with slight revisions the primary indicators that a plan or plan amendment does not discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl that were in repealed Rule 9J 5.006, Florida Administrative Code (6)(b) Modifies requirements for the Transportation Element to include significant portions of repealed Rule 9J 5.019, Florida Administrative Code, addressing circulation of recreational traffic, including bicycle facilities, exercise trails, riding facilities, and airport master plans (6)(c) Modifies requirements for the general sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, and natural groundwater aquifer recharge element to include guidance from portions of repealed Rule 9J 5.011, Florida Administrative Code, and deletes requirements for including a topographic map depicting any areas adopted by a water management district as prime groundwater recharge areas and addressing areas served by septic tanks (6)(c) (6)(d) 1 and (6)(d) (6)(f) 1 and 2 Modifies potable water supply planning requirements to remove the provision that states that amendments to incorporate the work plan do not count toward the limitation on the frequency of adoption of amendments to the comprehensive plan. Modifies requirements for the conservation element to include portions of repealed Rule 9J 5.013, Florida Administrative Code, to list the natural resources to be identified, analyzed and protected and toward which conservation principles, guidelines and standards are to be directed. Modifies requirements for analyzing current and projected water sources for a 10 year period to include consideration of demands for industrial, agricultural and potable water use and the quality and quantity of water available to meet these demands and the existing levels of conservation, use and protection and policies of the regional water management district. Clarifies requirements for the housing element to include guidelines, standards and strategies based on an inventory taken from the latest decennial United 22

23 (6)(f) (6)(f) 3 States Census or more recent estimates and various other considerations listed in repealed Rule 9J 5.010, Florida Administrative Code. Deletes requirement for an affordable housing needs assessment conducted by the state land planning agency. Based on repealed Rule 9J 5.010, Florida Administrative Code, sets forth new requirements for the creation and preservation of affordable housing, elimination of substandard housing conditions, providing for adequate sites and distribution for a range of incomes and types, and including programs for partnering, streamlined permitting, quality of housing, neighborhood stabilization, and improving historically significant housing (6)(g) Modifies the objectives of the coastal management element and includes a new requirement for preserving historic and archaeological resources (6)(g) 2 Deletes provisions for local government adoption of recreational surface water use policies (6)(g) 10 Sets forth an option for the local government to develop an adaptation action area designation for low lying coastal zones experiencing coastal flooding due to extreme high tides and storm surge and that are vulnerable to the impacts of rising sea level (6)(h) 1.b Deletes requirement for intergovernmental coordination element to provide for recognition of campus master plans and airport master plans (6)(h) 3.a and b Modifies requirements for the intergovernmental coordination element to include portions of repealed Rule 9J 5.015, Florida Administrative Code, including coordinating and addressing impacts on adjacent municipalities and coordinating the establishment of level of service standards (6)(h) 3 an d 4 Deletes requirements in intergovernmental coordination element for fostering coordination between special districts and local general purpose governments, submittal of public facilities report, execution of interlocal agreement with district school board, the county and nonexempt municipalities, and submittal of reports to the Florida Department of Community Affairs by counties with populations greater than 100, (6)(i), (j), (k) Deletes provisions for optional elements of the comprehensive plan, transportation and traffic circulation, airport compatibility and other requirements related to transportation corridors and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions specific to local governments within an urbanized area (6)(k) Deletes provisions for airport master plans (7)(a) (l) Deletes provisions for additional plan elements, or portions or phases thereof, including an economic development element (8) See prior table entries for description of deleted provisions. (14) (7)(c) 2 Modifies provisions for processing plan amendments for land located within a rural agricultural industrial center to presume that these amendments are not urban sprawl as defined in section and shall be considered within 90 days after any review required by the state land planning agency if required by (1)( b) (d) and (2) (3)( a) (c) and (4) (7) section Deletes requirements for public schools interlocal agreements with respect to submittal of the agreements to the state land planning agency based on an established schedule and other requirements involving the state land planning agency related to waivers and exemptions. Deletes requirements related to the submittal of comments from the Office of Educational Facilities on the interlocal agreement, challenges to the state land planning agency notice of intent and other review process requirements. 23

24 (1) Deletes parks and recreation, schools and transportation from the list of public facilities and services subject to the concurrency requirement on a statewide basis (1)(a) and (b) Modifies concurrency requirements to include portions of repealed Rule 9J , Florida Administrative Code, which relate to achieving and maintaining adopted levels of service for a 5 year period, and providing for rescission of any optional concurrency provisions by plan amendment, which is not subject to state review (1)(b) Deletes requirement that professionally accepted techniques be used for measuring levels of service for automobiles, bicycles, pedestrians, transit and trucks (2)(b) and (c) Deletes requirement that parks and recreation facilities to serve new development are in place or under actual construction no later than one year after issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. Citations (3) Deletes provisions addressing governmental entities and establishment of binding level of service standards with respect to limiting the authority of any agency to recommend or make objections, recommendations, comments or determinations during reviews conducted under section (4)(b) and (c) (5)(a) (h) Deletes concurrency provisions specifically related to public transit facilities and urban infill and redevelopment areas. Establishes concurrency provisions for transportation facilities, which include portions of repealed Rule 9J , Florida Administrative Code. Sets forth requirements with respect to adopted level of service standards, including use of professionally accepted studies to evaluate levels of service, achieving and maintaining adopted levels of service standards, and including the projects needed to accomplish this in 5 year schedule of capital improvements. Requires coordination with adjacent local governments and setting forth the method to be used in calculating proportionate share contribution. Defines the term transportation deficiency. See prior table entries for description of deleted provisions (6) (13) (6)(a) Sets forth concurrency provisions for public education, setting forth provisions for those local governments that apply concurrency to public education. If a county and one or more municipalities that represent at least 80 percent of the total countywide population have adopted school concurrency, the failure of one or more municipalities to adopt the concurrency and enter into the interlocal agreement does not preclude implementation of sch ool concurrency within jurisdictions of the school district that have opted to implement concurrency (6)(f) 1 and (d) [2014 cite: Section (g)] (h)1. a., b. and c. Modifies school concurrency provisions to clarify that adoption and application of school concurrency is optional. Modifies school concurrency provisions to remove requirement for financial feasibility and to require that facilities necessary to meet adopted levels of service during a 5 year period are identified and consistent with the school board s educational facilities plan. Modifies school concurrency provisions to allow a landowner to proceed with development of a specific parcel of land notwithstanding a failure of the development to satisfy school concurrency if certain factors are shown to exist, including adequate facilities are provided for in the capital improvements element and school board s educational facilities plan, demonstration that facilities needs can be reasonably provided, and the local government and school board have provided a means by which proportionate share is assessed. 24

25 (14) See prior entries for description of deleted provisions. (17) Changes transportation concurrency backlogs to transportation deficiencies and makes related clarifications (2) Changes creation of transportation concurrency backlog authorities to creation of transportation development authorities and makes related clarifications (4) Changes powers of a transportation concurrency backlog authority to powers of a transportation development authority and makes related clarifications (1)(b) Modifies the definition of in compliance to include a reference to section and delete the reference to now repealed chapter 9J 5, Florida Administrative Code (1)(c) Provides a list of the reviewing agencies (2) Sets forth the expedited and coordinated review processes (3) and (4) Sets forth requirements for adopting and processing plan amendments according to the expedited and coordinated review processes, the scope of the comments to be provided by review agencies, responsibilities of the state land planning agency with respect to its various levels of review and (5) (7) (11); cite: Section (8) (15); cite: Section 163. coordination with other state agencies and public hearings. Sets forth requirements for administrative challenges to plans and plan amendments, compliance agreements and mediation and expeditious resolution. Modifies provisions to enable the administration commission to specify sanctions to which the local government will be subject if it elects to make a plan amendment effective not withstanding a determination of noncompliance. Modifies provisions for public hearings to state there is no prohibition or limitation on the authority of local governments to require a person requesting an amendment to pay some or all of the cost of the public notice. 3184(11) (12) Establishes provisions for concurrent zoning, requiring a local government, at the request of an applicant, to consider an application for zoning changes that would be required to properly enact any proposed plan amendment and making the approved zoning changes contingent upon the comprehensive plan or amendment becoming effective (13) Revises provisions to require that no proposed local government comprehensive plan or plan amendment that is applicable to a designated area of critical state concern shall be effective until a final order is issued finding the plan or amendment to be in compliance as defined in subsection (1)(b) (1)(a) (f); 2014 cite: Section (1)(a) (d) (1)2. a and b;3,4 and (e) (q); 2014 Section cite: (2) (5) Modifies provisions to address the process for adoption of small scale comprehensive plan amendments, deleting several exceptions. Plan amendments are no longer limited to two times per calendar year and text changes that relate directly to and are adopted simultaneously with small scale future land use map amendments are permissible. Modifies the public notice requirements for small scale plan amendments, addressing petitions, prohibiting the state land planning agency from intervening and requiring that consideration be given to the plan amendment as a whole and whether it furthers the intent of this part in all challenges. 25

26 Citations (1) (14); Modifies provisions for evaluation and appraisal of comprehensive plan. Maintains the requirement for 2014 cite: Section local government evaluation of plan to occur at least once every 7 years. The local government is required (1) (5) to determine if amendments are necessary to reflect changes in state requirements (only) since the last update and to notify the state land planning agency by letter as to its determination. If needed, these amendments are to be prepared and transmitted within 1 year of this determination for review pursuant to section (4) (State Coordinated Review). Local governments are encouraged to comprehensively evaluate and as necessary update plans to reflect changes in local conditions. If a local government fails to submit its notification letter to the state land planning agency or fails to update its plan to reflect changes in state requirements, then the local government is prohibited from amending its plan until it complies with these requirements. The state land planning agency may not adopt rules to implement this section, other than procedural rules or a schedule indicating when local governments must comply with these requirements (2) Deletes the reference to section (1) and provisions regarding the frequency of adoption of plan amendments as they relate to adoption of a municipal overlay (3) Changes Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act to Community Planning Act (2) and (11) Changes Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act to Community Planning Act Revises the duration of a development agreement from 20 years to 30 years, unless it is extended by mutual consent, and deletes reference to sections and regarding compliance determination by state land planning agency Modifies provisions for periodic review of a development agreement to delete requirements for annual review conducted during years 6 through 10, incorporation of the review into a written report and the state land planning agency adoption of rules regarding the contents of the report Deletes requirements that a copy of the recorded development agreement be submitted to the state land planning agency within 14 days after the agreement is recorded and for the effectiveness of the agreement based on receipt by the state land planning agency Changes Optional Sector Plans to Sector Plans and clarifies the intent to promote and encourage long term planning for conservation, development and agriculture on a landscape scale and protection of regionally significant resources, including regionally significant water courses and wildlife corridors. Revises the amount of geographic area intended for sector plans from at least 5,000 acres to at least 15,000 acres and protection of public facilities (9)(a) Modifies provisions in the local government comprehensive planning certification program to allow small scale development amendments to follow the process in section (12) Deletes provisions in the local government comprehensive planning certification program that address the failure to adopt a timely evaluation and appraisal 26

27 report and failure to a dopt an evaluation and appraisal report found to be sufficient (14) Deletes the requirement that the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability prepare a report evaluating the certification program Establishes provisions for Rural Land Stewardship Areas, which were provided for as part of the innovative and flexible planning and development strategies in now repealed section (11) (2)(a) Changes Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act to Community Planning Act (3)(a) Changes Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act to Community Planning Act [Ch , , , , , and , Laws of Florida] (2)(a) Rewords the definition of farm to the same meaning provided in section (2)(b) Rewords the definition of "farm operation" to the same meaning provided in section (2)(d) Adds a definition of governmental entity, which has the same meaning provided in section The term does not include a water control district or a special district create d to manage water (3) Changes county to governmental entity Adds provisions related to agricultural enclaves (8) Provides that any local government charter provision that was in effect as of June 1, 2011 for an initiative or referendum process for development orders or comprehensive plan a mendments may be retained and implemented (4)(b) Changes the preparation of the periodic reports to the periodic evaluation and appraisal of the comprehensive plan (5) Revisions related to local government coordination with military bases. (6) Changes to Chapter 163, F.S (1)(f) (6)(a) (6)(a) 8.c. Changes the University of Florida s Bureau of Economic and Business Research to the Office of Economic and Demographic Research and adds language stating that population projections must, at a minimum, reflect each area s proportional share of the total county population and the total county population growth. Changes the University of Florida s Bureau of Economic and Business Research to the Office of Economic and Demographic Research." Changes the requirement that future land use map amendments be based on an analysis of the minimum amount of land needed as determined by the local government, to instead be based on an analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the requirements of the statute (6)(f) 2. Deletes the requirement that the housing element be based in part on an inventory taken from the latest Census (3) Moves the exemptions from having a public school interlocal agreement from section (6)(i) to section (3). 27

28 (4) Adds language requiring each local government exempt from having a public school interlocal agreement to assess at the time of evaluation and appraisal if the local government still meets the requirements for exemptions described in section (3). Each local government that is exempt must comply with the interlocal agreement provisions within one year of a new school within the municipality being proposed in the 5 year district facilities work program (3), Revisions to the coastal management requirements. (6) (1)(a) Adds language stating that an amendment that rescinds concurrency shall be processed under the expedited state review process, and is not required to be transmitted to reviewing agencies for comment, except for agencies that have requested transmittal, and for municipal amendments, it must be transmitted to the county. A copy of the adopted amendment shall be transmitted to the state land agency. If the amendment rescinds transportation or school concurrency, the adopted amendment must also be sent to the Department of Transportation or Department of Education, respectively (6)(a) Provides general rewording. Adds language to clarify that the choice of one or more municipality to not adopt school concurrency does not preclude implementation of school concurrency within other jurisdictions of the school district (2)(c) Adds developments that are proposed under section (24)(x) to the list of amendments that must follow the state coordinated review process (3)(b) 1. Added the word working to clarify the number of days a local government has to transmit an amendment (3)(b) 2. Changed the time limit for the reviewing agencies transmittal to 30 days after instead of from the date the amendment was received (3)(c) 2. Added the word working to clarify the number of days a local government has to transmit an amendment (4)(b) Changes the time limit a local government has to transmit an amendment from immediately following the first public hearing to within 10 working days after the first public hearing (4)(e) 2. Added the word working to clarify the number of days a local government has to transmit an amendment (5)(b) Corrects the citation related to plan amendment package completeness from (3)(c)3. to (4)(e) (5)(d) Changes the time limit by which the Administration Commission must enter into a final or der from 45 days after the receipt of the recommended order to the time period specified in section (5)(e) (5)(e) 2. Changes the time limit for the state land planning agency to submit a not in compliance recommended order to the Administration Commission from no later than 30 days after the receipt of the recommended order to the time period provided in section Changes the time limit by which the state land planning agency must enter into an in compliance final order from 30 days after the receipt of the recommended order to the time period provided in section (6)(f) Changes the time period by which the state land planning agency must issue a cumulative notice of intent from upon receipt of a plan or plan amendment adopted pursuant to a compliance agreement to within 20 days after receiving a complete plan or plan amendment adopted pursuant to a compliance agreement (8)(b) 1.a. Changes the statutory reference for the Florida Small Cities Community Development Block Grant program. 28

29 Replaces Department of Community Affairs with state land planning agency and changes this Act to the Community Planning Act (6) Changes the citation that refers to the sanctions that can be the sole issue before the Administration Commission when land development regulations are inconsistent with the comprehensive plan from section (11)(a) or (b) to sections (8)(a) or (b)1. or 2. Changes to Chapter 163, F.S Chapter 163, Description F.S. Citations (14) Changes the definition of state land planning agency to refer to the Department of Economic Opportunity instead of the Department of Community Affairs (7) Deletes the requirement that the department provide an annual status report to the legislature regarding every optional sector plan (1) Replaces Department of Community Affairs with state land planning agency (5)(a) Replaces Secretary of Community Affairs with executive director of the state land planning agency (5)(b) Replaces Department of Community Affairs with state land planning agency (6) Removes the word county from board of commissioners 2013 [Ch , , , , and , Laws of Florida] (2)(d) Amends the definition of governmental entity in the provisions for agricultural lands and practices, clarifying that in addition to not including a water control district established under chapter 298 or a special district created by special act for water management purposes, the term does not include a water management district (3)(a) Replaces county with governmental entity (3)(b) Prohibits a governmental entity from charging a fee on a specific agricultural activity of a bona fide farm operation on land classified as agricultural land pursuant to section , if such agricultural activity is regulated through implemented best management practices, interim measures, or regulations adopted as rules under chapter 120 by the Department of Environmental Protection, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, or a water management district as part of a statewide or regional program; or if such agricultural activity is expressly regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, or the United States Environmental Protection Agency (8) Clarifies the provisions for growth management that an initiative or referendum process in regard to any development order is prohibited, with certain exceptions (5)(h) Revises and adds requirements for local governments that continue to implement a transportation concurrency system, whether in the form adopted into the comprehensive plan before the effective date of the Community Planning Act, Chapter , Laws of Florida, or as subsequently modified (5)(i) Sets forth new provisions for any local government that elects to repeal transportation concurrency (1),(4 ) (7), (9)(a), (12) Changes numerous references in the provisions for the local government comprehensive planning certification program from department to state land planning agency. 29

30 and (1 3) Creates short title for sections as the Manufacturing Competitiveness Act. and sets forth provisions for a local government proposing to establish a local manufacturing development program (2) Revises the definitions to replace a reference to section (5) in the definition of public body to section (7) [ , , and , Laws of Florida] (8)(b) Deletes the provision that an initiative or referendum in regards to a comprehensive plan amendment or map amendment is only allowed if it affects more than five parcels of land (8)(c) Deletes the provision that an initiative or referendum in regards to a comprehensive plan amendment or map amendment is only allowed if it affects more than five parcels of land (7)(a) 2. Changes rural areas of critical economic concern to rural areas of opportunity (7)(a) 3.b. Changes rural areas of critical economic concern to rural areas of opportunity (7)(e) Provides general re wording and changes rural area of critical economic concern to rural area of opportunity (3) Changes rural areas of critical economic concern to rural areas of opportunity (1) Requires that local governments must adopt, amend, and enforce land development regulations that are consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan within one year after submission of the comprehensive plan or amended comprehensive plan pursuant to section , Florida Statutes (evaluation and appraisal process), instead of section (2), Florida Statutes (requirement that each local government maintain a comprehensive plan) (1) Provides legislative intent related to the importance of fuel terminals (2)(a) Provides a definition of "fuel" with cross references (2)(b) Provides a definition of "fuel terminal" (3) Provides that after July 1, 2014, a local government may not amend its comprehensive plan, land use map, zoning districts, or land use regulations to conflict with a fuel terminal s classification as a permitted and allowable use, including an amendment that causes a fuel terminal to be a nonconforming use, structure, or development (4) Provides that if a fuel terminal is damaged or destroyed due to a natural disaster or other catastrophe, a local government must allow the timely repair of the fuel terminal to its capacity before the natural disaster or catastrophe (5) Provides that the section does not limit the authority of a local government to adopt, implement, modify, and enforce applicable state and federal requirements for fuel terminals, including safety and building standards. Local authority may not conflict with federal or state safety and security requirements (10) Changes rural area of critical economic concern to rural area of opportunity [ , , Laws of Florida] Description 30

31 Adds requirements for the redevelopment component of the Coastal Management Element (9) Deletes obsolete provisions establishing 2012 deadlines for a local government to adopt plan amendments related to military base compatibility (6)(c) 4. Provides that a local government that does not own, operate, or maintain its own water supply facilities and is served by a public water utility with a permitted allocation of greater than 300 million gallons per day is not required to amend its comprehensive plan in response to an updated regional water supply plan or maintain a work plan if the local government s usage of water is less than 1 percent of the public water utility s total permitted allocation. 178 The local government must cooperate with any local government or utility provider that provides service within its jurisdiction. 179 The local government must keep the element up to date in accordance with section (evaluation and appraisal) (2) The list of plan amendments subject to the coordinated state review process is expanded to include plan amendments that propose an amendment to an adopted sector plan and plan amendments that propose a development that qualifies as a development of regional impact pursuant to section , Florida Statutes Revisions related to Sector Plans (11) and ( 14) Revisions related to the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program Connected City Corridor Pilot Program (4) Deletes regional planning councils as entities that provide assistance and participate in developing a plan for the rural land stewardship area [HB 1361, SB1508] (2) Revisions to County board procedures (7) Revisions to coordination between local governments and military installations (2) (c ) Requires state coordinated review process for plan amendments related to development that is subject to state coordinated review (5) (e) 3. The recommended order from an administrative challenge becomes effective in 90 days, with some exceptions (7) Revisions to mediation procedures Revisions to sector plan process to reduce the minimum size to 5000 acres Allows expedited annexation for enclaves up to 110 acres Revisions to Apalachicola Bay Area of critical state concern (14) (c ) Allows local governments to approve a change to a DRI without further review, in certain circumstances (15) (g) Changes to procedures if a DRI reaches a buildout date or is essentially built out (19) (e) Allows phase date extensions to be considered a non substantial deviation. 2. l (30) Allows proposed developments to be reviewed pursuant to (4) in lieu of the DRI requirements in section (4)(c ) 6. Allows newly acquired lands not to count toward DRI aggregation rules if the acquisition is 10% or less of the total DRI acreage Updates numerous definitions related to airport zoning (1) Requires a permit to construct an obstruction (2) Protects certain airport facilities from hazards (3) States that permits are not required for existing facilities (4) Procedure for state review of local government airport protection zoning regulations. 31

32 (5) to Procedures for review of permits. (9) Requires local governments to adopt airport protection zoning regulations including provisions related to proximity of landfills, permit process, noise study, and incompatible uses In cases of a conflict in regulations, the more stringent requirement prevails Procedures for adopting zoning regulations (4) Requires each public use airport to prepare an airport master plan Local government permitting of airspace obstructions Enforcement and administration of airport zoning Judicial review for airport zoning Acquisition of air rights Enforcement of violations Requires local governments that do not have airport zoning to adopt such zoning by July 1, 2017, and requires any existing regulations to be updated by that date. 32

33 SEE SEPARATE DOCUMENT 33

34 The Rural Neighborhoods Policy (2.1.11) was included in Marion County s Comprehensive Plan in 1992, and was deleted in It is being reintroduced primarily to pay special attention to areas that were developed as large-acreage tracts and may be impacted by the administrative changes that intensified Future Land Uses within the UGB in 2013; primarily in the area north of Ocala. Overall, there are less than three-hundred rural subdivisions (out of 3,180 subdivisions county-wide) and approximately 10% are within the Urban Growth Boundary (Figure 1). Because new development will be directed within the UGB, the majority of Rural Neighborhoods are not expected to be affected over the planning horizon. The policy is intended to ensure compatibility of land uses while protecting private property development rights. HistoricRuralSubdivisions LR - Low Residential (0-1 du/ac) RAC - Rural Activity Center 0-2 du/ac; FAR 0.35) P - Public (N/A; FAR 1.0) Municipalities (9-1-1) MR - Medium Residential (1-4 du/ac) COM - Commercial (0-6 du/ac; FAR 1.0) PR - Preservation (N/A; N/A) Urban Growth Boundary 2018 HR - High Residential (4-8 du/ac) EC - Employment Center (0-12 du/ac; FAR 2.0) M - Municipality RL - Rural Land (1 du/10 ac) UR - Urban Residential (8-16 du/ac) CD - Commerce District (N/A; FAR 2.0) Figure 1: Historic Rural Subdivisions 34