TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL M E M O R A N D U M To: Council Members AGENDA ITEM 10A From: Date: Subject: Staff April 20, 2007 Council Meeting Local Government Comprehensive Plan Review Draft Amendments to the City of Fellsmere Comprehensive Plan DCA Reference No. 07-1 Introduction The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, requires that Council review local government comprehensive plan amendments prior to their adoption. Under the provisions of this law, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) prepares an Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report on a proposed amendment only if requested to do so by the local government, the regional planning council, an affected person, or if an ORC Report is otherwise deemed necessary by the DCA. If the local government requests DCA to prepare an ORC Report, then Council must provide DCA with its own objections, recommendations for modification, and comments on the proposed amendments within 30 days of its receipt. Background The City of Fellsmere is located in the north central portion of Indian River County (Exhibit A). Historically, the City developed as a small market center for the agriculture industry. The City has a population of 4,600 people, which grows to approximately 7,000 people during the height of the citrus season. The characteristics of the population of Fellsmere are quite different from those of the County as a whole. The City s median age is 25, while the County s is 46. In the 2000 Census, the City s per capita income was $10,000, while the County s per capita income was $30,000. 21% of Fellsmere households are at or below the poverty level, while the County has 11% of households with this status. In 2003, the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan, necessitated in part by the annexation in 1999 of 3,480 acres of vacant land located in the southwest corner of the I- 95 and CR 512 interchange (see Exhibits). The City annexed more land in 2006, adding approximately 90 acres west of I-95 and over 390 acres east of the I-95 interchange.
These newly annexed lands are the subject of two of the proposed Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendments in this package. During the last 2 years, the City has undertaken the following economic development efforts: Annexation of additional land. Establishment of a Community Redevelopment Area (CRA). Development of a streamlined development review process. Institution of new land development codes. The CRA was established in 2005 to eliminate blight and promote infill and redevelopment in the traditional downtown area known as Old Town. The City of Fellsmere is proposing four amendments to the FLUM and text amendments to the Future Land Use Element and the Transportation Element of the City Comprehensive Plan. The City has requested a formal review of the proposed amendments by the DCA. Evaluation The FLUM amendments are summarized in Table 1. The location of the subject properties are shown on the attached maps (see Exhibits 2, 3, and 4). 2
Table 1 Proposed Amendments to the Future Land Use Map City of Fellsmere Comprehensive Plan DCA Reference No. 07-1 Amendment Number/Name 1. Carson Platt/ Fellsmere 392 (CPA-01-07) 2. Banack Family Part. (CP-01-07-C) 3. Patel Properties (CPA-01-07B) 4. Old Town Expansion (City Initiated) Approx. Acreage 392.0 Current FLUM Designation AG-1 (80.0 ac.) C/I (312.0 ac.) Proposed FLUM Designation REAC (41.0 ac.) LDMXN (351.0 ac.) 90.5 A LDR 20.0 LDR OTD 16.0 Total: 518.5 LDR (4.7 ac.) MDR (8.9 ac.) NC (1.5 ac.) PIN (.90 ac.) OTD Approximate Location NE corner of I-95 and CR 512 interchange. West of Willow St., between 99 St. & 101 St.. North of South Carolina Ave. North of CR 512, east of Orange St., West of Pine St. and South side of South Carolina Ave. City LDMXN LDR MDR NC OTD PIN REAC County AG-1 C/I Key to FLUM Designations Low Density Mixed Neighborhood Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Neighborhood Commercial Old Town District Public Institutional Regional Employment Activity Center Agricultural Commercial Industrial Future Land Use Map Amendments 1. (CPA-01-07) Carson Platt/ Fellsmere 392 The subject property is approximately 392 acres of land annexed into Fellsmere in October of 2006. The property is generally located in the northeast corner of the I- 95/CR 512 interchange. Under the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan, 312 acres of the parcel was designated as Commercial/Industrial, the highest intensity under the County s plan. The remaining 80 acres had a FLUM designation of Agriculture (AG-1). Fellsmere proposes to designate 41 acres of the parcel as Regional Employment Activity Center (REAC) and the remaining land as Low Density Mixed Neighborhood (LDMXN). The property is currently vacant. The existing land use to the north is Conservation but the County leases the area from the St. Johns River Water Management District 3
(SJRWMD) to operate a gun range. The property to the east has existing industrial uses and is designated for Commercial/Industrial (C/I) under the County Comprehensive Plan. The properties to the south are largely undeveloped and have a FLUM designation of C/I (IRC). I-95 borders the property to the west. The amendment is proposed to allow regional employment activity center development (commercial and/or industrial) on the southern portion of the property along the interstate and CR 512, followed to north by townhouses, then single-family units and, finally, conservation lands in the northern most area. 174 acres is slated to remain undeveloped for probable eventual inclusion into the St. Sebastian Buffer Preserve. 2. (CP-01-07-C) Banack Family Partnership The subject property is approximately 90 acres in size and was annexed into the City in May of 2006. The property is generally located west of Willow Street, between 99 th Street and 101 st Street. The property had a FLUM designation of AG-1 under the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan. The City is proposing a Low Density Residential (LDR) designation. The subject property is currently undeveloped. The property to the north is undeveloped and has a FLUM designation of AG-1. The property to the east is predominantly single family houses with a FLUM designation of LDR. The properties to the south have designations of Public/Institutional (PIN) and the proposed Old Town District (OTD) designation on the bordering Patel Properties amendment. The property to the west is farmland designated AG-1. 3. (CPA-01-07B) Patel Properties The subject property is approximately 20 acres in size and has a historic building partially located within the boundaries. The City has required the preservation of the building. The property is currently designated LDR. A designation of OTD is proposed. The property abuts the Banack parcels on the north side. The parcels to the south across South Carolina Avenue are the subject of a City-initiated amendment to re-designate them from LDR to OTD (see below). The property to the west is undeveloped and has a FLUM designation of AG-1. The change is consistent with the City s adopted CRA plan. 4. Old Town Expansion The City intends to re-designate approximately 16 acres of land that currently has several FLUM designations (see Table 1) to expand the Old Town District. The expansion results in a larger OTD formed by the blocks along Broadway Street, between CR 512 and South Carolina Avenue and the properties on the north and south sides of South Carolina Avenue. The OTD is intended to preserve the small 4
scale mixed use character of Fellsmere. The proposed amendment is consistent with the City s CRA plan for the downtown area. Text Amendments The City is proposing a significant number of text amendments to the Future Land Use and Transportation Elements. The amendments are categorized by the City as follows: 1. Re-formatting, and clarifying some of the sections, such as REAC and Pine Grove to give them their own clear and concise sections. Note: No changes to the Pine Grove development have been made. 2. Changing the Low Density Residential Mixed Use District to be named Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhoods LDMXN, keeping most of the old policies, creating the enabling methods for creating planned developments and new master planned communities, setting forth density and intensity of uses, types of uses, mixes of uses as desired by the City. 3. Making REAC more useful to the City for interchange areas or other areas that the City may choose. 4. Recognizing the fair share apportionment of the County. 5. Integrating enabling policies for adopting the IRC Interlocal Agreement on Schools. 6. Strengthening the City s ability to use annexation agreements, development agreements, or other sureties to secure funding for capital improvements, making the plan completely financially feasible. Indeed the types of development envisioned by the Plan and those annexed will more than adequately provide the resources for infrastructure improvements and quality of life improvements. 7. Adopting the County s Level of Service standards for the County s roads coming through our jurisdiction. 8. Separating Neighborhood Commercial from General Commercial sections. 9. Setting forth an overall policy that lands annexed after January 2007 shall have an average of no more than 3 dwelling units per acre. 10. Setting forth design standards for all new developments using architectural and site design standards. 11. Setting rational densities and intensities desired by the City to encourage feasible, quality development. 5
Extrajurisdictional Impacts According to the City correspondence dated March 6, 2007, the County was provided with a copy of the proposed amendments. In a memo dated March 20, 2007, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council requested comments on the proposed amendments from Indian River County and the Indian River County Metropolitan Planning Organization. In a letter dated April 10, 2007 (Attachment A), Indian River County expressed a number of concerns regarding two of the FLUM amendments. Effects on Significant Regional Resources or Facilities Analysis of the proposed amendments indicates that they are not likely to have adverse effects on significant regional resources or facilities. It is important that the native habitat on the Carson Platt/Fellsmere 392 FLUM amendment be preserved and protected. Analysis of Consistency with Strategic Regional Policy Plan (CPA-01-07) Carson Platt/ Fellsmere 392 1. The proposed amendment package indicates that 174 acres of this 392 acre property will remain undeveloped as a buffer for probable eventual inclusion into the St. Sebastian Buffer Preserve. In accordance with Objective FLUE B of the Fellsmere Comprehensive Plan, the protection of conservation resources should be achieved through a FLUM designation of Conservation. Policy FLUE B-1 requires Conservation lands to be governed by regulatory agencies (SJRWMD, US Fish and Wildlife Service, FDEP or other state or federal agencies). In the event that the transfer of governance to one of these agencies is not practical, the policy allows the use of conservation easements, which shall be treated the same as areas designated Conservation on the FLUM. The applicant has negotiated on-site and off-site mitigation with SJRWMD. It is unclear why the referenced property is not being assigned a Conservation designation at this time. The City should revise the proposed amendment to assign a Conservation designation to the referenced property; consistent with City policy and with Regional Goal 2.1 of the Strategic Regional Policy Plan (SRPP). Alternatively, a conservation easement should be a condition of the FLUM amendment, consistent with Policy 2.1.1.3 of the SRPP. 2. According to Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes and contract agreement between the DCA and the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, one of the most important roles played by the regional planning council in reviewing proposed local government comprehensive plan amendments is to identify extrajurisdictional impacts which would be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan of an affected local government. The attached letter from Indian River County dated April 10, 2007, raises a number of concerns about the compatibility of this proposed amendment with the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan. The County indicates that the portion of the property to be redesignated for residential use (351 acres to be designated as LDMXN) is not 6
appropriate for such uses; and is in conflict with a number of policies in the County Comprehensive Plan. The County points out the potential incompatibility of residential uses with the adjacent County Gun Range, with existing industrial uses and with other lands designated for future industrial uses (see Exhibits 6, 7, and 8). In Goal 6.1 of the SRPP, a balanced and well-planned compatible mix of land uses is encouraged for new neighborhoods and communities. However, the incompatibility of new residential uses with existing uses that create noise, light, odor, heavy traffic, etc. should not be overlooked. Prior to the adoption of this amendment, the City should address the concerns raised by the County and indicate how the proposed new uses will be compatible with the existing uses. 3. When a municipality undertakes a sizeable annexation of unincorporated land and proposes to assign different Future Land Use Map designations to the property, a conflict between the vision as set forth in the County comprehensive plan and the new vision perceived by the municipality is likely. The City of Fellsmere has recently undertaken some large annexations and has proposed and/or adopted new FLUM designations that could significantly change the land use mix and intensity of development in those areas. Before annexing additional lands and before adopting the proposed amendments to the Carson Platt/Fellsmere 392 property, it is recommended that the City work with the County to prepare a joint annexation and future growth plan for the area. Such a plan should address such matters as land use designation and compatibility, services, schools and the designation of conservation lands. One approach would be to identify a joint planning area as authorized and encouraged in the Florida Statutes. (CP-01-07-C) Banack Family Partnership 4. This 90.5 acre property currently has access from one improved road (Willow Street) and from three unimproved dirt roads. The City required a traffic analysis, which indicated that improvements to Willow Street are needed. The annexation agreement requires the owner/developer to provide various improvements including paved access to the development from 99 th Street and paved extensions of Broadway to Community Street and Community Street to 101 st Street. The agreement also stipulates that additional right-of-way needs must meet both City and County specifications. Indian River County has indicated a concern regarding transportation access to this parcel. The County is currently maintaining the unpaved roads. Multiple access points and an interconnected street network are necessary to ensuring a healthy transportation network in the region consistent with Regional Strategy 7.1.3. Pursuant to City Policy FLUE B-1.3, new development should include the integration of both the larger streets identified in the agreement, as well as the existing finer grain neighborhood streets. The new street network should connect through the Patel Properties parcel, extending the existing street network from the south side of South Carolina Avenue. The City should also coordinate with the County to ensure the 7
concerns raised regarding the jurisdictional responsibility of these streets are resolved before development occurs. (CPA-01-07B) Patel Properties 5. This 20 acre parcel is located on the north side of South Carolina Avenue. In order to achieve a development form consistent with the character envisioned for the Old Town District and with Policy FLUE B-1.3, the City should require new development to extend the fine grain system of neighborhood streets on the south side of South Carolina Avenue and connect into the Banack parcel. Future Land Use Element Text Amendments 1. Principle #4 in the guiding principles of the Fellsmere Comprehensive Plan is amended to include new text stating, Lands annexed after January 2007 shall be limited to an average gross density of 3 dwelling units per acre. This provision is repeated in Policy FLUE B-2.6(3) and Policy FLUE B-13, both related to the Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhoods future land use category. This statement raises concerns regarding internal conflicts within the City s plan, establishes unnecessary limitations on future development/redevelopment and could create potential compatibility conflicts, depending upon the specific location of the annexed parcel. City Policy FLUE A-1.3 states that the highest residential densities should be allocated to areas with access to major thoroughfares, considering adjacent existing densities. The larger concern is that a policy requiring low density residential development for all future lands in the City will result in the propagation of sprawl in the region. Proposed Policy FLUE B-2.6 contains minimum criteria for the LDMXN, including the limitation of 3 du/ac for parcels annexed in the future. Regional Goal 6.1 in the SRPP encourages development in the form of sustainable neighborhoods. The SRPP describes neighborhoods as having the following elements: 1) 40-160 acres in size; 2) An average gross density of 4 to 10 units per acre within a variety of building types; 3) A mix of uses; 4) A Center; 5) Civic sites; 6) Public Open Spaces; 7) Streets for people, bicycles, buses and cars; 8) Many separate and distinct buildings. The provision limiting the residential density of all future neighborhoods and communities in annexed areas to 3 dwelling units per acre is inconsistent with the SRPP. 8
It would prevent the development of sustainable cities, towns or villages consistent with Regional Goal 4.1, and would be inconsistent with a number of policies in Regional Goals 6.1 regarding the creation of new neighborhoods and communities and Regional Goal 15.1 regarding the containment of suburban sprawl. The City should amend the minimum principles for the LDMXN contained in Policy FLUE B-2.6 to ensure that all new master planned neighborhoods achieve the minimum standards set forth by the SRPP. Specifically, the phrase, to the extent practicable should be removed from sections (5) regarding providing conservation/ open spaces; (8) regarding providing a mix of housing types; and (9) regarding clustering residential development to provide undeveloped open space adjacent to conservation areas. Section (4) regarding an internal transportation system should be expanded to be consistent with the street network requirements in FLUE B-1.3. Policy B-2.6.2 should be amended to require a minimum amount of institutional/recreational uses within these neighborhoods. 2. Existing Objective FLUE B-1 states that existing and new residential neighborhoods are the life blood of the community and has supporting Policy FLUE B-1.3 outlining general development standards for such residential neighborhoods. Proposed Objective FLUE-A-11 regarding Master Planned Communities should be coordinated with Policy FLUE B-1.3 so that it is clear that residential master planned communities must also meet these general development standards. The County should add a policy under Objective FLUE-A-11 (similar to Policy FLUE A-3.1 for infill projects) stipulating that the general development standards for neighborhoods also apply to master planned communities. Consistency with Strategic Regional Policy Plan The contract agreement between the DCA and the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council requires Council to include a determination of consistency with the SRPP as part of the written report to be submitted to the DCA. Council finds the proposed amendments to be CONSISTENT with the SRPP, with the exception of: 1) the proposed text amendments to the Future Land Use Element regarding the limitation of residential density to 3 dwelling units per acre; 2) the provisions of the LDMXN future land use map category that are in conflict with the SRPP; and 3) the assignment of the LDMXN designation to 392 acres of the Carson/Platt Fellsmere 392 FLUM amendment. Recommendation Council should adopt the above comments and approve their transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. Attachments 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23