TEXT/POLICY I.D. #: Policy [L], Policy [L], Policy [L], and Policy [L]

Transcription

1 TEXT AMENDMENT #: PCT APPLICANT: Luis N. Serna TEXT/POLICY I.D. #: Policy [L], Policy [L], Policy [L], and Policy [L] CITY X COUNTY X_ DATE: March 1, 2012 PRELIMINARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny Amendment Request PCT A. SUMMARY: The requested amendment proposes use of the conservation subdivision concept in the Rural future land use category. The subdivisions would be required to permanently set aside at least 50% of the total site as open space and they would receive a 230% density bonus by increasing the allowed density from one unit per ten acres to one unit per three acres. These units would be clustered on the remaining 50% of the site, resulting in lot sizes below 1.5 acres. The proposed policy also includes four restrictions intended to limit the geographic availability of the provision. Each of the four restrictions are reviewed in the report section titled Analysis of Proposed Text. B. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL: 1. The requested 230% density bonus for Conservation Subdivisions would reduce predictability regarding future density in Rural areas. This appears to be inconsistent with action taken in 2011 by the Board of County Commissioners and the City Commission to end the increased density provided for Conservations Subdivisions in the Urban Fringe Category. 2. Not consistent with Urban Service Area (USA) policies by allowing expanded residential development outside the USA while sufficient residential capacity is available inside Rural Communities and the USA where the full complement of urban services is not yet available or funded. 3. Not consistent with Southern Strategy policies by making development at the edges of the urbanized area more attractive to development, potentially resulting in less or delayed redevelopment and new development within the Southern Strategy area. 4. Not consistent with the adopted Regional Mobility Plan concepts of focusing growth in designated growth nodes. The requested expansion of residential development along a road between growth nodes consumes the capacity of the roadway with shorter, more numerous vehicular trips. 5. Not consistent with Comprehensive Plan Policies that specifically do not allow conversion of Rural to a more dense category. The policies are intended to protect Rural areas from premature development, facilitate infill and redevelopment inside the USA, and recognize the significant area already mapped as Urban Fringe that allows development at one unit per three acres. 6. Does not support County Strategic Priorities and directional statements related to sense of place, orderly growth, carbon footprint, human scale infrastructure, and sound financial management. 1

2 C. EXISTING TEXT/POLICIES: See Attachment #1. D. PROPOSED TEXT/POLICIES: See Attachment #1 E. APPLICANT S REASON FOR THE AMENDMENT: See Attachment #2. F. STAFF ANALYSIS History In 2008 Mr. Serna submitted a Comprehensive Plan map amendment request on behalf of Rockaway, LLP. The amendment requested that approximately 509 acres located on the south side of Mahan Drive, approximately one mile east of Chaires Cross Road, be converted from the Rural category to the Urban Fringe category. The Board of County Commissioners passed a motion to support transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state for review. However, after receiving a recommendation for denial from the Planning Commission, the City Commission, and objections from the Florida Department of Community Affairs, the applicant withdrew the amendment. Mr. Serna, the agent for the current application, has indicated this proposed text amendment is intended to target the Rockaway LLP owned site. Rockaway LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership based in Jacksonville Florida and established by Rock Creek Capital in 2005, just prior to purchase of the subject site. 2

3 Density Increase Based on Conservation Subdivisions On October 25, 2011 The Board of County Commissioners and the Tallahassee City Commission both adopted a Comprehensive Plan amendment that ended the increased density provided for Conservation Subdivisions in the Urban Fringe land use category. The change in Urban Fringe density is described in Table 1 below. Throughout the extensive public outreach process for the Urban Fringe amendment, citizens living in the area indicated a desire to remove the density increase and have one predictable density established for the area. This concept of predictability was an important factor in the significant public support for making Conservation Subdivisions the same density as traditional subdivisions. Urban Fringe and Rural areas are noted on the map below. The proposed amendment requests a 230% density bonus for conservation subdivisions in the Rural land use category. This potential increase in density reduces the predictability associated with future development in Rural. If approved, Rural landowners near principal arterials will not have certainty that future development will be limited to the traditional density of one unit per ten acres. Table1. Urban Fringe Density Change in 2011 Old Density New Density Urban Fringe Standard Development 1 Unit/3 Acres 1 Unit/3 Acres Urban Fringe Conservation Subdivision 1 Unit/1.33 Acres (127% Increase) 1 Unit/3 Acres Table2. Proposed Rural Density Change in 2012 Existing Density Proposed Density Rural Standard Development 1 Unit/10 Acres 1 Unit/10 Acres Rural Conservation Subdivision Not Allowed 1 Unit/3 Acres (230% Increase) 3

4 Managing Growth One of the fundamental concepts for managing the growth of urban and suburban settlements is to direct growth to those areas with the capacity to accommodate the growth in a fiscally, environmentally, and socially acceptable manner. Managing the growth of American cities has been a major topic for local governments for several decades as a variety of factors (such as inexpensive fuel and tax payer subsidized roadways) have tended to result in very low density residential development isolated from commercial activity. This development pattern, often referred to as sprawl, tends to privatize the profit of land development while externalizing to the existing and future tax payers costs such as roadway maintenance, sewer service and retrofit, stormwater and flood management, solid waste service, parks and recreation facilities, and other urban services desired by the residents of new developments. The growth management efforts of the State of Florida and Leon County have worked to help balance growth by creating mechanisms that help make sure that new development pays a fair share of these often externalized costs while also fostering a more compact development pattern that is less expensive for future tax payers to serve. In addition to these fiscal considerations, managing growth seeks to preserve the natural and rural areas surrounding communities for their current values as-well-as the preservation of options for future generations. Lastly, there is a growing body of knowledge regarding a variety of social and environmental issues associated with managing growth. These issue range from general health and obesity problems linked to the automobiledependence associated with low-density residential development to greenhouse gas emissions associated with an increasing number of vehicle miles travelled per person. Staff can provide additional information on any of these growth management topics should the Board desire this information while considering a potential increase in Rural density. Urban Service Area Concept The foremost tool for managing growth in Leon County is the Urban Service Area (USA) concept. The Comprehensive Plan contains policies that establish how the County will discourage additional growth outside of the USA and encourage growth inside the USA. Community dialog regarding the appropriate size and location of the USA is a healthy part of planning for the future of our community. However, staff recommends that such dialog be data driven and occur in the broader context of shaping our community, not in the discussion of a specific development project. Project specific allowances tend to create pressure for additional project specific allowances on nearby lands. This was anticipated and addressed when the Urban Fringe category was expanded to include the Black Creek Highlands site (see map on page 16). Policy 1.3.2: [SS] was amended to indicate that no additional lands designated Rural or Urban Fringe as of August 26, 2006 shall be converted to a more dense or intense land use category unless adjoining lands are also within the designated Urban Service Area boundary or the designated Woodville Rural Community. The requested amendment seeks to overstep this policy by increasing the allowed density in Rural. Further discussion is included in the section below on Consistency with Additional Comprehensive Plan Polices. 4

5 The first Objective of the Plan (included below) establishes Leon County s desire to grow in a responsible manner, with infrastructure provided economically and efficiently, and surrounding forest and agricultural lands protected from unwarranted and premature conversion to urban land use. Objective 1.1: [L] (Effective 7/16/90; Revision Effective 7/26/06; Revision Effective 12/24/2010) Direct development to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and the service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner. This shall be accomplished in part through the establishment and maintenance of an Urban Service Area (USA) concept. This Urban Service Area (USA) concept is based upon a desire to have Tallahassee and Leon County grow in a responsible manner, with infrastructure provided economically and efficiently, and surrounding forest and agricultural lands protected from unwarranted and premature conversion to urban land use. An urban service strategy provides for well-managed, orderly growth, which preserves natural resources and promotes fiscal responsibility. The location and size of the USA shall be depicted on the Future Land Use Map and is based upon the area necessary to accommodate 90% of new residential dwelling units within the County by the Plan Horizon; the ability to provide urban infrastructure; and, the presence of environmentally sensitive lands and water bodies, requiring protection from the impacts of urban development. The significant (230%) Rural density bonus proposed in the requested amendment would be considered a departure from the existing Urban Service Area concept as it would expand the development potential outside of the Urban Service Area. Mechanisms to address the costs of potentially providing urban services to new increased density development in the Rural areas should be considered along with any policy direction to increase Rural density. For example, it would be counter to the concept of growth paying for itself to allow significant new development on septic systems in Rural now, and then seek a publicly funded project to retrofit that development to sewer in the future. Population Accommodation in the Urban Service Area A land use needs analysis is a tool to evaluate the land available to accommodate the projected population over a planning period. Section (6)(a), F.S., provides: The future land use plan shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, including the amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth; the projected population of the area;... A land use needs analyses was included in the Board adopted 2007 Evaluation and Appraisal Report. The analysis determined that based on the residential capacity already allowed on the Future Land Use Map and population projections, there was sufficient capacity to accommodate the population for the next 130 years. As population projections have been revised downward since this 2007 analysis, the current accommodation period is even longer. The analysis used for the 2007 Evaluation and Appraisal Report was required by the Florida Department of Community Affairs and included some assumptions regarding redevelopment density that may not actually be achieved. To provide additional data with significantly fewer 5

6 assumptions, the Planning Department conducted an analysis utilizing actual units proposed by the development community inside the Urban Service Area as part of major and ongoing projects (project with greater than 20 units). According to the analysis, sufficient residential units have already been proposed inside the Urban Service Area to accommodate the projected population through Relevant slides from a Planning Department presentation on this analysis are included as Attachment #3. It is important to note that this analysis includes no units for 4,800 acres of Welaunee Plantation and no figures or projections of the increased units that can be achieved through the desired redevelopment and small infill lot development of the Urban Service Area. Therefore, the actual population accommodation potential is even greater than what is represented in this analysis. Southern Strategy Area Increasing the allowed density in Rural may create development potential that could affect demand within the Urban Services Area and the Southern Strategy area, potentially resulting in less or delayed redevelopment and new development within these areas. The current direction from the Board, reflected in the objective below, is to direct development into the Southern Strategy area by making the area more attractive to development than development at the edges of the urbanized area. Part of the equation for making the Southern Strategy area more attractive than the edge of our community is to limit the amount of development allowed at the edge of our community. On average over the past ten years, there are 958 single family detached homes built in Leon County each year (including City of Tallahassee). Increasing the allowable density in Rural could capture some of the residential market potential of the Southern Strategy area, thereby slowing or delaying the desired renewal of this area and fostering the historic urban decline associated with wealthier citizens moving out to the rural edge of communities. Objective 11.3: [L] - Attraction of Development (Effective 12/8/98; Revision Effective 12/24/2010) Based on the need to reduce infrastructure and public service delivery costs, enhance urban core stability, protect natural resources, and reduce economic disparity, it is intended that new development be directed into the Southern Strategy Area by making areas inside the urban core and Southern Strategy Area more attractive to development than development at the edges of the urbanized area. To accomplish this over the Plan Horizon, it is intended that residential densities in the Southern Strategy Area average at least two dwelling units per gross acre, and that new non-residential development average at least 10,000 square feet per gross acre. 6

7 Regional Mobility Plan and Nodes of Development On November 15, 2010 the Capital Region Transportation Planning Agency (CRTPA) Board (comprised of Leon, Gadsden, Jefferson, Wakulla and City of Tallahassee Commissioners) adopted the Regional Mobility Plan. A significant component of the Regional Mobility Plan was the selection of a preferred growth scenario that will affect growth patterns and the nature of transportation infrastructure investment over the coming decades. The CRTPA Board has selected Scenario #3, termed Quality Growth Plus. This scenario is the most progressive option in promoting infill development, optimizing current transportation infrastructure, and focusing growth in concentrated areas. Implementation of this scenario will lead to a regional urban structure that consists of a primary core (the Tallahassee multi-modal transportation district (MMTD)) and a series of outlying nodes that represent smaller urban centers in Gadsden, Jefferson, Leon, and Wakulla counties, as shown in the accompanying graphic. Outlying growth nodes such as Monticello, Crawfordville, and Woodville, are not envisioned as sprawling development connected to Tallahassee by low-density housing. Rather these nodes of development are expected to be concentrated growth areas. Promoting intensification of the nodes and preventing the proliferation of low-density housing between the nodes will optimize the current transportation infrastructure by preserving roadway capacity for longer, less frequent trips between nodes. Expanding residential development along the roads between nodes consumes the capacity of the roadway with shorter, more numerous vehicular trips. The proposed amendment is not consistent with the adopted plan as it specifically targets the creation of low-density residential development along principal arterial roadways. 7

8 Regional Mobility Plan and Sustainability One of the major themes that the CRTPA Board discussed regarding the Goals and Objectives for the Regional Mobility Plan was the concept of sustainability. Based on this discussion, CRTPA staff utilized the Smart Growth Principles to provide additional guidance in development of the plan. These principals were developed by the Smart Growth Network. The Network's partners include real estate interests, developers, environmental groups, historic preservation organizations, professional organizations, and local and state government entities. The Network was formed in response to increasing community concerns about the need for new ways to grow that boost the economy, protect the environment, and enhance community vitality. Several of the Smart Growth Principles included in the Regional Mobility Plan are included below along with discussion related to the proposed text amendment for density bonuses associated with Rural Conservation Subdivisions. Strengthen and Direct Development Towards Existing Communities - Smart growth directs development towards existing communities already served by infrastructure, seeking to utilize the resources that existing neighborhoods offer, and conserve open space and irreplaceable natural resources on the urban fringe. - The requested amendment seeks to increase opportunities to create new residential subdivisions on the urban fringe and beyond. Mix Land Uses - Smart growth supports the integration of mixed land uses into communities as a critical component of achieving better places to live. - The requested amendment will only allow the construction of residential subdivisions with no mixture of uses. Create Walkable Neighborhoods - Walkable communities are desirable places to live, work, learn, worship and play, and therefore a key component of smart growth. - The requested amendment seeks to open the opportunity for development in rural areas that are primarily not conducive to walking to a destination. Provide a Variety of Transportation Choices - Providing people with more choices in housing, shopping, communities, and transportation is a key aim of smart growth. - The requested amendment focuses increased rural development along principal arterial roadways in a manner that has historically fostered a single transportation choice: the automobile. Create a Range of Housing Opportunities and Choices - Providing quality housing for people of all income levels is an integral component in any smart growth strategy. - The requested amendment is likely to only produce housing for the upper income levels. In Conservation Subdivisions owners pay a premium for lots because they are also buying into a share of the permanently protected areas and any included amenities. 8

9 Consistency with Additional Comprehensive Plan Polices In additional to the consistency issues related to the Urban Service Area and Southern Strategy Area policies identified earlier in this report, the requested amendment is also not consistent with Policy 1.3.2: [SS], Policy 2.2.2: [L], and Policy 2.3.2: [L] as described below. Policy [SS] part c prohibits the conversion of Rural lands to a more dense land use category unless adjoining lands are within the Urban Service Area or Woodville Rural Community. The proposed amendment is not consistent with this policy as it would allow Rural lands to be converted to more dense use. Policy 1.3.2: [SS] (Revision Effective 12/24/2010, previously part of Policy 1.3.1: [SS]; Revision Effective 12/15/2011) For areas lying outside of the Urban Service Area boundary and within the Urban Fringe land use category, central sanitary sewer service may be extended and/or provided by an existing utility provider under the following circumstances: a) To serve an existing residential subdivision in order to correct documented environmental or health problems associated with failing septic treatment systems; or b) To serve a new Conservation subdivision or permitted non-residential use that is otherwise in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and its implementing land development regulations; AND c) No additional lands designated Rural or Urban Fringe as of August 26, 2006 shall be converted to a more dense or intense land use category unless adjoining lands are also within the designated Urban Service Area boundary or the designated Woodville Rural Community. Conversions to the Woodville Rural Community designation shall be consistent with the Transfer of Development Units provision in Policy 4.2.5: [C]. The Board reiterated and expanded on the above concept with the October 25, 2011 adoption of an amendment to Policy [L] included below. The requested amendment is also inconsistent with this policy. Policy 2.2.2: [L] To protect Rural areas from premature development, facilitate infill and redevelopment inside the Urban Service Area, and in recognition of the significant area already mapped as Urban Fringe, no additional lands designated Rural or Urban Fringe as of August 26, 2006 shall be converted to a more dense or intense land use category unless adjoining lands are also within the designated Urban Service Area boundary or the designated Woodville Rural Community... The requested amendment proposes that Conservation Subdivisions in Rural protect 50% of the total site as open space. This is the same percentage of open space currently required for the more dense Urban Fringe category. This is not consistent with the intent established in Policy [L] to establish higher open space percentages for the less dense Future Land Use Map categories. 9

10 Consistency with this intent could be achieved by increasing the required percent of protected open space in the requested Rural Conservation Subdivisions. Policy 2.3.2: [L] (Effective 7/1/04; Renumbered Effective 7/26/06; Revision Effective 12/15/2011) Within the land development regulations, local government shall define for various Future Land Use categories in which Conservation Subdivisions are allowed, any applicable density bonus incentives, and the minimum percentages of parent tract(s) to be protected as contiguous open space within Conservation Subdivisions. It shall be the intent to establish higher open space percentages for the less dense Future Land Use Map categories. County Strategic Priorities At the December 12, 2011 retreat, the Board charted the course for the future of Leon County through the establishment of a vision statement and the four strategic priority areas of Economy, Environment, Quality of Life and Governance. Each of the strategic priority areas is supported by a general statement and a series of directional statements. Six of these directional statements are included below in italics, followed by a brief discussion of the relationship to the requested amendment. Integrate infrastructure, transportation, redevelopment opportunities and community planning to create the sense of place which attracts talent. How to attract and retain people with the talent that will drive our future economy is a question may communities are asking. Economists and social scientists have provided theories regarding who has this talent and what they want in a community. While there is debate on the specifics, a generally accepted idea is that young people are a key factor. A 2009 survey of Generation Y (born in late 1970 s through early 2000 s) housing preferences by the Concord Group, a real estate strategy firm, found that transit-oriented development located near employment nodes and retail services should continue to attract this group and command price premiums. The requested amendment appears to foster a type of development that is not the preference of youthful talent and that is already represented in the Tallahassee market. Promote orderly growth which protects our environment, preserves our charm, maximizes public investment, and stimulates better and more sustainable economic returns. The requested amendment arguably encroaches upon the charm of our designated Rural areas by seeking to allow a more suburban land development pattern. While the proposal does include perpetual protection of 50% of the land, it has not been demonstrated that 230% more units clustered on 50% of the property is more environmentally protective than the existing allowance of one unit per ten acres. Regarding economic returns, a study published by the Tall Timbers Research Station found that in Leon County, for every $1 of revenue collected on farm and forest land, local government only expends 42 cents. However, for every $1 of revenue collected on residential lands, local government expends $1.38. This study supports the idea that conversion of farm and forest land to residential development has a negative impact on the bottom line for local governments. To increase economic returns, new residential development must be accompanied by increasing revenues from redevelopment and non-residential uses. 10

11 Reduce our carbon footprint, realize energy efficiencies, and be a catalyst for reusable energy, including solar. Private vehicles are the largest contributors to household carbon footprints, accounting for 55 percent of carbon emissions from U.S. households. Local strategies to reduce this carbon footprint are focused on creating a more compact development pattern that fosters the ability to walk, bike, utilize transit service, and shorten private vehicle trips. The requested amendment would foster low density residential in areas on the outskirts of the community that are not typically served by bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities. Create senses of place in our rural areas through programs, planning and infrastructure phasing in appropriate areas to encourage connectedness. This proposed sense of place planning for rural areas has just been introduced and is likely to focus on the already designated Rural Communities of Woodville, Fort Braden, Miccosukee, Chaires, and Capitola. Any increases in density, intensity, or allowed uses in these and surrounding areas should be developed as part of this larger infrastructure and sense of place planning initiative. At this time it does not appear that the requested amendment supports this initiative. Further create connectedness and livability through supporting human scale infrastructure and development, including enhancing our multimodal districts. The geographic areas addressed in the requested amendment characteristically support automobile scale, not human scale, development served by a single mode of transportation. Additionally, allowing expanded low density development in Rural areas tends to weaken efforts to enhance multimodal districts by continuing to distribute the population over an ever greater area that is very difficult and expensive to serve with alternate modes of transportation. Exercise responsible stewardship of County resources, sound financial management, and build the County s fiscal strength and ensure that the provision of services and investments are done in a fair and equitable manner. The efficiency of a denser, more compact development pattern to local government and the local tax payer has been well-documented over thirty years. The methodologies and scope of these studies vary widely and parts of the data could be picked to support just about any point of view on urban sprawl and smart growth. However, the preponderance of the data backs up the notion that lower density, spread-out development, as proposed in the requested amendment, requires government to build and maintain more lane miles and more sewer and water pipes than more compact development. It is also more expensive based on potential fuel costs to provide public services such as law enforcement, ambulance service, and fire protection services to more distant lower density populations than it is to a higher density compact community. Discussion of expanded development outside the Urban Service Area also brings up equity issues, as the full array of urban services are not yet available throughout this designated area. 11

12 Analysis of Proposed Text The full text of the requested amendment is included as Attachment #1. The text proposes use of the conservation subdivision concept in the Rural future land use category. The subdivisions would be required to permanently set aside at least 50% of the total site as open space and they would receive a 230% density bonus by increasing the allowed density from one unit per ten acres to one unit per three acres. The proposed policy includes four restrictions intended to limit the geographic availability of the conservation subdivision concept and associated density bonus. Each of the four restrictions are reviewed below. In general, the problem with each of the proposed restrictions is the lack of predictability regarding the areas of potential future use. If the only intent of the proposed policy is to provide for increased density on the Rockaway LLP site, a map amendment would be a better tool to more clearly limit the applicability to a single site. A map amendment would provide complete predictability for the landowners surrounding the Rockaway LLP site, in addition to removing the uncertainty associated with potential unintended use of the policy in other areas of the County. However, a map amendment would still raise many of the same issues noted in other portions of this staff report. At a minimum, a map amendment would need to have a companion text amendment to revise joint City/County Policies [SS] and [L] to allow the creation of new Urban Fringe Areas that are not adjacent to the existing Urban Service Area. 12

13 Review of Proposed Restriction #1: The proposed Conservation Subdivision must be located within 100 feet of any existing or approved residential development having a density of at least one unit per acre. While restriction #1 appears to be focused on keeping the proposed higher density development near areas that already have higher density development, the result is that any single home on one acre or less of land would lift this restriction for all lands within 100 feet. The figure below provides a map of parcels in Rural that are currently within 100 feet of residential development with a density of at least one unit per acre. The mapped area may also be expanded by combining multiple parcels into a single development proposal. For example, the applicant has indicated that this text amendment is targeting a 509 acre collection of nine parcels owned by Rockaway LLP. Currently only three of the nine parcels are within 100 feet of residential development with a density of at least one unit per acre. However, by combining the parcels in a single development proposal the area eligible for the density bonus would expand from 174 acres (3 parcels) to 509 acres (9 parcels). Additionally, future Family Heir subdivisions in Rural are likely to continue to expand the area not covered by this restriction; as such subdivisions are allowed to create ½ acre lots. Based on this analysis, staff believes this is not effective policy language for containing or limiting use of the proposed density bonus for Rural Conservation Subdivisions. 13

14 Review of Proposed Restriction #2: The proposed Conservation Subdivision must be located along a principle arterial roadway. The functional classification of roadways, such as principle arterial, is included in the Comprehensive Plan Mobility Element. These classifications are based on a combination of data on access to the roadway and the mobility associated with the roadway. The classification of principle arterial is not subject to frequent changes and would require a Comprehensive Plan amendment to include a new road. The figure below provides a map of Rural parcels located along principal arterials. However, the lack of exactness in the term along may lead to future conflicts regarding interpretation of eligibility for the proposed density bonus. Amending the language to include a precise locational standard such as adjacent to may help reduce conflicts. However, the mapped area below would still be subject to expansion by combining multiple parcels into a single development proposal. 14

15 Review of Proposed Restriction #3: The proposed Conservation Subdivision must be located within 100 feet of existing or approved water and sewer services. It is important to clarify that while restriction #3 bases eligibility for the proposed density bonus on close proximity to sewer service, the policy has been written such that any development proposed under the new provisions would be constructed on septic tanks not central sewer service. The proposed amendment does not contemplate actual use of central sewer and fails to address policies in the Comprehensive Plan that limit central sewer service to inside the Urban Service Area, Rural Communities, and specific cases in the Urban Fringe (1.1.3 [L]; [SS]). The proposed restriction utilizes terms regarding water and sewer service that are not recognized in the City and County Interlocal Agreement on the provision of such services. Staff recommends that it is more appropriate and may avoid future conflict if the distance measure and concept of existing or approved were replaced with the already defined concept of sewer being available to the subject site, as provided in the Interlocal Agreement. The proposed restriction appears to have been developed with the intent of allowing the requested density bonus on the Rockaway LLP site based on its close proximity (less than 100 feet) to potential sewer service at the Black Creek Highlands site (see map on page 16). Black Creek Highlands is the subject of a May 2006 Development Agreement with the County that allows for the provision of central sewer service to the site. However, the Agreement indicates the developer shall be responsible for making the appropriate arrangements for sewer service with the City. At this time the developer of Black Creek Highlands has not entered into a Letter of Agreement with the City for extension of City utility service, as specified in a November 2006 letter from City Utilities to the property owner. As such, sewer is not currently approved for the site. The Black Creek Highlands Development Agreement is set to expire in May Based on either the proposed language from the applicant or the staff recommendation to utilize the existing definition for sewer availability form the Interlocal Agreement, the Rockaway LLP site would not currently meet the restriction to qualify for the proposed density bonus. Based on Geographic Information System analysis, it appears the only parcels that may qualify for the proposed restriction are owned by the St. Joe Company (360 acres) and are located along Apalachee Parkway next to the Timber Lake subdivision, approximately two miles outside of Capital Circle. 15

16 Map indicating the location of the Black Creek Highlands site as described in the review of proposed restriction #3 on the previous page. Review of Proposed Restriction #4: The proposed Conservation Subdivision must be at least 100 acres in size. The 100 acre limitation on size does potentially limit the frequency with which the proposed policy may be utilized by limiting the eligibility of smaller landowners. Additionally, the 100 acre limitation enhances the potential ecological value of the resulting reserve area by ensuring that all reserve areas are at least 50 acres in size (50% of total site). However, the 100 acre limitation has little impact on the geographic distribution of the proposed density bonus, as aggregation of smaller parcels can be utilized to create a 100 acre site. For this reason, mapping of existing 100 acre parcels is not an accurate predictor of potential qualification for the proposed density bonus. Public Outreach In addition to the regular level of public outreach associated with Comprehensive Plan text amendments a post card describing the proposed amendment, providing a website link, and inviting citizens to participate in the policy discussion was mailed to landowners near areas that may qualify for the proposed Rural Conservation Subdivision policy in the future. 16

17 G. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the above analysis, the Planning Department recommends denial of the amendment request for the following reasons: 1. The requested 230% density bonus for Conservation Subdivisions would reduce predictability regarding future density in Rural areas. This appears to go against action taken in 2011 by the Board of County Commissioners and the City Commission to end the increased density provided for Conservations Subdivisions in the Urban Fringe Category. 2. Not consistent with Urban Service Area (USA) policies by allowing expanded residential development outside the USA while sufficient residential capacity is available inside Rural Communities and the USA where the full complement of urban services is not yet available or funded. 3. Not consistent with Southern Strategy policies by making development at the edges of the urbanized area more attractive to development, potentially resulting in less or delayed redevelopment and new development within the Southern Strategy area. 4. Not consistent with the adopted Regional Mobility Plan concepts of focusing growth in designated growth nodes and enhancing sustainability. The requested expansion of residential development along a road between growth nodes consumes the capacity of the roadway with shorter, more numerous vehicular trips. 5. Not consistent with Comprehensive Plan Policies that specifically do not allow conversion of Rural to a more dense category. The policies are intended to protect Rural areas from premature development, facilitate infill and redevelopment inside the USA, and recognize the significant area already mapped as Urban Fringe that allows development at one unit per three acres. 6. Does not support County Strategic Priorities and directional statements related to sense of place, orderly growth, carbon footprint, human scale infrastructure, and sound financial management. H. ATTCHMENTS: Attachment #1: Requested Text Amendment Attachment #2: Letter from Applicant. Attachment #3: Population Accommodation Presentation 17

18 Attachment #1 Page 1 of 3 Policy 2.1.8: [L] (Revision Effective 7/26/06; Revision Effective 1/7/10) Maintain a viable mix of available residential densities to accommodate a variety of housing types. Current residential densities are summarized below: RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES RANGE (Revision Effective 3/14/07; Revision Effective 12/15/2011) Rural Future Land Use Category Urban Fringe Maximum Gross Density - Dwelling Units (DU)/Acre (Ac) 1 1 DU/10 Ac (standard) or 1 DU/3 Ac (Conservation Subdivision) 1 DU/3 Ac (standard) or 1 DU/3 Ac (Conservation Subdivision) Minimum Gross Density Dwelling Units (DU)/Acre (Ac) No minimum No minimum Urban Residential 10 DU/AC 4 DU/Ac Urban Residential 2 20 DU/Ac 2 No minimum Village Mixed Use 20 DU/Ac 2 No minimum Suburban 20 DU/Ac 2 No minimum Planned Development 20 DU/Ac 2 No minimum Bradfordville Mixed Use 2 20 DU/Ac No minimum Central Urban 2, 3, 4 45 DU/Ac No minimum Activity Center 2, 3 45 DU/Ac No minimum University Transition 2,3, 4 50 DU/Ac No minimum Central Core 2, 3, 4 (Eff.1/7/10) 150 DU/Ac (Eff. 1/19/02) No minimum Rural Community 4 DU/Ac No minimum Residential Preservation 2 6 DU/Ac No minimum Lake Talquin Recreation/Urban 1 DU/3 Ac (standard) No minimum Fringe 5 Lake Protection 5 1 DU/2 Ac (standard) No minimum Notes: 1 Maximum gross density is based on the gross acreage of the site and may not be achievable after addressing applicable land development regulations (e.g., parking, stormwater, and other regulations that may limit maximum development potential). 2 Density ranges can be increased up to 25% above the maximum limits listed above for the purpose of providing affordable housing units, consistent with Policy [LU]. 3 Density ranges can be increased up to 35% above the maximum limits listed above for the purpose of encouraging infill development and redevelopment, consistent with Policy [LU]. (Effective 1/19/02) 4 In areas designated Central Core, University Transition and Central Urban on the Future Land Use Map, any development with density of more than 50 dwelling units per acre must be subject to the design standards identified in Policy [LU]. (Effective 1/19/02; Rev. Effective 1/7/10) 5 Clustering Option Available

19 Attachment #1 Page 2 of 3 Policy 2.2.1: [L] RURAL/AGRICULTURE * (Revision Effective 8/17/92; Revision Effective 7/26/06; Revision Effective12/24/2010) *(Leon County refers to this category as "Rural" only.) Largely undeveloped acreage remotely located away from urbanized areas containing the majority of the County's present agricultural, forestry and grazing activities. Intended not to be scheduled for urban activity during the Plan Horizon due to lack of present and/or scheduled urban infrastructure services. Very low residential density (1 unit per 10 acres) and minimal commercial designed to service basic household needs of adjacent residents are allowed, as well as passive recreational land uses. Industrial and ancillary commercial land uses associated directly with the timbering and/or agri- business are permitted. Intended to maintain and promote present and future agriculture land uses and to prohibit residential sprawl into remote areas lacking basic urban infrastructure services. To promote a mix of residential areas and perpetually protected open space and agricultural lands, Conservation Subdivision developments are allowed and encouraged under certain limiting circumstances. Conservation Subdivision design in Rural/Agriculture may be permitted at a density of up to one unit per three gross acres with units clustered on no more than 50% of the site if subject to the following restrictions: 1. The proposed Conservation Subdivision must be located within 100 feet of any existing or approved residential development having a density of at least one unit per acre. 2. The proposed Conservation Subdivision must be located along a principle arterial roadway. 3. The proposed Conservation Subdivision must be located within 100 feet of existing or approved water and sewer services. 4. The proposed Conservation Subdivision must be at least 100 acres in size. Conservation Subdivisions must also permanently set aside at least 50% of the total site as open space and restrict development to the least environmentally sensitive and otherwise significant portions of the land.

20 Attachment #1 Page 3 of 3 CONSERVATION SUBDIVISIONS Objective 2.3: [L]. (Effective 7/1/04; Renumbered Effective 7/26/06; Revision Effective 8/1/07) Conservation Subdivision land development regulations in the County shall continue to provide design options and guidelines for the development of Conservation Subdivisions that advance environmental resource protection or restoration or promote infill and redevelopment. The City may adopt similar provisions. Policy 2.3.1: [L] (Effective 7/1/04; Renumbered Effective 7/26/06) To minimize the threat of premature conversion of rural land, including properties supporting bona fide agriculture and silviculture, the Conservation Subdivision option shall not be allowed within the Rural Future Land Use category, with the exception of those areas designated as Rural Residential within the Bradfordville Sector Plan except as specifically limited in Policy [L]. Conservation Subdivisions shall also be allowed within those areas designated as Rural Residential within the Bradfordville Sector Plan Policy 2.3.2: [L] (Effective 7/1/04; Renumbered Effective 7/26/06; Revision Effective 12/15/2011) Within the land development regulations, local government shall define for various Future Land Use categories in which Conservation Subdivisions are allowed, any applicable density bonus incentives, and the minimum percentages of parent tract(s) to be protected as contiguous open space within Conservation Subdivisions. It shall be the intent to establish higher open space percentages for the less dense Future Land Use Map categories. Similarly, it is intended that density bonuses only be permitted as an incentive in those land use categories which are more dense than the Urban Fringe land use category, except for those areas within the Rural land use category that meet the limiting requirements of Policy 2.2.1[L]. Policy 2.3.3: [L] (Effective 7/1/04; Renumbered Effective 7/26/06) To better judge the impacts of Conservation Subdivisions on the demands for services and the effects of coordinating protected open space, local government may phase the implementation of Conservation Subdivisions within Future Land Use Categories more dense than Urban Fringe via the adoption of land development regulation provisions, beginning with Urban Fringe Future Land Use category and those areas designated as Rural Residential within the Bradfordville Sector Plan.

21 Luis N. Serna, AICP, LEED AP BD+C 3213 Proud Clarion Trail Tallahassee, Florida Attachment #2 Page 1 of 2 November 22,2011 Tallahassee-Leon County Planning Department 435 North Macomb Street Tallahassee, FL Re: Proposed Text Amendment for Conservation Subdivisions in Rural Land Use Districts During the last cycle of comprehensive plan amendments, a significant debate took place as both the City and County commissioners considered changing Urban Fringe densities from one unit per three acres to one unit per ten acres to mirror the density in the Rural land use category. After extensive debate, the determination was made by the joint commissions that, while there are many areas where the change was appropriate, there were clearly areas where Urban Fringe densities are needed in order to facilitate an orderly transition between Urban and Rural development patterns. Among the characteristics of those parcels which caused the reconsideration of a blanket change in Urban Fringe densities were those sites which were adjacent to existing urban densities, located along major roadways, and those located adjacent to developments approved for water and sewer service. Also in the last cycle was a reconsideration of Conservation Subdivision densities. The Comprehensive Plan currently excludes Conservation Subdivisions in the Rural land use category. However, the plan makes a specific exemption which allows Conservation Subdivisions in the Rural Residential land use category within the Bradfordville Sector Plan. That provision exists because the joint commissions recognized that, despite their rural character, there are rural areas which are appropriate for Conservation Subdivisions based on their proximity to already existing urban densities, their proximity to major roadways, and their adjacency to water and sewer service. A logical application of standards would suggest that the same benefits afforded 10 one area of our community should be afforded to every area of our community if the criteria which allow Conservation Subdivisions in the Rural Residential areas of the Bradfordville Study Area exist in other areas. As they are in Bradfordville, the criteria for developing a Conservation Subdivision should require meeting a series of strict requirements. The requirements in this proposed text amendment reflect those attributes which define orderly growth, and just as significant, the very exemptions which both the City and County Commissions deemed appropriate in the northeast quadrant of our community - Adjacent to already approved urban densities, located on a principle arterial roadway, and adjacent to developments already approved for water and sewer service. Additionally, the amendment includes a minimum size of 100 acres for Conservation Subdivisions in Rural areas in keeping with the purpose and intent of the Rural land use district and the Conservation Subdivision policies of the Comprehensive Plan.

22 Attachment #2 Page 2 of 2 We respectfully request your thoughtful consideration of this proposed text amendment. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Luis N. Serna, AICP, LEED AP BD+C cc: Gary Yordon

23 What do we know about population and units needed? New Units Needed by ,622 people / 2.35 people per unit = 20,690 Units Attachment #3 Page 1 of 5 Population Projections (BEBR) 2011 = 276, = 324,900 Growth = 48,622 people Persons Per Unit 2010 County = 2.35

24 Population Accommodation and the USA Major Planned Developments Southwood = 2,500 units (Remaining in DRI) Fallschase = 1,514 units (Site Plan) Southside = 2,800 units (Proposed DRI) Welaunee = 4,819 units (Toe and Heel only) Pinnacle = 400 units (Proposed DRI) Summerfield= 447 units (PUD) Hopkins North= 480 units est.(192 res. ac. x 2.5 DU/ac.) Collin English = 2,000 units est. (10,610 based on SESP) Total = 14,960 units Attachment #3 Page 2 of 5

25 Population Accommodation Other Major Ongoing and Proposed Projects Inside the USA (greater than 20 units each) SF Detached Townhouse Condo Multi-Family TOTAL Proposed Under Review ,104 Approved (in subs/projects not yet started) ,550 Approved (in subs/projects under construction) 1, ,130 Clearing Site Under Construction Projects Not included in the above totals 2, ,121 5,992 Updated September 2011 Attachment #3 Page 3 of 5 and the USA