Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2010-06-17
CITY OF OKEECHOBEE PLANNING BOARDIBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS JUNE 17, 2010 SUMMARY OF BOARD ACTION AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER - Chairperson. II. CHAIRPERSON, MEMBER AND STAFF ATTENDANCE - Secretary. Chairperson Devin Maxwell Vice - Chairperson Dawn Hoover Board Member Terry Burroughs Board Member Douglas McCoy Board Member Kenneth Keller Board Member Osiel Luviano Board Member Malissa Morgan Alternate Member Karyne Brass Alternate Member - Phil Baughman Attorney John R. Cook Senior Planning Consultant Bill Brisson Board Secretary Betty J. Clement III. MINUTES - Secretary. A. Motion to dispense with the reading and approve the Summary of Board Action for the May 20, 2010 regular meeting. IV. AGENDA - Chairperson. A. Requests for the addition, deferral or withdrawal of items on today's agenda. ACTION - DISCUSSION - VOTE Chairperson Maxwell called the June 17, 2010 meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Secretary Clement called the roll: Present Absent (w /consent) Present Absent (w /o consent) Present Present Present (entered Chambers at 6:07 p.m.) Present (entered Chambers at 6:02 p.m.) Present (moved to voting position) Present Present Present Member Burroughs motioned to dispense with the reading and approve the Su Regular Meeting; seconded by Member Baughman. There was no discussion VOTE MAXWELL - YEA HOOVER - ABSENT BURROUGHS - YEA MCI KELLER- YEA LUVIANO - YEA MORGAN - ABSENT BR/ BAUGHMAN - YEA MOTION CARRIED. Chairperson Maxwell asked whether there were any requests for additions, defE agenda? There were none. 339 340 AGENDA V. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING - Chairperson. A. Petition No. 10- 003 -SE submitted by Kevin McGinley to allow height in excess of 30 feet Sec. 90- 103(10) for property located at 901 SW 6th Street, Okeechobee, FL - Senior Planner. B. 2010 Evaluation and Appraisal Draft of the City's Comprehensive Plan - Senior Planner. VI. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING - Chairperson VII. NEW BUSINESS - Chairperson A. Consider any additional requests for amendments to the City's Land Development Regulations - Chairperson. JUNE 17, 2010 - PLANNING BOARD /BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS - PAGE 2 OF 3 ACTION - DISCUSSION - VOTE There were none. Mr. Brisson presented the Planning Staff Report, stating compliance with the City's Code of Ordinances. The applicant has met and addressed all requirements therefore Staff recommends, Petition No. 10- 003 -SE, be approved to allow a maximum height of 44' 4" to the top of the architectural dome /bell tower. Mr. Kevin McGinley, for the applicant addressed the Board, reporting there were no actual bells in the bell tower and no chiming. At this time he thanked the Planner for the Staff Report. Public meeting was opened and closed at 6:10 p.m., and there was no board discussion. Board Member Burroughs moved to approve Petition No. 10- 003 -SE, to allow for height in excess of 30 feet, Sec. 90- 103(10) for property located at 901 SW 6th Street, Okeechobee, FL; seconded by Member Baughman. VOTE MAXWELL - YEA HOOVER - ABSENT BURROUGHS - YEA MCCOY - ABSENT KELLER- YEA LUVIANO - YEA MORGAN - YEA BRASS - NON VOTING BAUGHMAN - YEA MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Brisson addressed the concerns and questions from the previous Board meeting in May. The Board discussed the 5 Major Issues and had multiple suggestions and concerns. Mr. Brisson requested all suggestions and concerns be e- mailed to him for review, and, discussion and recommendation would follow at the next regular Planning Board meeting. Chairperson Maxwell closed the Public Hearing at 7:30 p.m. There were none. 1 AGENDA VIII. ADJOURNMENT - Chairperson. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE AND BE ADVISED that if any person desires to appeal any decision made by the Planning Board /Board of Adjustment and Appeals with respect to any matter considered at this proceeding, such interested person will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose may need to ensure a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. General Services media are for the sole purpose of backup for official records of the Department. Devin M ATTEST: etty J Clement, Secretary 1 ell Chairpe = on JUNE 17, 2010 - PLANNING BOARD /BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS - PAGE 3 OF 3 3 4 1 ACTION - DISCUSSION - VOTE Chairperson Maxwell adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m. CITY OF OKEECHOBEE PLANNING BOARD/BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MEETING JUNE 17, 2010 OFFICIAL AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER: Planning Board /Board of Adjustment and Appeals, June 17, 2010 6:00 p.m. - Chairperson. II. CHAIRPERSON, BOARD MEMBER AND STAFF ATTENDANCE - Secretary. Chairperson Devin Maxwell Vice - Chairperson Dawn Hoover Board Member Terry Burroughs Board Member Kenneth Keller Board Member Osiel Luviano Board Member Douglas McCoy Board Member Malissa Morgan Alternate Karyne Brass Alternate Phil Baughman Attorney John R. Cook Senior Planner Bill Brisson Secretary Betty Clement III. MINUTES - Secretary. A. Motion to dispense with the reading and approve the Summary of Planning Board /Board of Adjustment and Appeals Action for the May 20, 2010 regular meeting. IV. AGENDA - Chairperson. B. Requests for the addition, deferral or withdrawal of items on today's agenda. PAGE 1 OF 2 JUNE 17, 2010- PB /BOA AGENDA - PAGE 2 OF 2 V. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING - Chairperson. A. Petition No. 10-003-SE submitted by Kevin McGinley to allow height in excess of 30 feet Sec. 90- 103(10) for property located at 901 SW 6th Street, Okeechobee, FL - Senior Planner. 1. Hear from Planning Staff. 2. Hear from the Property Owner or designee /agent. 3. Open Public Hearing for public comment - Chairperson. 4. Close Public Hearing - Chairperson. 5. Board Discussion. 6. Consider motion and vote. B. 2010 Evaluation and Appraisal Draft of the City's Comprehensive Plan - Senior Planner. VII. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING - Chairperson. VIII. NEW BUSINESS - Chairperson. A. Consider any additional requests for amendments to the City's Land Development Regulations - Chairperson. IX. ADJOURN - Chairperson. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE AND BE ADVISED that all interested parties and citizens shall have the opportunity to be heard at these public hearings. Any person deciding to appeal any decision made by the Planning Board /Board of Adjustment and Appeals with respect to any matter considered at this meeting or hearing will need to ensure a verbatim record of the proceeding is made and that the record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal will be based. General Services media are for the sole purpose of backup for official records of the Department. CITY OF OKEECHOBEE PLANNING BOARD /BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS HAND WRITTEN MINUTES JUNE 17,2010 I. CALL TO ORDER- Chairperson: June 17, 2010, Planning Board /Board of Adjustment and Appeals Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. 11. CHAIRPERSON, BOARD MEMBER STAFF ATTENDANCE - Secretary. Chairperson Maxwell Vice Chairperson Hoover Board Member Burroughs Board Member Keller Board Member McCoy Board Member Morgan (n lo' Board Member Luviano Alternate Brass , .0 Alternate - Baughman Senior Planner Brisson Attorney Cook Secretary Clement Present Absent Page 1 of 10 111. MINUTES - Secretary. A. Motion to dispense with the reading and approve the Summary of Planning Board /Board of Adjustment and Appeals Action for the May 20, 2010 regular meeting. MOTION:,GrrO u k s moved to dispense with the reading and approve the Summary of Planning Board /Board Adjustment and Appeals Action for the May 20, 2010 meeting; regular g eetmg; seconded VOTE: YEA NAY JUNE 17, 2010 - PB/BOA MINUTE GUIDE - PAGE 2 OF 10 ABSENT ABSTAIN NON VOTING MAXWELL HOOVER X BURROUGHS KELLER 1/ MCCOY ✓ MORGAN ✓ LUVIANO ✓ BRASS / t/ BAUGHMAN RESULTS (7 CARRIED j DENIED IV. AGENDA - Chairperson. A. Requests for the addition, deferral or withdrawal of items on today's agenda. NanJ V. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING - Chairperson. A. Petition No. 10- 003 -SE submitted by Kevin McGinley to allow height in excess of 30 feet Sec. 90- 103(10) for property located at 901 SW 6'h Street, Okeechobee, FL - Senior Planner. 1. Hear from Planning Staff. -34A4 Y5itz- C4_ -+Q.16 tuAg_e_g44/Akr,t od. Edx2-( 6-kaiik IL_ +�t A. Petition No. 10- 003 -SE continued. 2. JUNE 17, 2010 - PB /BOA AGENDA - PAGE 3 OF 10 Hear from the Property Owner or designee /agent. YRC Z11, LL-0 3. Open Public Hearing for public comment - Chairperson. 4. Close Public Hearing - Chairperson. t , 5. Board Discussion. ■d� dos Li<s JUNE 17, 2010 - PB /BOA AGENDA - PAGE 4 OF 10 A. Petition No. 10- 003 -SE continued. 6. Consider motion and vote. Member L Loved to approve /deny height in excess of 30 feet Sec. 90- 103(10) for property located at 901 6m Street, Okeechobee, FL; seconded by Member Na pr5, • VOTE: B. YEA NAY ABSTAIN MAXWELL HOOVER X BURROUGHS KELLER ✓ MCCOY MORGAN LUVIANO •` BRASS f BAUGHMAN RESULTS CARR IED DENIED 2010 Evaluation and Appraisal Draft of the City's Comprehensive Plan - Senior Planner. Section 1: Community -Wide Assessment 0--g_oe 'Is okt_ kas 10° fe LOS 3 on) to Taivi 4.1fult_4, LOS JUNE 17, 2010 - PB!BOA AGENDA - PAGE 5 OF 10 B. 2010 Evaluation and Appraisal Draft of the City's Comprehensive Plan continued. Major Issue 1: Need to provide for a transition from residential use to commercial use in certain areas of the City. 75 foosL2JAA;),- (YL. Qe ,� . /06. 14ctro.--)J a o x..,f jilzka ite4L4,-, (304ii,d,)--, A eri (-I° 3 cie-c-tri,42_64_,,L, / i-c_ct fill . YLL..' r ,,,,,br,g-A.4), A, eL, i e -Lk lJ - JUNE 17, 2010 - PBIBOA AGENDA - PAGE 6 OF 10 B. 2010 Evaluation and Appraisal Draft of the City's Comprehensive Plan continued. Major Issue 2: The need to eliminate inconsistencies between the Official Zoning Map and the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). -+_LL40 c.„ keTuft=s_dLcuL., Lc_fL , 0,1c„,,/ /Id OWAUUL_ 10 41kt (1(4-6-e-g/ fit-14 k):(9 SL-tj (44-1 CH. G>1) 4)-ri-g-t SID ILL --1- wnk- (iiLa 6-1J5-1 cam 7O 6- JUNE 17, 2010 - PB /BOA AGENDA - PAGE 7 OF 10 B. 2010 Evaluation and Appraisal Draft of the City's Comprehensive Plan continued. Major Issue 3: The need to re- examine the Taylor Creek area and related Plan Policies in order to allow development that will not degrade water quality in the Creek 141, OgiA o JUNE 17, 2010 - PB /BOA AGENDA - PAGE 8 OF 10 B. 2010 Evaluation and Appraisal Draft of the City's Comprehensive Plan continued. Major Issue 4: The need to establish compatible and consistent urban design. JUNE 17, 2010 - PB /BOA AGENDA - PAGE 9 OF 10 B. 2010 Evaluation and Appraisal Draft of the City's Comprehensive Plan continued. Major Issue 5: The need to emphasize pedestrian connectivity and establish streetscape standards within the City. -2-p-ertz-- —14 74--erzA) - Actz . L D 77 6-I- . l=am es (gw5t) E 5/f (-,v--1A-e--5€ Otr ►G 6 fuu„ <--x_e_a(6.gpo / 62o(e4te?.,„" -7 )2 r A)67. L_ O- 4 Oc ? -u) (6 G `—c:- —,j (1-6 e_ fr'nacY. 7 cam/ era 7) 2010 - PB /BOA AGENDA - PAGE 10 OF 10 B. 2010 Evaluation and Appraisal Draft sty's Comprehensive Plan continued. Motion: Member Draft of the City's Comprehen VOTE: moved to recommend to City Council approval of the EAR Ian; seconded by Member YEA NAY MAXWELL ABSENT ABSTAIN NON VOTING HOOVER X BURROUGHS KELLER MCCOY MORGAN LUVIANO BRASS Z ,777 BAI%HMAN ESULTS CARRIED DENIED VI. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING - Chairperson. k VII. NEW BUSINESS - Chairperson.0i A. Consider any additional requests for amendments to the City's Land Development Regulations - Chairperson. VIII. ADJOURN REGULAR MEETING - Chairperson % % 30 pm City of Okeechobee General Services Department 55 S.E. 3`d Avenue, Room 101 Okeechobee, Florida 39974 -2903 Phone: (863) 763 -3372, ext. 218 t'ax: (8631763 -1686 Date: Fee Paid: ' .0b 1st Hearing: 6//1/40 Publication Dates: Notices Mailed: Petition No. l 0-003 Jurisdiction: 604 2nd Hearing: )/4 Rezone; Special,Exception,"`arid Variance APPLICANT INFORMATION Name ofproperty owner(s): Bishop Gerald M. 13arbarito Owner mailing address: P.O. Box 109650 Palm Beach Gardens, FL Name ofapplicant(s) if other than owner Sacred Heart Catholic Church Applicant mailing address: see attached e -mail address: see attached Date Rec'd. Chk'd Name of contact person (state relationship): Kevin McGinley Contact person daytime phone(s): 561 686-2481 PROPERTY INFORMATION Property address /directions to property: 901 S.W. 6th Street, Okeechobee, FL 34974 Describe current use of property: House of Worship (church) with accessory uses, including parish hall /education center, rectory, maintenance building, pavilion and offices. Describe improvements on property (number /type buildings, dwelling units , occupied or vacant, etc. Church (250 seats) - 4,708 s.f., hall - 8,638 s.f., rectory - 2,125 s.f., pavilion - 4,000 s.f., offices - 405 s.f., maintenance bldg. _ 3,000 s.f. Approx. acreage: 12.0 Is property in a platted subdivision? yes Is there a use on the property that is /was in violation of a city or county ordinance? I o, If describe: No Is a pending sale of the property subject to this application being granted? 1� Describe uses on adjoining property to the North: North: vacant /undeveloped East: Child day care /SFRs South: vacant /undeveloped West: vacant /undeveloped Existing zoning: RS F 1 Future Land Use classification RSF Request is for: ( ) Rezone ( X) Special Exception ( ) Variance 16 Parcel Identification Number: 2- 21- 37- 35 -0A00 -00013 -0000 17 see attached ATTACHMENTS Applicant's statement of interest in property Revised 7/08 Page 1 of 10 18 Non - refundable application fee: Rezoning $850; Special Exception: $500; Variance: $500; all plus $30 /acre Note: Resolution No. 98 -11 Schedule of Land Development Regulation Fees and Charges — When the cost for advertising publishing and mailing notices of public hearings exceeds the established fee, or when a professional consultant is hired to advise the city on the application, the applicant shall pay the actual costs. 19 Last recorded warranty deed v 20 Notarized letter of consent form property owner (if applicant is different from property owner) i 21 Three property surveys (one no larger than 11" x 17 ") containing: a. certified boundary survey, date of survey, surveyor's name, address and phone number b. Legal description c. Computation of total acreage to nearest tenth of an acre (/) (/) ( ) 22 List of surrounding property owners with addresses and location sketch of the subject property. See the Information Request Form from the Okeechobee Property Appraiser's Office (attached) 23 Affidavit attesting to completeness and correctness of the list (attached) INFORMATION SPECIFICALLY RELATING TO A REZONE Date;'' Rec'd Chk'd 23 Current zoning classification: Requested zoning classification 24 What is the desired permitted use and intended nature of activities and development of the property? House of Worship (church) with accessory uses (hall, rectory,pavilion, offices etc.) 25 Is a Special Exception necessary for your intended use? / .-' /c >,.%' Yes — to allow for height in excess of 30 feet 26 Is a Variance necessary for your intended use? No 27 Applicant's materials addressing required findings for granting a rezoning (attach). INFORMATION SPECIFICALLY RELATING TO A SPECIAL EXCEPTION 28 Describe the Special Exception sought: App oval for a House of Worship-to exceed 30 feet in heig'h't. 29 Are there similar uses in the area? If so, describe them: Yes, see attached justification and findings. 30 If a business , briefly describe the nature of the business, # of employees, hours of operation and any activities to be conducted outside of a building: Revised 7/08 Page 2 of 10 31 Applicant's materials addressing standards for granting a special exception (attach) 32 Applicant's materials addressing findings required for granting a special exception (attach) 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 INFORMATION SPECIFICALLY RELATING TO A VARIANCE Describe the Special Exception sought: Describe the physical characteristics of the property that make the variance necessary. Did you cause or contribute to the characteristic necessitating the variance? If so, describe: What is the minimum variance necessary? Applicant's materials addressing standards for granting a variance (attach) Applicant's materials addressing findings required for granting a variance (attach) Confirmation of Information Accuracy I hereby certify that the information in this application is correct. The information included in this application is for use by the City of Okeechobee in processing my request. False or misleading information may be punishable by a fine of up to $500.00 and imprisonment of up to 30 days and may resulting the summary denial of this application. Signature Printed Name Date ;eel)* ;I ALCrrirt�Gt+ t 4 -z 1® Revised 7/08 Page 3of10 STATEMENT OF INTEREST The owner of the subject property is the Most Reverend Gerald M. Barbarito, as Bi the Diocese of Palm Beach, the Applicant is Sacred Heart Catholic Church (Pastor Hugh Duffy) and the Applicant and Owner's Agent /Zoning Consultant is Kevin McGinley, Land Research Management, Inc. 2240 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 103, West Palm Beach, FL 33409 (phone: 561 - 686 -2481 / fax: 561 - 681 -1551 / e -mail: Irmi(a�bellsouth net ). All correspondence and communication should be addressed to Kevin McGinley. City of Okeechobee 55 SE 3rd Avenue Okeechobee, FL 34974 Tele: 863 - 763 -3372 Fax: 863 - 763 -1686 LAND USE POWER OF ATTORNEY Name of Property Owner(s): Diocese of Palm Beach, Inc. 9995 N. Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Mailing Address: Home Telephone: Work: 561 -7 7 5-9 500 Cell: Property Address: 901 S.W. 6th Street, Okeechobee, FL 34974 Parcel ID Number: 2-21- 37- 35 -0A00- 0001 3 -0000 02 Name of Applicant: Kevin McGinley Home Telephone: 561 - 965 -6024 Work561 - 686 -2481 Cell: 561- 758 -71 48 The undersigned, being the record title owner(s) of the real property described above, do hereby grant unto the applicant stated above the full right and power of attorney to make application to the City of Okeechobee to change the land use of said property. This land use change may include rezoning of the property, the granting of special exception or variances, and appeals of decisions of the. Planning Department. It is understood that conditions, limitations and restrictions may be place upon the use or operation of the property. Misstatements upon application or in any hearing may result in the termination of any special exception or variance and a proceeding to rezone the property to the original classification. This power of attorney may be terminated only by a written and notarized statement of such termination effective upon receipt by the Planning Department. REOF THE UNDERSIGNED HAVE SET THEIR HAND AND SEALS THIS also 1� j Before me the undersigned authority personally appeared the owner(s) named above who upon being duly sworn acknowledged before me that they are the owner(s) of the real property describ c} above and at t ey executed the power of attorney for the purse stated therein. Sworn and subscribed this (t day of Notary Public: L 50- ) �� CLQ O Commission Expires: (, 1 1 07` / D-0 SEAL usAcucc0 �RES: Apri1 24,2009 Bonded ThN Notary Pubic Underw!Mers Page 10 of 10 Revised 7/08 VERITATEly FACIENTES IN CARITATE DIOCESE OF PALM BEACH 9995 North Military Trail • P.O. Box 109650 Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 -9650 (561) 775 -9595 Fax (561) 775 -7035 April 28, 2010 Ms. Betty Clement, General Services Coordinator City of Okeechobee 55 S.E. 3rd Avenue Okeechobee, FL 39974 Re: Sacred Heart Catholic Church Dear Ms. Clement: Office of THE BISHOP This letter will serve to authorize Mr. Kevin McGinley, Land Research Management, Inc. to file, coordinate and represent applications for special exception and site plan approval for Sacred Heart Catholic Church on my behalf cerel yours, STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF PALM BEACH Most Reverend Ger M. Barbarito Bishop of Palm Bea h The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this fj "lQ the Most Reverend Gerald M. Barbarito, D.D., J.C.L., Bishop of Pa day of April, 2010, by personally known to me. P m Beach, who is ............................................. KIMBERLY A. SANTORO own? Comm# DD0800740 • Expires 6/25/2012 Florida NotaryAssn., Inc h*..... •.uute Mynasit9.0•11 FIRP.neuf Printed Name of Notary STANDARDS FOR GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION 1. Demonstrate that the proposed location and site are appropriate for the use. Sacred Heart Catholic Church was constructed in 1961 and has continued to occupy the subject property for the last 49 years. The property's location along SW 6th Street is consistent with development trends in the vicinity which can be characterized as a mix of institutional, commercial and residential uses. Granting the special exception to allow the parish to construct the 500 -seat church with architectural features in excess of 30 feet is consistent with prior and present use of the subject property. 2. Demonstrate how the site and proposed buildings have been designed so they are compatible with the adjacent uses and the neighborhood, or explain why no specific design efforts are needed. The existing parish campus and the proposed 500 -seat have been oriented toward the center of the subject property, providing for substantial building setbacks from existing residential lots east of the site. A large dry retention area is proposed to be located in the eastern - central portion of the side, abutting the single family residences located along S.W. 7th Avenue. Vacant tracts of land south and west of the subject property will not be affected by the construction of the new church. 3. Demonstrate any landscaping techniques to visibly screen the use from adjacent uses, or explain why no visual screening is necessary. In addition, the proposed landscape plan prepared by Tony Grimaldi, Landscape & Hardscape Design, Inc. dated April 12, 2010, provides for supplementing existing landscaping with perimeter and internal landscaping which serve to provide compatibility with adjacent residential development. Foundation planting is proposed for the new church which will further soften the appearance of the building from the backyard of the existing single - family homes east of the property. 4. Demonstrate what is proposed to reduce the impact of any potential hazards, problems or public nuisance generated by the use, or explain how the nature of the use creates no such potential problems. There will be no potential hazards associated with the new church. It is not anticipated that the new church will result in an increase in the number of attendees at Mass or associated traffic since the new church will simply provide a more uplifting place to congregate than is otherwise provided by the existing multi - purpose building. p. 2 5. Demonstrate how the utilities and other service requirements of the use can be met. The proposed church expansion is presently served by all required utilities with the exception of wastewater treatment, which is presently ater utilities a by on-site septic system. The entire site Okeechobee Utility Authority. with be connected to water and wastew provided Demonstrate how the impact of traffic generated will be handled, off site and on site. Access to the site is provided via three driveway connections to S.W. 6th Street. A link analysis was provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by AECOM (March 2010) and the distribution of trips quantified in the report. External impacts associated with the church expansion were concluded to be acceptable and manageable" and "not adversely affecting the adjacent roadway links ". Internal circulation has been provided which connects the existing parking areas to proposed additional parking spaces in the rear of the existing hall. A drop -off area in the form of a circular entryway is located at the main entrance to the new church (north side of building). Pedestrian walkways are located throughout the campus, linking parking areas to the existing buildings and new church. Submitted: May 3, 2010 FINDINGS REQUIRED FOR GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION 1. The use is not contrary to Comprehensive Plan requirements. The subject property has a Future Land Use designation of Single- Family Residential and a zoning classification of Residential Single - Family (RSF1). The RSF1 District corresponds to the Single - Family Residential Land Use designation; therefore, the existing zoning, use and special exception request are consistent with the city's Comprehensive Plan. 2. The use is specifically authorized as a special exception use in the zoning district. Houses of worship in excess of five (5) acres are permitted uses in the RSF1 District, pursuant to Article III, Division1, Section 90 -120, Code of Ordinances. The subject property consists of 12.0 acres; therefore, the proposed planned expansion of the existing church is specifically authorized under the existing zoning district. The special exception is required to allow the height of the non - habitable components of the church to exceed 30 feet. 3. The use will not have an adverse effect on the public interest. Houses of worship serve to provide religious, educational and social services to area residents and are an integral part of the fabric of any community. Sacred Heart Catholic Church, a long - established parish in the city of Okeechobee, has and will continue to provide these essential community services and ministries which serve the public interest. 4. The use is appropriate for the location proposed, is reasonably compatible with adjacent land uses, and is not detrimental to urbanizing land use patterns. The subject property is located in an area characterized as a mix of light commercial (office use), residential and institutional uses (day care center, school and church). Vacant and undeveloped properties are located north, south and west of the subject property. Several single family homes are located east of the subject property, fronting along S.W. 7th Avenue. Child day care centers are located at the intersection of S.W. 6th Street and S.W. 7th Avenue. The proposed use is therefore appropriate and consistent for the subject property in terms of development patterns in the area and adjacent land uses and is not contrary or detrimental to urbanizing land use patterns. 5. The use will not adversely affect property values or living conditions, nor be a deterrent to the development of adjacent property. The requested special exception will provide for the expansion of the Sacred Heart Catholic Church parish in a manner consistent with traditional religious expression and is a logical and orderly step in the development of the property. Approval of the requested special exception Page 2 will allow the parish, which was established in 1961, to construct its planned 500 -seat sanctuary on the eastern portion of the 12 -acre property. The church expansion will not adversely affect property values or living conditions or be detrimental to the future residential development of adjacent properties because the use is consistent with the subject property's use as a place of worship for the past 49 years. 6. The use may be screened from surrounding uses to reduce the impact of any nuisance or hazard to adjacent uses. The 12 -acre subject site is large enough to provide suitable buffering to adjacent single - family homes to the east and future residential development to the north, south and west. The use is deemed consistent with the adjacent day care center and will not present a nuisance or hazard to existing and future residential neighborhoods in the immediate vicinity. Adequate screening and buffering is demonstrated through the design and details depicted on the plans submitted in support of the request (i.e. site plan and landscape plan). 7. The use will not create a density pattern that will over burden public facilities such as schools, streets and utility services. The proposed special exception and expansion to the long- established, existing Sacred Heart parish will not adversely impact public facilities such as schools, parks or government services due to its non - residential nature. Existing roadways and utilities have been deemed adequate to serve the proposed expansion. A traffic impact analysis confirming consistency with adopted standards has been submitted as part of the concurrent site plan review process. 8. The use will not create traffic congestion, flooding or drainage problems, or otherwise affect public safety. The proposed church expansion complies with traffic standards for concurrency and site impacts, including access to public streets. Drainage has been addressed in a site - specific comprehensive manner through a master drainage system that insures consistency with applicable standards. The subject property does not contain wetlands or areas of specific environmental concern. Public safety will not be affected by the proposed church expansion. 9. The proposed use has not been inordinately burdened by unnecessary restrictions. The proposed church expansion meets all applicable land development and design regulations and standards of the city code and the special exception request for relief from the 30 -foot building height restriction will accommodate the architectural dome and bell tower which is an integral part of the proposed church (see project narrative and justification). Submitted: May 3, 2010 PROJECT NARRATIVE AND JUSTIFICATION The subject property consists of a 12 -acre parcel of land which has supported Sacred Heart Catholic Church for nearly fifty years. As the parish congregation has grown, so has the need to expand the sanctuary from the existing small chapel constructed in 1961 to a larger church where the congregation can worship in a more uplifting gathering space. Presently the parish consists of 24,500 sq. ft. of building space which includes a 250 -seat chapel, administrative offices, a multi - purpose room and storage space. Sunday Mass is presently being held in the multi - purpose building, with daily Mass and smaller liturgical services held in the chapel. Sacred architecture, also known as religious architecture, is concerned with the design and construction of places of worship and seeks to combine an intensely private and personal intimacy into the expression of religious practice. The interior of a Catholic Church is designed to establish the mood for worship, for preaching the Gospel and to elevate one's mind and heart to the God the faithful come to praise. This gathering place is typically achieved by providing an elevated space above the Altar, therefore, signifying the importance and presence of God in the worship space. In the case of Sacred Heart Church, the elevated area has a height to the mean roof line of 42 ft. - 9 in. and represents only a small portion of the entire roof. That portion of the church that exceeds the 30' maximum allowable height as prescribed by the City Zoning Code is the tower /steeple or clearstory space above the Altar. The architectural elevations prepared by the project architect, API Group, Inc., indicates construction of a 11,183 sq. ft. church with a height of 24 ft. — 5 in. to the top of the beam, with the cupola extending to a mid -roof height of just under 43 ft. The proposed height from finished grade to the top of the cross as depicted in the elevations is 54 ft. —10 in. Construction of the new 11,183 sq. ft. church will consist of a slab on grade with shallow concrete foundations, exterior masonry walls, concrete columns and a steel framed roof with concrete roof tiles. The layout is circular in nature with the focal point being the altar. An entrance space with adjacent toilet rooms and sacristy area is located on the street side of the building. To the rear of the altar are storage and altar service rooms with second floor mechanical equipment rooms. Water service comes from S.W. 6th Street to the north and along the east property line to a fire closet to the southeast side of the church. From this location the fire sprinkler system extends throughout the building. Submitted: May 3, 2010 1 1 f NOKNDO 50018'44E(C) 1109.90(0) S.W. 10TH AVENUE 500'16'44'E(C) 1039.95'(0) 70' RIGHT -OF -WAY i %jj FIP NO I.D. -- -- FlR� 1 '110.54' N.. 0.33' E. 0.25' .0. 'VACANT LAND' 0.96 E. i ncl 15 I _ 4A iJ-' u NT) D TOP of BANK 500'20'55 'E(C) 1040.05'(C) NO I.D. I.ii ry i 0.19' S. 'T;q 44 I SCALE •seit4 ' (PARALLEL TO EASTERLY BOUNDARY TRACT A)(D) `.4 iFy _• .39' E. �SWALE TOE Or SLOPE J _ _ caCRE -E 1�A9 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY 18' CUP W. INV.=2 a6 12' CUP 50.0 4 20.0 Y9. ONE-STORY CBS BUILDING BUILDING 3 FFE=31.95 70.0 -°i 50 0 ox�cc, CONCRETE. DRIVEWAY = 2 E ° 11,�,, YO60001 WA1FA r11y� IrAovALVE �- (CONTAINING 12.007 ACRES, MORE OR LESS BENCH MARK ,y723.___5;,. ELEVATION = 29.53 IRON ROD A CAP 'LBFH TRAV L99959' AINU 8UILOING ■ FFE =32.22 ONE -STORY CBS BUILDING DYERED 5' COVERS CONCRETE '.§WALXWAY C 8' CMP W. INV._28.82' E. INV.- 2695' MULCH DRIVEWAY 11' CUP CONCRETE PADS . POINT OF BEGINNING , SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 250 ONE -STORY RESIDENCE 6810 METAL SHED SCREENED FFE'31.71 PORCH BKtp SHED TOP OF BANK TOE 0„ Lon V, z-SWALE 066861E RIVEVIAY 1.26' APPARENT USE OF CE 6 CHAIN UNK FENCE NORTH 1039.5'(D) 1100'20.55x"W(C) 1040.12'(C) BENCH MARKS ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON A FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BENCHMARK. A BRASS DISK STAMPED '15' AT THE Y SOUTHEAST CORNER OF STATE ROAD 70 AND SOUTHWEST 8TH AVENUE. PER FOOT BENCHMARK I FORM, PROJECT 1'40.91070-1526, WPI 00.196900. HAVING AN ELEVATION OF 31.953 FEET, NORTH A. AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 (9.0.0.029). 1 y� © 2010 B>,N Engineering Carpm,ebn 1 RR NO I.D. - 0.04' S. BLOCK 0.19' E. (PLAt BOOK 120 'PARENT 05E OF GUY ANC60V (2) 6 5 FN &D NO I.D. OCCUPIED WEST UNE 8L001 250 250 I II yJ 1, PAGE 11 g g 'y 8O • 4 3 2 1 � 2 r..0i 11 O I-� OCCUF41ED I 9 I OCClID1ED I � <Ixj I FlRC y PDS"NN AY8 5B" '00'SO'''TM BLECK o.m' EASr (PAT BOOK N00'20'55'W� 301.54' J y 1 FlRC "85061 g BLOC1K 251 9 -, I 8 II 7 o HOCCUPIED 2 q1 0 0110 1, IPAGE 5 IOCCIIPIED 4 N0020'S5 "W 1040.15'- 1400'20'55'W 1110.16' BEARING BASE L_ l I �__ NO020'S5'W 668.61' S.W. 7TH AVENUE (A.K.A. OKEECHOBEE AVENUE) eke 100' RIGHT -OF -WAY FNAIL 070 I.D. 120 Scow: I' _ 60' LEGEND • = FOUND 4X4 CONCRETE MONUMENT • = FOUND IRON PIPE = FOUND IRON ROD • = FOUND IRON ROD AND CAP O' = FOUND PK NAIL AND DISC • = FOUND NAIL (P)= PLAT (C)= CALCULATED (M)= MEASURED LB = LICENSED BUSINESS I.D. = IDENTIFICATION RRC= FOUNO IRON ROD AND CAP FIR = FOUND IRON ROD FN OR FNAIL= FOUND NAIL FPKNAD = FOUND PARKER KALON NAIL AND DISC FIP = FOUND IRON PIPE NON o+ FOUND 4'04° CONCRETE MONUMENT • SPOT ELEVATION A.K.A.= ALSO KNOWN AS (D)= DEED INV.= INVERT F.F.E.= FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION BLDG = BUILDING (TYP.)- TYPICAL CMP= CORRUGATED METAL PIPE -060 -= OVERHEAD ELECTRIC O = LIGHT POLE WPP = WOOD POWER POLE CBS = CONCRETE BLOCK STUCCO = GUY ANCHOR 0 = WOOD POWER POLE SURVEYOR'S NOTES 1. 9ELD SURVEY LAST CONDUCTED ON JANUARY 27, 2009. 2. SYMBOLS SHOWN ARE NOT TO SCALE. 3. SUBSURFACE AND /OR AERIAL IMPROVEMENTS, OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN, IF ANY, WERE NOT LOCATED. 4. THE BOUNDARY INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON IS TAKEN FROM A PLAN ENTITLED 'BOUNDARY SURVEY FOR SACRED HEART CHURCH OKEECHOBEE, OKEECHOBEE COUNTY , FLORIDA° DATED JUNE 7, 2005 BY LBFH. INC. 5. PARCEL SUBJECT TO ANY EASEMENTS. RIGHTS -OF -WAY, OR ENCUMBRANCES OF RECORD. 6. SURVEY PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT. 7. GROUND ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON HAVE AN ACCURACY OF 0.2' MORE OR LESS. 8. THE SURVEYOR REUED UPON ATTORNEYS' T151 INSURANCE FUND, INC., COMMITMENT N0. 57- 2010 -63 (SCHEDULE B), EFFECTIVE DATE MARCH 15. 2010 IN PREPARING THIS SURVEY AND EASEMENTS AND 0111ER SURVEY MATTERS OF RECORD RECITED IN SAID COMMITMENT WHICH ARE CAPABLE OF BEING DEPICTED WTHIN SAID SURVEY HAVE BEEN SHOWN. BEARING BASE THE CENTERLINE OF SOUTH WEST 7011 AVENUE IS TAKEN TO BEAR NORTH 00'20'55' WEST AND ALL OTHER BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE RELATIVE THERETO. BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION: (OFFICIAL RECORD BOON 208 PACE 0196) BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 250, 1ST ADDITION TO THE TOWN OF OKEECHOBEE. ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT OF OKEECHOBEE COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE RUN NORTH ALONG THE WEST BOUNDARY OF SAID BLOCK 250 AS EXTENDED A DISTANCE OF 1039.5 FEET TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY BOUNDARY OF THIRD STREET. EXTENDED. THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THIRD STREET. EXTENDED. A DISTANCE OF 502.86 FEET, THENCE SOUTH ON A UNE PARALLEL TO THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY 06 SAID TRACT A DISTANCE OF 1039.6 FEET, THENCE EAST ALONG NORTH BOUNDARY OF SOUTH STREET A DISTANCE OF 502.86 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING 3/28/10 2/27/09 8K 8K REVIEW TITLE POLICY SURVEYOR'S NOTE ADDED TOTAL ACREAGE ,,DATE BY REVISIONS J Dole =OM SLNe: INN gip. 6y:-11 . By NMckBB Page 7475 F Do . .211 VERIFY SCALE BAR R 0000L TO ONE INCH ON ORIGINAL DRAWING 0 - 1 ADJUST ALL SCALED DIMENSIONS ACCORDINGLY BOAC r.801,, BOYLE ENGINEERING 3550 S.W. Corporate Parkway, P01,, City, Florida 34990 1 772.286.3883 F 772.286.3925 BPR & FBPE License No's: 2005 k LB7622 ww17.0oyIS,080am.conl SURVEYOR AND MAPPER'S SIGNATURE A. UNLESS IT BEARS 711E SIGNATURE AND ORIGINAL RAISED 5EAL OF FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER. 1615 MAP /REPORT 6 FOR NFORIAAT 09L PURPOSES ONLY 05 R NOT VALID. 2. NO SEARCH OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS WS BEEN MADE BY 1155 OFFICE BRAN C. KNOINAN. PROESS0NV. SURVEYOR 6 MAPPER STATE OF FLORIDA NO. 0101 SACRED HEART CHURCH BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PROJECT No: 60096039 SHEET 1 of 2 1 1 1 2010 0.4. EnOne.rin9 Corporation ,DATE 8Y REVISIONS S.W. 10TH AVENUE 70' RIGHT –OF –WAY 316.4' 343.3' ONE STORY C85 BUILDING FFEw29.20 ONE STORY CBS BUILDING FFEw29.30 667.2' 753.5' 5.06' x000 PYNP HOUSE 24'038.5' ONE STORY CBS BUILDING FFE�31.71 6'N10' METAL SHED 5 241.6' ONE STORY C85 BUILDING FFEw31.95 ONE STORY CBS BUILDING FFEw32.16 182.3' ONE STORY CBS BUILDING FFE =32.22 214.9' 215.1' (BLOCK 250 (PLAT 800K 1, PAGE 1 5 4 3 2 VERIFY SCALE BAR IS EQUAL TO ONE INCH ON ORIGINAL DRAWING 0I♦ I ADJUST ALL SCALED DIMENSIONS ACCORDINGLY 11 10 9 1 BOCK (PIIAT BOOK BLOCK 251 5 7 1,PAGE 111) 6 5 4 3 L S.W. 7TH AVENUE (A.K.A. 06EEOH08 ASCNUE) 100' RIGHT –OF –WAY 10 BOYLE ENGINEERING 3550 S.W. Corporate Parkway, Palm City. Florida 34990 T 772.286.3883 F 772.286.3925 BPR & FBPE License No's: 2005 & LB7622 www.Doyle.aecom.com 2 SACRED HEART CHURCH BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BUILDING TIE-IN SHEET MAR Me: 60096039 — SHEET 2 of 2 Staff Report Special Exception Request Prepared for: The City of Okeechobee Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Petition No.: 90- 003 -SE Elio& Manal;e,uent Services. Inc. 1375 Jackson Street, Suite 20(, hut ,11< er., Florida 239- 335- 33(6 Serving Florida Local Governments Since 1,11111 )lanning Staff Report Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Special Exception Request Petition No.: 10- 003 -SE General Information OwnerlApplicant: Owner Address: Site Address: Applicant/Contact Phone Number: Contact Person: Diocese of Palm Beach Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito/ Sacred Heart Catholic Church P.O. Box 109650 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 701 SW 6th Street Okeechobee, FL 34974 561 - 686 -2481 Kevin McGinley, Agent Future Land Use Map Classification Single - Family Zoning District RSF1 Church with accessory Use of Property Acreage Legal Description of Property uses 12.0 acres Property Location: 701 SW 6th Street Legal Description: BEGINNING ATTHE TOWN SOUTHWEST ADDITION TO ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT OF OKEECHOBEE COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE RUN NORTH ALONG THE WEST BOUNDARY OF SAID BLOCK 250 AS EXTENDED A DISTANCE OF 1039.5 FEET TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY BOUNDARY OF THIRD STREET, EXTENDED, THENCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THIRD STREET, EXTENDED, A DISTANCE OF 502.86 FEET, THENCE SOUTH ON A LINE PARALLEL TO THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT A DISTANCE OF 1039.6 FEET, THENCE EAST ALONG NORTH BOUNDARY OF SOUTH STREET A DISTANCE OF 502.86 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Serf in iiarizh i.oeai Gtxct rr1nwnts ',in.x° )98', 1 Staff Report Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Special Exception Request Petition No.: 10- 003 -SE Adjacent FLUM Classifications, Zoning Districts, and Existing Land Use: North: Future Land Use Map Classification: Zoning District: Existing Land Use: East Future Land Use Map Classification: Zoning District: Existing Land Use: South Future Land Use Map Zoning District: Existing Land Use: West: Future Land Use Map Zoning District: Existing Land Use: Classification: Classification: Single - family and Multi- family Holding and RMF Vacant, undeveloped Commercial, Multi- family and Single- family RMF and RSF1 Child day care and single - family residences Single- family PUD -R Vacant, pasture Single- family Holding Vacant, pasture Item before the Board of Adjustment: The matter for consideration by the City of Okeechobee Board of Adjustment is a Special Exception to allow the height of the proposed new Sacred Heart Catholic Church building to exceed the 30 -foot height limitation in the RSF1 Zoning District. [LDC 90- 103(10)] Description of the Situation: The Diocese proposes to build a new church on its 12 -acre parcel. The property is designated Single- family on the Future Land Use Map and is zoned RSF1. The existing facility will remain and includes a parish hall /education center, rectory, maintenance building, pavilion and offices. The elevation drawing provided by the Applicant shows the maximum height to the top of the architectural dome /bell tower to be 44' 4" from finished grade, within the maximum 45 -foot allowed for a house of worship under Sec. 90 -696 (5). 2 Semi' Florida local er meets fit❑ Staff Report Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Special Exception Request Petition No.: 10- 003 -SE Consistency with Land Development Regulations: Section 70 -373 (b) requires that the Applicant address the following standards for granting a Special Exception, during his /her presentation to the Board of Adjustment. The Applicant has provided, as part of the submission, statements and information addressing these standards. The Applicant's statements are shown in Times Roman typeface. Staff comments follow and are shown in bold Arial typeface. (1) Demonstrate that the proposed location and site are appropriate for the use. "Sacred Heart Catholic Church was constructed in 1961 and has continued to occupy the subject property for the last 49 years. The property's location along SW 6th Street is consistent with development trends in the vicinity which can be characterized as a mix of institutional, commercial and residential uses. Granting the special exception to allow the parish to construct the 500 -seat church with architectural features in excess of 30 feet is consistent with prior and present use of the subject property." The Special Exception is not actually for the 500 -seat church, but rather for the 44' 4" height. Nevertheless, this is a large site, well in excess of the standard requirement of five acres. A house of worship (church) is listed as a permitted use in the RSF1 District and height in excess of 30 feet is allowed as a special exception, but is limited to 45 feet per Sec. 90 -696 (5). (2) Demonstrate how the site and proposed buildings have been designed so they are compatible with the adjacent uses and the neighborhood, or explain why no specific design efforts are needed. "The existing parish campus and the proposed 500 -seat church have been oriented toward the center of the subject property, providing for substantial building setbacks from existing residential Tots east of the site. A large dry retention area is proposed to be located in the eastern - central portion of the site, abutting the single family residences located along S.W. 7th Avenue. Vacant tracts of land south and west of the subject property will not be affected by the construction of the new church." The highest part of the church building for which the special exception is being applied is located about 350 feet south of the north property line. The architectural dome /bell tower is, therefore, located adjacent to the property associated with the day care center. It appears from the preliminary site plan that the building will be set back about 43 feet from the eastern property line. This means the location of the peak of the architectural dome /bell tower will be about 125 feet as measured along the ground from the nearest single - family property line of Lot 7. This represents a ratio of about 3' distance for every foot of height. We consider this to be an acceptable relationship for such a situation. 3 Staff Report Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Special Exception Request Petition No.: 10- 003 -SE (3) Demonstrate any landscaping techniques to visually screen the use from adjacent uses; or explain why no visual screening is necessary. "In addition, the proposed landscape plan prepared by Tony Grimaldi, Landscape & Hardscape Design, Inc. dated April 12, 2010, provides for supplementing existing landscaping with perimeter and internal landscaping which serve to provide compatibility with adjacent residential development. Foundation planting is proposed for the new church which will further soften the appearance of the building from the backyard of the existing single - family homes east of the property." Landscaping will address buffering adjacent properties from the building itself. The requested height for the roof -top appurtenance is ameliorated best by the distance it is from adjacent properties. As noted above, we believe this is adequately addressed by the placement of the structure. This will be confirmed during site plan review. (4) Demonstrate what is proposed to reduce the impacts of any potential hazards, problems or public nuisance generated by the use or explain how the nature of the use creates no such potential problems. (5) "There will be no potential hazards associated with the new church. It is not anticipated that the new church will result in an increase in the number of attendees at Mass or associated traffic since the new church will simply provide a more uplifting place to congregate than is otherwise provided by the existing multi - purpose building." We agree there are no potential hazards, problems or public nuisances posed by the additional height requested. Demonstrate how the utilities and other service requirements of the use can be met. "The proposed church expansion is presently served by all required utilities with the exception of wastewater treatment, which is presently provided by an on -site septic system. The entire site with (will) be connected to water and wastewater utilities provided by Okeechobee Utility Authority." The additional requested height does not affect utilities and service requirements. The effects, if any, of the additional height upon firefighting services will be addressed during the site plan review. 4 Serving 7Inricla P,kC.11 Ci csrvrnmcrrr. Sfrx Staff Report Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Special Exception Request Petition No.: 10- 003 -SE (6) Demonstrate how the impact of traffic generation will be handled off site and on -site. "Access to the site is provided via three driveway connections to S.W. 6th Street. A link analysis was provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by AECOM (March 2010) and the distribution of trips quantified in the report. External impacts associated with the church expansion were concluded to be "acceptable and manageable" and "not adversely affecting the adjacent roadway links ". Internal circulation has been provided which connects the existing parking areas to proposed additional parking spaces in the rear of the existing hall. A drop -off area in the form of a circular entryway is located at the main entrance to the new church (north side of building). Pedestrian walkways are located throughout the campus, linking parking areas to the existing buildings and new church." The request for increased height will have no impact upon the number of parking spaces required or the traffic generation associated with the church. Section 70- 373(c) (1) — (8): When reaching a conclusion on a Special Exception request, the Board of Adjustment shall consider and show in its record the following findings as set forth in Section 70- 373(c)(1) — (8). The required findings are listed below followed by the Applicant's statements in Times Roman typeface after which are the Staff comments pertaining to these findings: (1) The use is not contrary to the Comprehensive Plan requirements. "The subject property has a Future Land Use designation of Single - Family Residential and a zoning classification of Residential Single - Family (RSF1). The RSF1 District corresponds to the Single - Family Residential Land Use designation; therefore, the existing zoning, use and special exception request are consistent with the city's Comprehensive Plan." We agree (2) The use is specifically authorized as a special exception use in the zoning district. "Houses of worship in excess of five (5) acres are permitted uses in the RSF1 District, pursuant to Article III, Division 1, Section 90 -120, Code of Ordinances. The subject property consists of 12.0 acres; therefore, the proposed planned expansion of the existing church is specifically authorized under the existing zoning district. The special exception is required to allow the height of the non - habitable components of the church to exceed 30 feet." We agree. 5 fling iir,rada Iocal i overnmems Since 1988 Staff Report Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Special Exception Request Petition No.: 10- 003 -SE (3) The use will not have an adverse effect on the public interest. "Houses of worship serve to provide religious, educational and social services to area residents and are an integral part of the fabric of any community. Sacred Heart Catholic Church, a long - established parish in the City of Okeechobee, has and will continue to provide these essential community services and ministries which serve the public interest." We agree that the requested increase in the height of the structure will have no adverse effect on the public interest. (4) The use is appropriate for the proposed location, is reasonably compatible with adjacent uses and is not detrimental to urbanizing land use patterns. "The subject property is located in an area characterized as a mix of light commercial (office use), residential and institutional uses (day care center, school and church). Vacant and undeveloped properties are located north, south and west of the subject property. Several single family homes are located east of the subject property, fronting along S.W. 7t Avenue. Child day care centers are located at the intersection of S.W. 6th Street and S.W. 7tn Avenue. The proposed use is therefore appropriate and consistent for the subject property in terms of development patterns in the area and adjacent land uses and is not contrary or detrimental to urbanizing land use patterns." (5) As stated in the Staff comments (1) and (2) to the standards set forth in Section 70 -373 (b), the granting of the additional height is reasonably compatible with adjacent uses. Further, the additional height will have no detrimental effect upon urbanizing land use patterns in this area. The use will not adversely affect property values or living conditions, nor be a deterrent to the development of adjacent property. "The requested special exception will provide for the expansion of the Sacred Heart Catholic Church parish in a manner consistent with traditional religious expression and is a logical and orderly step in the development of the property. Approval of the requested special exception will allow the parish, which was established in 1961, to construct its planned 500 -seat sanctuary on the eastern portion of the 12 -acre property. The church expansion will not adversely affect property values or living conditions or be detrimental to the future residential development of adjacent properties because the use is consistent with the subject property's use as a place of worship for the past 49 years." Since we have suggested that the additional height will be accommodated in a manner that will not adversely affect nearby properties, it should not adversely affect property values or deter continued development in the area. Serving Florida Loral Gc7rernnrxenUs Since 1988 6 Staff Report Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Special Exception Request Petition No.: 10- 003 -SE (6) The use may be required to be screened from surrounding uses to reduce the impact of any nuisance or hazard to adjacent uses. "The 12 -acre subject site is large enough to provide suitable buffering to adjacent single - family homes to the east and future residential development to the north, south and west. The use is deemed consistent with the adjacent day care center and will not present a nuisance or hazard to existing and future residential neighborhoods in the immediate vicinity. Adequate screening and buffering is demonstrated through the design and details depicted on the plans submitted in support of the request (i.e. site plan and landscape plan)." Landscaping will address buffering adjacent properties from the building itself. The requested height for the roof -top appurtenance is ameliorated best by the distance it is from adjacent properties. As noted previously, we believe this is adequately addressed by the placement of the structure and the location of the architectural dome/bell tower. This will be confirmed during site plan review. (7) The use will not create a density pattern that will overburden public facilities such as schools, streets, and utility services. "The proposed special exception and expansion to the long - established, existing Sacred Heart parish will not adversely impact public facilities such as schools, parks or government services due to its non - residential nature. Existing roadways and utilities have been deemed adequate to serve the proposed expansion. A traffic impact analysis confirming consistency with adopted standards has been submitted as part of the concurrent site plan review process." The additional requested height will have no effect upon density or the provision of schools, streets or utility services. (8) The use will not create traffic congestion, flooding or drainage problems, or otherwise affect public safety. "The proposed church expansion complies with traffic standards for concurrency and site impacts, including access to public streets. Drainage has been addressed in a site - specific comprehensive manner through a master drainage system that insures consistency with applicable standards. The subject property does not contain wetlands or areas of specific environmental concern. Public safety will not be affected by the proposed church expansion." Since the special exception request is only for additional height of nonhabitable space, the request for increased height will have no impact upon traffic, flooding or drainage or otherwise affect public safety. nrs Si v 9 7 Staff Report Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Special Exception Request Petition No.: 10- 003 -SE (9) The proposed use has not been inordinately burdened by unnecessary restrictions. "The proposed church expansion meets all applicable land development and design regulations and standards of the city code and the special exception request for relief from the 30 -foot building height restriction will accommodate the architectural dome and bell tower which is an integral part of the proposed church (see project narrative and justification)." We agree that neither the site nor the use are inordinately burdened. Recommendation: Based upon the foregoing analysis and findings, Staff recommends that Petition Number 10- 003-SE be approved to allow a maximum height of 44' 4" to the top of the architectural dome /bell tower. Submitted by: James G. LaRue, AICP June 08, 2010 Attachments: Future Land Use Map Zoning Map, Property Appraiser's Aerial Photograph Exterior Elevations Sketch 1ST Hearing — Board of Adjustment, June 17, 2010 8 ing 1I nda is>ca3 i.:cxrern,, nxa Staff Report Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Petition tholic Church) Special Exception Request FUTURE LAND USE 11 1 S W 914 STREET 11111 ® ®1L. • • t • s' 51 STREET ®11® IEEE • s 1 . e e • 1. x ,} N 1. 1 f1 1e 0 1e ,! a1 SEE 7T4 SWEET es 16 n eau "1e, .E u 1em 1 m 1V. 114 516EEI ®11112®® 914 SWEET sal ert s ♦ 1 a 1 y[ T E..t 11 1$ 4. 1 g COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE SINGLE - FAT1'UL MULTI - FAMILY COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE EMI EMI FHA = subject property Y 8M. 914 SWEET 12 1 :f ri11(• Serving florid* Local Governments Since 1988 9 Staff Report Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Special Exception Request Petition No.: 10- 003 -SE In71n 2sn7777 &VI T4 Men ZONING < °': ' ■ irts 72 Ai •1 r- 16 6!r I? II • Y� ..,.. ZONING at all • C tom.. CPO- CdWglfifW 1.CF., AID* ▪ w &_ RE&ICEnnx wLT rMw, , Rh,_ RE8.0041144. 3s.(1E FMK, • &WILY ca: Serving Florida LC cal Governments Since 1988 = subject property 10 f Staff Report Special Exception Request Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Petition No.: 10- 003 -SE Okeechobee County Property Appraiser's Aerial = Subject Property A Child's Worid Daycare Subject Property MP PASTURE (15TH ST. HOMES) Service #1. rids Luca! G.>vernments %incc I98k 11 Staff Report Special Exception Request Applicant: Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito (Sacred Heart Catholic Church) Petition No.: 10-003-SE tt151.1.11,. tt12.2 IC Lit OF 34210-!--Nittit — r cavcric n 'Ili 002 WADI RESISTANT DE --GLASS PAIEID — — 4-14' Max I-1, TOS RIO 770t,R4 IL Li 1 FASCIA CNE R 2.12 SUVE LASSO TYE te2 f' ELEVATION, PRESENTATION 51,S.J/27LtALS _ - 12 .21 ,112C141 tt i POO; .-- 1.8 7AD:A OVER 2.12 SURE RASA EYP Ato 14t TOS (46-er Max lib, Fentitt Grad...444s _ fit Bea_74,4s, — az RBI2 TO.44.4s' 01 S SO4.1114 BRiATION PREsemnau DECORATIVE COLUMNS MTN CE MI NT RASTER FINISH TYR S7771 TORE DETERMINED STUCCO 31121:41G RACE Cl )1 OR TOED DE 0 RIME 0 cc*Togr DE P!!1.3a) jaLie Baaaa, _O4-R& ,19134A0 JILLITrL krICLCIIIJU9 185 SPARISHI RIVER BM Suite 105 BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33431 Phone.' 561-392-7120 / Fax: 561-392-7520 ar,f, oanus. sAcw) CATLICILIC CIFIUMIH EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 7,3,6 r`V Mr ing Fkwitla Lot :d Go‘erilm,m, 1981.4 Planning & Management Services, Inc. Memorandum To: LPA Members City of Okeechobee From: Bill Brisson, Senior Planner Date: June 8, 2010 Subject: Explanatory memo re: Questions on the EAR posed at the last LPA meeting 1. There were some questions and discussion about the City's recreation inventory and level of service. The text on page I -14 now reflects updating of the recreation inventory and discussion of the level of service. 2. During our last meeting, members of the LPA were interested in knowing why we would wish to consider adding new Low Impact Development requirements or guidelines to the City's toolbox of development regulations. The comments primarily related to the fact that the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) already has permitting authority over drainage/ stormwater issues related to development throughout the City and especially along Taylor Creek. Response: While it is true that the SFWMD has permitting authority and responsibility to ensure that developments adequately treat and dispose of stormwaters, they do not necessarily require or encourage use of the most environmentally friendly techniques. The idea behind Low Impact Development is to achieve the necessary levels of stormwater storage, treatment and disposal, but in a manner that is typically considered more efficient and preserve or enhance the natural environment. Following are a few excerpts from the U. S. Department of Environmental Protection and the Low Impact Development Center, Inc. that provide relatively simple explanations of what these measures do and how they differ from the more conventional and limited requirements of the SFWMD. The following is taken from "Low Impact Development (LID)" on the EPA Website, www.epa.gov /nps /lid. "LID is an approach to land development (or re- development) that works with nature to manage storm - water as close to its source as possible. LID employs principles such as preserving and recreating natural landscape features, minimizing effective imperviousness to create functional and appealing site drainage that treat stormwater as a resource rather than a waste product. There are many practices that have been used to adhere to these principles such as bioretention facilities, rain gardens, vegetated rooftops, rain barrels, and permeable pavements. By implementing LID principles and practices, water can be managed in a way that reduces the impact of built areas and promotes the natural movement of water within an ecosystem or watershed. Applied on a broad scale, LID can maintain or restore a watershed's hydrologic and ecological functions. LID has been characterized as a sustainable stormwater practice by the Water Environment Research Foundation and others." Providing Planning and Management Solutions for Local Governments Since 1988 1375 Jackson Street, Suite 206 Fort Myers, FL 33901 239- 334 -3366 info @larueplanning.com The following two paragraphs are taken from "Urban Design Tools, Low Impact Development ", www.lid - stormwater.net, Low Impact Development Center, Inc. "Why should I use LID techniques? LID has numerous benefits and advantages over conventional stormwater management approaches. In short, it is a more environmentally sound technology and a more economically sustainable approach to addressing the adverse impacts of urbanization. By managing runoff close to its source through intelligent site design, LID can enhance the local environment, protect public health, and improve community livability - all while saving developers and local governments money. The need for such an approach has never been greater. Stormwater programs require that a wide array of complex and challenging ecosystem and human health protection goals be addressed. Many of these goals are not being met by conventional stormwater management technology, and communities are struggling with the economic reality of funding aging and ever - expanding stormwater infrastructure. The challenge of how to restore stream quality in watersheds that have already been densely developed is even more daunting. Simply relying on impervious reduction and/or conventional detention ponds to address these issues is not feasible, practical or sustainable. LID provides the key in its emphasis on controlling or at least minimizing the changes to the local hydrologic cycle or regime. What about flood control? Traditionally, stormwater management systems have been designed to function well under a single design condition, e.g. the 100 year flood, the 10 year storm, etc. Designing control systems for a single extreme event does not mean that they will perform adequately under other scenarios. For example, designing major floodways for the 100 year event overdrains the system during more frequent storms, degrades the natural stream system, and causes downstream water quality problems by rapidly transporting pollutants through the urban area and into the receiving waters.' Flow control standards, which have their origin in ensuring public safety and reducing property damage, have very little to do with ecosystem protection. For preserving stream integrity, experience has demonstrated the importance of a stormwater system that specifically addresses the frequent or micro - storms that occur on a regular basis (weekly or monthly). By using decentralized site -based source controls, LID uses the stormwater from these more frequent events as a resource and is an effective ecosystem approach. Additionally, if the full suite of LID controls and site design practices is creatively used, LID is capable of automatically controlling the 10 and 100 -year storms through its primary strategy of restoring the built area's natural rainfall- runoff relationship. The more techniques that are applied, the closer to natural hydrologic function one gets. Where there are known flooding problems, however, a hybrid approach may be needed to reduce liability and provide a sense of safety. LID does not demand isolation from conventional technology. The LID national design manual recommends hybrid systems if site constraints warrant it." Construction Industry Research and Information Association, 1995: Infiltration drainage - appraisal of costs. Project Report 24. (London) 2 3 3.The next major question and topic of discussion pertained to the appropriateness of designating the area between NE 3rd and NE 7th Streets from NE 3rd Avenue to Taylor Creek as Commercial on the Future Land Use Map. This area encompasses a little under 44 acres excluding roads and rights -of -way. The primary reasons stated by LPA members for suggesting that this area be considered for designation as a commercial area were that the area is pretty much surrounded by lands either designated or proposed to be designated Commercial or Industrial on the FLUM; and that there are already some properties within this area that are designated, zoned and used for commercial purposes. Some members of the LPA wondered if and why anyone would want to build residential uses in this area. Response: It is true that by virtue of the proposal to create a commercial corridor within two blocks of US 441 and SR 70, the area will ultimately be bounded on the west and south by commercial uses and on the north by industrial uses. However, it must be remembered that, as now proposed, com- mercial uses along both the south and western boundaries will be largely lower intensity commercial uses as allowed in the CLT and CPO zoning districts. With regard to the size and character of the area and the existence of commercial uses within it, please refer to the following map showing existing land use and the current zoning and Future Land Use designations applied. As can be seen in the table below, the area is predominately comprised of either vacant lots or residentially developed lots. For example, of the 80 lots in the area, 35% are vacant and about 50% are residentially developed. These properties also comprise over three quarters of the acreage in the area. Existing Land Use Parcels Percent Acres Percent Vacant 28 35.0 16.9 38.8 Single- family 39 48.8 16.1 36.9 Mobile Home 1 1.3 0.3 0.7 Multi- family 3 3.8 1.1 2.5 Commercial /Industrial 7 8.8 6.7 15.4 Churches 2 2.5 2.5 5.7 TOTAL 80 100.0 43.6 100.0 The most significant commercial -type use involves the Fort Drum properties lying on either side of NE 5th Avenue between NE 4th and 5th Streets. The Property Appraiser's records show these uses as warehousing and associated parking. These properties are zoned CHV. The only other lands zoned for commercial use are the Shoppes on the Boardwalk properties located in the southeast corner of the area. The lot in the northeast corner of block 85 is shown as warehousing in the Property Appraiser's records and, because it is zoned RSF1, is also a nonconforming use. Finally, the proposed changes connected with the Commercial Corridor will already add 101 acres to the City's inventory of commercially designated lands. We believe that adding another 44 acres may prove difficult to justify to the DCA from a "needs" standpoint. In summary, we do not recommend opening this area to additional commercial development. EXISTING LAND USE. AREA PROPOSED FOR COMMERCIAL CONSIDERATION no r EXISTING LAND USE, ZONNG AND FUTURE LAND USE IN AREA PROPOSED FOR COMMERCIAL CONSIDERATION ZQG AREA PROPOSED FOR. COMMERCIAL CONSIDERAI1ON hill lL 600 1111 111111 • 1 6EK Feet Vacant Single-family Mobile homes Multi-family Commercial Industrial Semi-public Water 11! a Ma Feet H RSF1 RMH RMF CPO CLT CBD CHV IND Water 1 1 1 urn I FUTURE IMO USE AREA PROPOSED FOR COMMERCIAL CONSIDERATION 111 iui 111 1T1 NE a SOO Fed SINGLE - FAMILY MULTI - FAMILY COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL WATER 4 2010 Evaluation a °dAppraisal Report Evaluation and Appraisal Report City of Okeechobee, Florida 55 SE Third Avenue Okeechobee, Florida 34974 Draft: June 4, 2010 Prepared by r Planning & Management Services, Inc. 1375 Jackson Street, Suite 206 Fort Myers. Florida 239- 334- 3366 Serving Florida Local Governments Since 1988 In conjunction with: The City of Okeechobee Cover photos courtesy of the Internet Images for City of Okeechobee T H E C I T Y O F O K E E C H O B E E , F L O R I D A 5 5 S E T H I R D A V E N U E Table of Contents Section 1: Community -Wide Assessment Introduction 1 -1 Executive Summary 1 -1 Purpose of the EAR 1 -1 Preparing the EAR 1 -2 Table 1.1: Evaluation and Appraisal Report Adoption Schedule 1 -3 Adoption of EAR -based Amendments 1 -4 Intent of the EAR Report 1 -4 Organization of the EAR Report 1 -4 Profile of the City 1 -5 Figure 1 -1: General Location Map 1 -5 Population Analysis 1 -6 Table 1.2: Peak Population Forecast 1 -6 Land Use Analysis 1 -7 Changes in Land Area and Land Use 1 -7 Table 1.3: Existing Land Use 2009 1 -7 Location of Existing Development In Relation to Development Anticipated in the Original Plan 1 -7 Extent of Vacant and Undeveloped Land 1 -7 Table 1.4: Comprehensive Plan Amendments, 2001 to 2009 1 -8 Figure 1 -1 Existing Land Use Map 1 -10 Financial Feasibility of Providing Needed Infrastructure 1 -11 Sanitary Sewer & Potable Water 1 -11 Table 1.5: WTP and WWTP Capacities 1 -11 Table 1.6: Projected Water and Sewer Demand, City of Okeechobee 1 -11 Solid Waste 1 -12 Table 1.7: Solid Waste Generation Table, 2011 -2021 1 -12 Drainage 1 -12 Traffic Circulation 1 -12 Table 1.8: 2008 Annual Average Daily Traffic Report 1 -13 Recreation and Open Space 1 -14 Table 1.9: Existing Recreational Sites And Facilities 1 -14 Table 1.10: Projected Recreational Needs, 2011 -2021 1 -14 School Coordination 1 -14 Financial Feasibility of Providing Adequate Facilities and Services 1 -15 Assessment of Successes and Shortcomings of the Elements 1 -15 Future Land Use Element 1 -15 Traffic Circulation Element 1 -16 Housing Element 1 -16 Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element 1 -17 Conservation Element 1 -17 Recreation and Open Space Element 1 -17 Intergovernmental Coordination Element 1 -18 Public School Facilities Element 1 -18 Capital Improvements Element 1 -19 Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -11 Compliance with Growth Management Laws 1-19 Preserving Public Access to Florida's Waterways 1 -19 School Concurrency Planning 1 -19 Coastal High Hazard Areas 1 -19 Coordination of Land Use and Water Supply Planning 1-19 State Comprehensive Plan 1 -19 Chapter 163, Florida Statutes 1 -20 Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code 1 -20 Strategic Regional Policy Plan for Southwest Florida 1 -20 Other State - Mandated Requirements 1 -20 Public Participation Summary 1 -21 Appendix A: Changes to Chapter 163, FS A -1 Appendix B: Changes to Rule 9J -5 A -39 Section 2: Major Issues Identification of Major Issues 11-1 Assessment of Major Issues and Plan Objectives 11 -1 Evaluation of Issues of Major Concerns 11-2 Major Issue 1: 11 -2 Issue Description and Analysis 11-2 Distribution of Commercial Lands 11 -2 Map 11 -1.1: Future Land Use Commercial Corridors Map 11 -3 Map 11 -1.2: Zoning in Commercial Corridors Map 11 -4 Effects of the proposal 11 -5 Table 1.1: Lands Designated Commercial on FLUM City -Wide, 2009 11 -5 Table 1.2: Commercial Corridor Characteristics 11-5 Table 1.3: Characteristics of Commercial Corridor 11 -6 Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts 11 -6 Identification of Comprehensive Plan Impacted 11 -6 Recommendations 11 -6 Major Issue 2: 11 -7 Issue Description and Analysis 11-7 Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts 11 -7 Recommendations 11-8 Table 2.1: City FLUM and Zoning Conflicts 11 -9 Map II -2.1: Future Land Use Map Showing Zoning Conflicts 11 -10 Map 11 -2.2: Zoning Map Showing Conflicts with FLUM 11 -11 Major Issue 3: 11 -12 Issue Description and Analysis 11 -12 Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts 11 -12 Identification of Comprehensive Plan Elements Impacted 11 -13 Recommendations 11 -14 Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -iii Major Issue 4: 11 -15 Issue Description and Analysis 11 -15 Figure 4.1: Okeechobee Main Street Local Program Area Boundary 11 -17 Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts 11 -18 Identification of Comprehensive Plan Elements Impacted 11 -18 Recommendations 11-19 Major Issue 5• 11-20 Issue Description and Analysis 11 -20 Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts 11 -20 Identification of Comprehensive Plan Elements Impacted 11 -21 Recommendations 11-21 Section 3: List of Recommendations 111 -1 Draft: June 4, 2010 I -iv Introduction Executive Summary The purpose of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) is to provide a summary analysis of the successes and failures of the Comprehensive Plan (Plan), to identify major issues of concern, and to identify proposed changes to amend and update the Plan. The Plan was evaluated through the collaboration of City staff, state agencies, other units of government, and the general public. Local issues were identified during the evaluation process, some of which are new and some of which already are being addressed under existing policies and programs. The original Plan was adopted in 1991 with subsequent Amendments in September 2000, February 2007, August 2008, and March 2009. Implementation of the Plan has been generally successful although some programs and policies have not been implemented. On -going implementation of the Plan is proceeding and most of the programs will eventually be implemented. The EAR process will result in an improved Plan to guide the City's growth through 2021. The entire Plan will be updated with the best available data and analysis and will be edited to ensure accuracy and consistency. Goals, Objectives, and Policies will be updated to reflect new information but major policy revisions are not expected except as otherwise noted in this report. Some policies and programs will be revised with more achievable implementation time frames. When completed, the EAR -based Comprehensive Plan will accommodate growth while maintaining the quality of life in the City. The EAR identifies five major issues that the City will address. Each issue and proposed actions are briefly summarized below. Community -wide Assessment Major Issue 1: Need to provide for a transition from residential use to commercial use in certain areas of the City. Major Issue 2: The need to eliminate inconsistencies between the Official Zoning Map and the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Major Issue 3: The need to re- examine the Taylor Creek area and related Plan Policies in order to allow development that will not degrade water quality in the Creek. Major Issue 4: The need to establish compatible and consistent urban design. Major Issue 5: The need to emphasize pedestrian connectivity and establish streetscape standards within the City. Purpose of the EAR The City of Okeechobee's Comprehensive Plan is designed to provide certainty in the development of the City. Responses to change come through amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, by revisions made to methods of implementation, and through periodic evaluation of the Plan. An EAR serves as an audit of progress and problems in achieving the development Goals of the City. The EAR is the first step in updating the Comprehensive Plan. Using requirements set forth in Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes, the EAR must accomplish the following Goals: Draft: June 4, 2010 I -1 1. Identify major issues for the City; 2. Review past actions of the City in implementing the Plan; 3. Assess the degree to which Plan Objectives have been achieved; 4. Assess both successes and shortcomings of the Plan; 5. Identify ways that the Plan should be changed; and 6. Respond to changing conditions and trends affecting the City. 7. Respond to the need for new data. 8. Respond to changes in State requirements regarding growth management and development. 9. Respond to changes in regional plans. 10. Ensure effective intergovernmental coordination. Preparing the EAR The EAR process is divided into two primary components: (1) an assessment of the implementation since the Plan was last updated, and (2) identification and assessment of locally important issues. By conducting public workshops, the City has identified five locally important issues. The current Comprehensive Plan of Okeechobee includes a wide variety of policies used to regulate and guide development throughout the City. The EAR provides an analysis of all Plan related data to determine if the City is achieving its Goals and Objectives set forth in the Plan. As a requirement of §163.3191, F. 5., the EAR contains information addressing the following: Draft: June 4, 2010 Community-wide Assessment 1. Population growth and changes in land area [163.3191(2)(a)]. 2. The location of existing development in relation to the location of development as anticipated in the plan [163.3191(2)(d)]. 3. The extent of vacant and developable land [163.3191(2)(b)]. 4. The financial feasibility of providing needed infrastructure to achieve and maintain adopted level of service standards and sustain concurrency through capital improvements, as well as the ability to address infrastructure backlogs and meet the demands of growth on public services and facilities [163.3191(2)(c)]. 5. A brief assessment of success and shortcomings related to each element [153.3191(2)(h)]. 6. Relevant changes in growth management laws (the state comprehensive plan, the appropriate strategic regional policy plan, Chapter 163, Part 11, F.S., and Rule 9J -5, F.A.C.) [163.3191(2)(f)]. 7. A summary of public participation activities in preparing the report [163.3191(2)(j)]. 8. An assessment of whether plan Objectives within each element, as they relate to major issues, have been achieved, and whether unforeseen and unanticipated changes in circumstances have resulted in problems and opportunities with respect to major issues in each element [163.3191(2)(g)]. 9. An assessment of corrective measures, including whether plan amendments are anticipated to address the major issues identified and analyzed in the report. Such identification shall include, as appropriate, new population projections and new 1 -2 revised planning time - frames, a revised future conditions map or map series, and updated Capital Improvements Element, and any new and revised Goals, Objectives and Policies for major issues identified within each element [163.3191(2)(1)]. 10. An assessment of the success or failure of coordinating future land uses and residential development with the capacity of existing and planned schools; establishing with the school board appropriate population projections; and coordinating the planning and siting of new schools [163.3191(2)(k)]. 11. An evaluation of whether any past reduction in land use density within the coastal high hazard area impairs the property rights of current residents when redevelopment occurs. The local government must identify strategies to address redevelopment and the rights of affected residents balanced against public safety considerations [163.3191(2)(m)]. 12. The extent to which the local government has been successful in identifying alternative water supply projects and traditional water supply projects, including conservation and reuse, necessary to meet water needs within the local government's jurisdiction [163.3191(2)(1)]. 13. An assessment of whether the local government was successful in achieving compatibility with military installations [163.3191(2)(n)]. 14. The extent to which a concurrency exception area, a concurrency management area, or a multimodal transportation district has achieved the purpose for which it was created [163.3191(2)(o)]. 15. An assessment of the extent to which changes are needed to develop a common methodology for measuring impacts on Community-wide Assessment transportation facilities for the purpose of implementing its concurrency management system in coordination municipalities and [163.3191(2)(p)]. with the counties The final report will be sent to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) in August 2010. Within 60 days after receipt, DCA will review the report and make a preliminary sufficiency determination that is forwarded to the City for its consideration. DCA will issue a final sufficiency determination within 90 days after receipt of the adopted EAR. Table 1.1: Evaluation and Appraisal Report Adoption Schedule Date Steps in the Process October- November 2009 Local workshops and public meetings to identify subject matter (issues) and prepare the list of issues. January 2010 Scoping meeting with agency representatives and presentation of final list of issues. February 2010 Letter of Understanding with DCA. May 2010 Complete a first draft of the EAR. Conduct workshop with LPA. June 2010 Public hearing with LPA on first draft. June 2010 Revise drafts, as needed. July 2010 Workshop with City Council, revise as necessary and transmit proposed EAR to DCA and other reviewing agencies (optional). August - September 2010 Receive comments from DCA. September 2010 Revise and produce final EAR for adoption. September 2010 Public Hearing with Council and adoption of the EAR. Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -3 Adoption of EAR -based Amendments Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. requires EAR -based plan amendments to be adopted within eighteen (18) months after the EAR is determined to be sufficient by DCA. Intent of the EAR Report All amendments outlined within this report represent recommendations to be considered for adoption by the City Council after required public hearings. Organization of the EAR Report The proposed EAR addressing the City's Comprehensive Plan is divided into three (3) Sections. Section 1— Community -wide Assessment Section 2 — Issues of Major Concern Section 3 — Recommendations Draft: June 4, 2010 Profile of the City The City of Okeechobee is located in the southern portion of Okeechobee County, approximately 1.5 miles north of Lake Okeechobee (SEE FIGURE 1.1, GENERAL LOCATION MAP). It is the County's only incorporated City and serves as the shopping and employment center for the area. US 441, and SR 70 are the two major arteries serving the City. SR 70 links the City with Fort Pierce 30 miles to the east, and Arcadia and Sarasota /Bradenton further west. US 98 connects the City with Sebring, approximately 50 miles to the northwest. US 441 approaches the City from the Orlando area, joins with US 98 and continues south toward West Palm Beach. Although the City's population is currently less than 6,000, the City experiences a level of intensity in its urban activities that is normally associated with larger cities. This bustling atmosphere is in sharp contrast to the large expanses of rural cattle - grazing land just outside the City in unincorporated Okeechobee County. Figure 1.1: General Location Map Draft: June 4, 2010 Community -wide Assessment 1 -5 Population Analysis This section of the Report provides updated population estimates and projections, pursuant to Florida Statutes 5163.3191(2)(a). The City of Okeechobee uses estimates of its population provided by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research of the University of Florida (BEBR). In 2009, BEBR estimated Okeechobee's resident population to be 5,377. Table 1.2 shows resident population forecasts for the ten -year planning horizon beginning in 2011. Resident population in the City will increase gradually each year as new residential units are constructed and occupied. From 2011 to 2021, growth is expected to increase at a rate of about 0.3% annually. BEBR does not provide estimates for the seasonal population. Because Okeechobee o is a enterate for freshwater fishing and other activities, the population in the City is estimated to swell by as much as 40% during the "season ". Table 1.2: Peak Population Forecast Source: BEBR, University of Florida 2009 LaRue Planning & Management Services, Inc., 2010 CommUfl ty -widt Msessment Since early 2007, eight residential projects have been approved for development. Development a is have o all but the two assisted living facility p 1 been postponed or cancelled; and, in a number of cases the projects have been subject to bankruptcy, foreclosure or other financial difficulties as a result of the current economic situation. Consequently, e no growth as a result of these approvals excess of that associated with the population projections provided in Table 1.2. Draft: June 4, 2010 Should these projects be built and occupied sin within the next 10 years, as originally planned, the 2.70 average household size for residential units recorded in the 2000 Census ved developments ould unit for ACLFs, these approved expected to increase the City's resident population by 1,155 persons by the year 2021. Land Use Analysis This section of the Report evaluates changes in land area and land use, pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 163.3191(2)(a). In addition, the chapter evaluates the location of existing development in relation to the location of development anticipated by the Plan, pursuant to Florida Statutes, §163.3191(2)(d). Changes in Land Area and Land Use The City of Okeechobee is comprised of approximately 4.2 square miles. Since the adoption of the last EAR, the City has not annexed any lands which would have altered the size of the City. The City also encompasses 0.2 square miles of water area. The City is separated by many miles from other urban areas. This relative isolation created a land use pattern that provides the full range of employment and commercial services needed by its residents and those of the surrounding unincorporated areas. Existing land use represents how lands in the City of Okeechobee are presently used. The location, type and distribution of land use patterns and activities are shown in Table 1.3. Table 1.3: Existing Land Use, 2009 Existing Land Use Acres Percent Residential Commercial Industrial Public /Semi - public Utilities Roads & Rights -of -Way Water Total 2,688 ' 100.0 Vacant lands include approximately 183 acres of agricultural use (primarily pastureland). (2) Includes street, road, and railroad rights -of -way. Source: Okeechobee County Property Appraiser's GIS files, 9/09. LaRue Planning & Management Services, Inc. 2010. Draft: June 4, 2010 Community-wide Assessment Location of Existing Development In Relation to Development Anticipated in the Original Plan Development in Okeechobee since adoption of the Plan has been somewhat different from the land uses established in the Future Land Use Element. This is, in part, due to certain conflicts between Zoning and the Future Land Use Map which are identified under Major Issue #2. This is also a result of the need for flexibility in the location of commercial uses and suggests a need to provide for a transition from residential use to commercial use in areas at the interface of existing commercial areas bordering major roadways. Since 2000, the City has had 84 map amendments. Table 1.4 provides a complete listing of those amendments. Based on Table 1.4, properties with the Future Land Use classification of Single Family decreased by 130 acres. Properties with the Future Land Use classification of Multi - Family increased by 66 acres. Properties in the Commercial, Industrial and Public Facilities Future Land Use categories increased by 47, 2, and 2 acres, respectively. In 2006, the City added a new Future Land Use category to accommodate mixed -uses. This category is intended to accommodate and provide flexibility for development of multiple uses within a residential setting. Extent of Vacant and Undeveloped Land Today, approximately 29% (783 acres) of the City is vacant including agricultural lands, the use of which is considered an interim use until demand for urban use matures. The projected population of the City during the peak season is 7,801 residents in the year 2021. At current inventory levels, the developable vacant land is sufficient to support the probable future population of the City. Figure 1 -1 depicts existing land use by the various categories. 1 -7 Community -wide Assessment Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -8 Table 1.4: Comprehensive Plan Amendments, 2001 to 2009 Petition # Property Owner Location Land Use Acreage 01- 005 -SSA Elbert Batton Lots 25 and 26, Block 200 C to RMF 0.30 01- 004 -SSA Lakeview Builders Lot 15 and 16, Block 37 SF to MF 0.34 01- 003 -SSA Utt /Cook Lots 1 through 6 of Block 15 of South Okeechobee SF to MF 1.10 01- 002 -SSA Connelly Lots 3 and 4, Block 21, South Okeechobee SF to MF 0.32 01- 001 -SSA Edwards Lots 4, 5, and 6, Block 75 SF to MF 0.48 02- 006 -SSA Visiting Nurses Assn. Block 171, City Parcel 6 SF to C 0.27 02- 005 -SSA Butler Lot 1 -12, Block 3, Wrights first Addition SF to MF 4.03 02- 004 -SSA Rickards Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 24, Northwest Addition SF to MF 1.00 02- 003 -SSA Snider Lot 4,5 and 6, Block 3, South Okeechobee SF to C 0.49 02- 002 -SSA Knapp Lots 3 and 4, Block 21, South Okeechobee MF to C 0.33 02- 001 -SSA Vandertrust Block 20, Lots 1 -13, 14 -26 SF to MF 5.50 03- 011 -SSA Watford Lots 1 through 12, Block 98 IND to C 2.06 03- 010 -SSA Byrd Lots 6, 7, and 8 Block 201, City of Okeechobee C to MF 0.399 03- 009 -SSA Swygard Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 5, of Wright's First Addition SF to MF 0.69 03- 008 -SSA Lefebvre Lots 1 & 2 Block 21, South Okeechobee SF to C 0.16 03- 007 -SSA Neese East %z of lot 20 & Lots 21, 22, 23 & 24 Block D SF to MF 0.705 03- 006 -SSA Gagbee Lots 1 -7, Block 18 & Lots 20 -26, Block 18 SF to MF 3.5 03- 005 -SSA Los Dos Compadres 702 SW Second St IND to C 0.9733 03- 004 -SSA Madrigal Lot 6 & West Half of Lot 5, Block 89 MF to C 0.241 03- 003 -SSA Edwards Lots 4, 5 & 6, Block 75 MF to C 0.482 03- 002 -SSA Lakeview Builders, Inc. Lots 12, 13 & 14, Block 30 SF to MF SF 0.52 0.52 03- 001 -SSA Okeechobee Courthouse Lots 1 -6 & 10 -12, Block 125 & C to PF 04- 006 -SSA David Nunez Lots 7 and 8 of Block 78, SF to C 0.32 04- 005 -SSA Buchanan Lots 1 and 2, Block 44 SF to I 0.321 04- 004 -SSA Carter Lots 9 and 12, Block 2 SF to MF 0.33 04- 003 -SSA Charles Farmer 410 SE 2nd Avenue SF to C 5.06 04- 002 -SSA Mary Dixon 410 SE 2nd Avenue SF to C 7 04- 001 -SSA TR Browning 807 N.E. Park Street SF to C 0.472 05- 002 -SSA Nunez Lots 1 and 2, Block 78 SF to MF 0.321 05- 003 -SSA KMJ Lots 14 -19, Block 32 SF to MF 3.18 05- 004 -SSA Altobello 0 SW 2nd Street SF to MF 9.9 05- 005 -SSA Tedders /Dyal North 1/2 of Lot 11 and the North 1/2 of Lot 12, Block 182 MF to C 0.48 05- 006 -SSA Mossel Lots 17 -22, Block 19 SF to MF 1.033 05- 007 -SSA Cook Lots 7 -10, Taylor Creek Manor SF to MF 1.39 05- 008 -SSA Goodbread Lots 8 -10, Block 18 C to MF 0.491 Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -8 Community -wide Assessment Draft: June 4, 2010 I -9 Table 1.4: Comprehensive Plan Amendments, 2001 to 2009 (cont'd) Petition # Property Owner Location Land Use Acreage 05- 009 -SSA Williams Lots 2 -3, Block 144 SF to C 0.2 05 -010 -SSA Wallace Lot 1, Block 3 SF to C 0.17 05- 011 -SSA Goodbread Lots 23 -26, Block 31 SF to MF 0.69 05- 012 -SSA Lewis Lot sll -12, Block 105 SF to C 0.321 05- 013 -SSA Surface Lots 1 -4, Block 31 SF to MF 0.689 05- 014 -SSA Stepping Stones Lots 7 -9, Block 181 SF to MF 0.656 06- 001 -SSA Hester Lots 9 -10, Block 143 MF to C 0.344 06- 002 -SSA Samms Lots 1 -6, Block 97 and Lots 1 -6, Block 102 SF to IND 2.066 06- 003 -SSA CR Investments Lots 14 -16, Blockl9 SF to MF 0.5165 06- 004 -SSA Childs World Lots 4 -6, Block 251 SF to MF 0.688 06- 005 -SSA Sims Lots 5 -6, Block 205 SF to C 0.3271 06- 008 -SSA B &R Ent Lots 4 -6, Block 117 SF to C 0.52 06- 009 -SSA Fraser Lot 6 & 1/2 of 5, Block 8 SF to C 0.25 06- 010 -SSA Insite Lots1 -26, Block 4 and Lots 1 -26, Block 13 SF to MF 9.33 06- 011 -SSA Sullivan Lot 2 -3, Block 3 SF to C 0.48 06- 012 -SSA Altobello SW 2nd St Hold to MF 9 06- 015 -SSA Harvin Lots 9 and 10 Block 106 SF to C 0.3 0.3 06 -CI -001 Hackle SR 70 SF to C 21.14 06 -CI -002 Close Parallel to US 441 SF to MU 32.97 07- 002 -SSA Bellamy Ellerb Y - Y Lots 1 & 2 Block 185 SF to C 0.54 07- 003 -SSA Butler 700 NW 9th Street None to MF 1 07- 005 -SSA lnsite/Dobbs- Southern Trace #2 Blocks 12 and 21 West of US Highway g Y 441, South of City limits ditch be- tween NW 5th and 7th Avenues and NW 11th and 13th Streets. Blocks 11 and 22 — West side of NW 7th Avenue between NW 11th and 13th Streets. SF to MF 29 11.29 07- 006 -SSA A.M.S.A. for Noorudin Lots 3 -6 Block 78 SF to C 0.64 07 -011 -SSA Nooruddin for Ilgen Lots 17 —19 Block 18 C to M F 0.488 07- 012 -SSA Okeechobee SR70 (Hampton Inn) 1108 Highway 70 East SF to C 4.5 07- 014 -SSA Gwynn & Linda Johnson Lots 1 - 7 and 20 - 26, Block 36 C &SF to IND 2.84 08- 001 -SSA Visiting Nurse Assn. 203 SE 2"d St SF to Com 0,.7782 08- 002 -SSA Sheri LaChappelle 813 SW 2 °d Street SF to MF 1.361 08- 003 -SSA Nooruddin for Husain Lots 19 -20, Block 15 SF to C 0.405 08- 004 -SSA Nunez NE 7th Ave between NE 3`d St & SR 70E SF to Com 1.74 08- 006 -SSA Abdul Cumber Lots 1 -12, Block 110 SF to Com 1.928 08- 007 -SSA Nooruddin Lots 17, 18, 19- Block 18 MF to Com 0.488 10- 001 -SSA Baker Lot 6, Block 208 SF to Com 0.162 10- 002 -SSA Nunez Lots 1 through 5, Block 147 SF to Com 0.84 Total 165.80 Source: LaRue Planning & Management Services Inc 7nno Draft: June 4, 2010 I -9 Community-wide Assessment Figure 1-1 EXISTING LAND USE, 2009 City of Okeechobee 114, 61111111, • r . 1 .L.11111„_ 17 7111 11 MIT 1111111111111 111111111.111.1.11 418111Rit %WM 1:31111L HL '4:1:1111 111 1 IM tiLl MIE rrti FT] 1.11144, 111 lililihl -11:11,0 Vat': uiu r ri-z11, 1 1 r , n•-• 1 II . III I11) ' • SRO Li--#4.1 -room A/ City Limits Vacant Agricultural I Single-family Mobile homes Commercial Golf courses Industrial Semi-public Public Utilities 1 RR & RR R-O-W Water 1000 0 1000 2000 Ft SOURCE: Okeechobee County Property Appraiser's Database; September; 2009 filepa't#cl by LaRue folAtiriing & Mariageibeht Services. !he- Septetbtiet. 2009 Draft: June 4, 2010 1-10 Financial Feasibility of Providing Needed Infrastructure Consistent with Florida Statutes, Okeechobee has adopted level of service (LOS) standards in its Comprehensive Plan. These standards are used to review the impacts of existing and proposed development on public facilities. The City has implemented a Concurrency Management System, and any new development is required to make or provide the necessary improvements to maintain or exceed the LOS standards. This section of the Report, consistent with §163.3191(2)(c), assesses the financial feasibility of providing the needed infrastructure to achieve and maintain adopted LOS standards and sustain concurrency through capital improvements, as well as the ability to address infrastructure backlogs and meet the demands of growth on public services and facilities. Sanitary Sewer & Potable Water The Okeechobee Utility Authority (OUA) is the entity responsible for providing water and sewer to the residents of the City of Okeechobee and to some unincorporated areas of Okeechobee and Glades Counties. While the majority of the City is provided water and sewer services, there are still small areas which are not served because there are no lines connecting to these properties. It is estimated that lines are available to serve about 95% of the City with potable water, but OUA estimates that is provides potable water to only about 78% of the City's resident population. The permitted capacity for the surface water treat- ment plant is 5.0 mgd with the groundwater treat- ment plant rated at 1.0 mgd for a total of 6.0 mgd. The wastewater treatment plant has a total capacity of 3.0 mgd. Table 1.5 shows an analysis of both plants. As stated earlier, there are some areas in the City of Okeechobee that are still being served by wells or septic tanks. Community-wide Assessment Table 1.5: WTP and WWTP Capacities Year Water Treatment Plant Wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity 6.00 mgd 3.00 mgd Avg. Daily Flow 1.93 mgd 0.89 mgd Committed 0.25 mgd 0.10 mgd Excess 3.82 mdg 2.01 mgd Source: LaRue Planning & Management Services, Inc., 2010. OUA is currently meeting present and future water demands by utilizing both groundwater and surface water. The adopted LOS of service for water and sewer are 114 gallons per capita per day and 130 gallons per capita per day, respectively. The data in Table 1.6 should be considered as proof that capacity currently exists at both the WWTP and the WTP. It is estimated that the City of Okeechobee comprises approximately 32% of all users of water and sewer services. Below is a table which depicts that even when all residents of City are connected to OUA for water and sewer during the period of peak population, there is sufficient capacity to continue serving the City well into the long -range planning horizon. Table 1.6: Projected Water and Sewer Demand — City of Okeechobee Year Peak Population Water genera- tion rate based on adopted LOS Sewer genera - tion rate based on adopted LOS 2011 7,573 0.86 MGD 0.98 MGD 2016 7,686 0.88 MGD 1.00 MGD 2021 7,801 0.89 MGD 1.01 MGD Source LaRue Planning & Management Services Inc., 2010. Adequacy of Water Supply Based on the County's Water Supply Plan, one can expect total demand in the year 2020 to approx- imate 3.86 mgd. Okeechobee Utilities' current Con- sumptive Use Permit (CUP) is for 3.00 mgd. The Util- Draft: June 4, 2010 ity is in negotiation to increase the CUP. The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) has indicated a willingness to issue a preliminary in- crease in the CUP to 4.00 mgd until such time OUA and the District can reach agreement as to a final CUP to be coupled with alternative sources of wa- ter, water conservation, and reuse projects. Appar- ently, there is adequate supply of water to accom- modate the increase in the CUP to 4.0 mgd and this supply is sufficient to serve the entire system until 2020 just shy of the City's planning horizon of 2021. Solid Waste Solid waste collection and disposal is provided by Waste Management, Inc. The adopted LOS for the City of Okeechobee is 13 Ibs /capita /day. The City of Okeechobee generates approximately 45% of the County's solid waste stream, while the City only has 15% of the population. Such a discrepancy can only be explained by the presence of businesses or industries in the City, as well as significant numbers of people living in urban or suburban lifestyle, as contrasted with the rural /agricultural nature of outlying areas. It is also reasonable to assume that some solid waste in unincorporated areas may have been disposed of outside of the County's organized collection system through burning, burial, or even improper dumping. The Okeechobee County landfill serves the entire County and has a remaining capacity of 110 million tons with a life expectancy of 50 years. There is adequate landfill capacity to serve the City's needs well beyond the year 2021. Table 1.7 shows a projection per capita of solid waste generation for the City based on the long range population projections. Table 1.7: Solid Waste Generation Table, 2011 -2021 Year Peak Population Pounds (per day) 2011 7,573 98,449 2016 7,686 99,918 2021 7,801 101,413 Source: LaRue Planning & Management Services, Inc., 2010. Draft: June 4, 2010 Community-wide ide Assessment In order to maintain the adopted LOS standard the City attempts to reduce solid waste generation by encouraging recycling programs. By encouraging the cooperation of its residents and by coordinating with the County, the City is expected to continue meeting its adopted level of service throughout the long -range planning timeframe. Drainage The adopted Level of Service for Okeechobee is for a 25 year — 24 hour storm event. Drainage on City roads is accommodated by swales and ditches and FDOT storm drainage facilities. The City of Okeechobee is in the Lake Okeechobee integrated drainage basin and is drained by Taylor Creek to the east and Papash Slough and Lemkin Creek to the south. At this time, no drainage facility improvements are needed. There are policies in the Comprehensive Plan which outline the process to restore natural areas. In addition, Policy 7.1 of the Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element requires the City to undertake a stormwater management study to identify water quality and drainage facilities. In adopting this policy, the City acknowledged that insufficient information existed to address this issue adequately, and that future expenditures were needed, both to fund the study and the needed improvements which it identified. In accordance with this policy, the City should budget available funds of its own for the study and seek the assistance of the South Florida Water Management District. Traffic Circulation The City of Okeechobee continues to be a small urban area. Most of the traffic issues relate to state and federal roads bisecting the City. The roadway functional classification is discussed below: 1 -12 • US 441 is a 4 -lane arterial road entering Okeechobee County from the north. In the southern part of the County, it is a main route for carrying traffic to western Palm Beach County. • US 98 is a 4 -lane arterial road which enters Okeechobee County from the west across the Kissimmee River and proceeds toward West Palm Beach. The southern portion of US 98 combined with US 441 provides a connecting link between the City and western Palm Beach County. • SR 710, just outside the City to the east, is a 4 -lane arterial road which connects the City with Indiantown and West Palm Beach. • SR 78 is a 2 -lane arterial road which provides a connecting link with US 27 in Glades County. It is an east -west arterial located a short distance south of the City and extends southwesterly around the west side of Lake Okeechobee. • SR 70 is a 4 -lane arterial highway extending from Bradenton through Okeechobee to Fort Pierce. It intersects with US 98 in the center of the City and provides a connecting link with Sebring to the north. The functional classification for roadways within the City has remained the same for the past 20+ years. The City does not take traffic counts on any roads Community -vie Assessment within its boundaries. Instead, counts are taken by FDOT and conveyed to the County. There are four traffic count stations within the City. The counts at stations within the City and immediately upon entering the City's limits are shown in Table 1 -8. Information on traffic volumes is provided by FDOT and is limited to state roads. Like most rural cities, Okeechobee also lacks an ongoing program for measuring traffic on the City's collector roadways. The City's Concurrency Management System (CMS) identifies any LOS problems and corresponding needs for capital investment in road improvements. Improvements are made every year on City's roadway system to keep them safe and in good working order. These improvements are shown on the City's Five Year Schedule of Capital Improvements. Recently, these projects have included: 1. Street sweeping and mowing of right -of- ways; 2. Roadway street lighting; 3. Road repairs and materials; and 4. Paving, sidewalks, and traffic signals. In addition, the City of Okeechobee will adopt by reference the FDOT Five Year Work Program 2009- 2014. Table 1 -8: 2008 Annual Average Daily Traffic Report Site Description Direction 1 Direction 2 AADT Two- Way 0002 SR 15 /US 441, North of NW 13th Street N 9700 5 10000 19700 0009 SR 15 /US 441, North of SR 70 N 11000 S 12000 23000 0012 SR 70, West of SR 700 /US 98 E 7100 W 6800 13900 0019 SR 70 /700 /US 98, East of SR 700 /US 98 E 10000 W 10500 20500 0103 SR 15/700, US 98/441 South of SR 70 N 12500 5 14500 27000 0112 SR 700 /US 98, North of SR 70 /US 98 S 6200 N 6100 12300 0123 SR 15 /700 /US 98/441, North of Wolff Road N 12000 5 12000 24000 0215 SR 15/700/US 98/441, South of Wolff Road N 8200 5 9300 17500 5012 SR 70, East of SR 15/700/US 98/441 E 15000 W 14500 29500 Source: FDOT, 2009. Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -13 Recreation and Open Space In 2003, the County estimated that approximately 489 acres of recreational facilities were available in Okeechobee County. These facilities were owned by the City (2), the County (13), the School Board (9), the State (3), and private entities (3). Of the 30 facilities, those described below are located within the City limits. Table 1 -9: Existing Recreational Sites and Facilities Site Name Category Type Facilities Available Acres Taylor Creek Boat Ramp* Resource -based (special park) Boat launch 2 Park Avenue Greenbelt* Activity -based (neighborhood park) Benches, bandstand tables 5.4 Okeechobee Recreational Park Activity -based (special park) 1 Ball field 2 Tennis Courts 1 Skateboard Park 4.7 Central Elementary School Activity -based Basketball court Play equipment 1.2 Okeechobee Freshman Campus Activity -based 2 Ball fields /Soccer fields 8.6 Lake House PUD and Southern Trace residential projects (as yet undeveloped) ** Park, play- ground and open space available to the public 3.0 Source: City of Okeechobee 0 * City -owned Facilities. ** Lands available as a condition of site plan approvals. There are a total of almost 25 acres of recreational lands in the City. Of these, two parks encompassing 7.4 acres are owned by the City. Another 17.5 acres of lands affording recreational opportunities within the City, now or in the future, are associated with public schools, County parks and private develop- ments with lands dedicated to recreational areas as conditions of site plan approval. Acreages associated with the Central Elementary School and Community-wide Assessment Freshman Campus in the table above reflect only those land areas devoted to recreational types of uses. In addition to recreational facilities and public open space within the City, residents have access to all County and State maintained recreational facilities within Okeechobee County. The adopted level of service standard for parks is 3 acres per 1,000 persons. Below is an assessment of the demand for parks based on the adopted LOS and the projected population. Table 1 -10: Projected Recreational Needs, 2011 -2021 Year Peak Population Acres 2011 7,573 22.7 2016 7,686 23.0 2021 7,801 23.4 Source: LaRue Planning & Management Services, Inc., 2010. The City of Okeechobee has participated with the County in a joint planning approach to provide recreational facilities with equal access for all residents of the County through a combined recreational program. By developing and adopting joint level of service standards, recreational needs of both the incorporated and unincorporated population have been and will continue to be well served. Provision of recreational facilities for future population will continue through Interlocal agreements. School Coordination The City of Okeechobee has two public schools within its boundaries. These are Central Elementary School and the Okeechobee Freshman Campus. Ac- cording the City's adopted Public Schools Facilities Elements, enrollment at Central Elementary was at 717 in SY 2006/07 with a capacity of 768 students. The utilization rate (enrollment to capacity) is at 93 %. The Okeechobee Freshman Campus currently operates at a utilization rate of 143% with approx- imately 500 students enrolled, but a capacity of 349 students. In addition, heating capacity, artificial Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -14 lighting and drainage in parking areas are inade- quate and this building has no re- locatable units. This campus is expected to continue to grow and may require a small addition to handle the increase in student enrollment. As with all schools which are exceed the LOS, enrollment relief is planned through boundary changes, program shifts, or per- manent classroom additions. Financial Feasibility of Providing Ade- quate Facilities and Services The City is currently meeting its adopted level of service for all its public facilities and has the ability to provide the needed infrastructure and maintain adopted level of service standards. The Compre- hensive Plan and the Unified Land Development Code both require that adequate public facilities be in place and concurrent with the impacts of devel- opment. Assessment of Successes and Shortcomings of the Elements Pursuant to §163.3191(2)(h), F.S., this section of this Report makes a brief assessment of the successes and shortcomings related to each element of the Comprehensive Plan. Future Land Use Element The Future Land Use Element has been, by and large, successful in guiding growth patterns throughout the City. The goal of the Future Land Use Element is to "maintain a high quality living environment, preserve its distinctive natural and historic resources, and provide public services to its residents." The 12 objectives included in the Element center on: • Guiding the location of future development by the availability and efficient use of public facilities; Co rmmulnity -wide Assessment • Ensuring that all new development is consistent with the Future Land Use Element; • Eliminating or reducing and uses which are inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element; • Ensuring the availability of suitable land for public facilities; • Establishing a threshold acreage identifying suitable locations for schools; and new • Protecting natural and historic resources; • Encouraging redevelopment and renewal of blighted areas; • Ensuring that land use activities along Taylor Creek are consistent with the Resource Management Plan for the Lower Kissimmee River and Taylor Creek Drainage Basin; • Promoting innovative land development techniques; • Integrating the objectives of the Local Mitigation Strategy into the Plan; and • Revising the land development code to encourage redevelopment,infill development, compatibility,andcurtailmentof inconsistent uses. The shortcomings of the Future Land Use Element were mentioned earlier in the Report and deal with the need to provide for a transition from residential use to commercial use for areas at the interface of existing commercial areas bordering major roadways and eliminating inconsistencies between the Future Land Use Map and the City's Zoning Map. Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -15 Traffic Circulation Element The Traffic Circulation Element has not been significantly changed since the City's last EAR -based Amendments adopted in 2000. The goal of the Traffic Circulation Element is to "develop a traffic circulation system which safely and efficiently meets existing and future transportation needs, promotes accepted design standards, and achieves desired levels of service." The nine objectives included in the Element focus on: • Utilization of the five -year CIP to identify improvements to roadway deficiencies; • Protecting existing and future right -of -way from building encroachment; • Supporting FDOT's 5 -Year Work Program on roadways which are in the City's jurisdiction, in addition to coordination of planning and programming improvements with FDOT and Okeechobee County; • Coordinating with the State, regional and local jurisdictions to promote a proper mix of funding for roadway improvements; • Implementing a program for providing roadways needs that integrates acceptable design standards; • Establishing level of service standards that are acceptable for existing and future conditions; • Coordinating development with the provision of providing adequate motorized and non - motorized transportation facilities; and • Curtailing future level of service standard deterioration along US Highway 441 and SR 70. Draft: June 4, 2010 Community -wide Assessment The system of local, county and state roadways in and around the City of Okeechobee has generally served the City well, circulating vehicular traffic within and through the City. Maintenance of local roads is completed on an as- needed basis and all such roadways are operating within the adopted level of service. SR 70 and US 441 are both constrained roadways for which the State bears operational responsibility. The availability of traffic count data is limited to that collected by FDOT. Therefore, in order to ensure that the traffic impacts of development do not unduly affect the adopted level of service standards, the City requires significant new development to provide traffic impact analyses. This requirement has worked well and will be continued for the foreseeable future. Housing Element The goal of the Housing Element is to "plan for the provision of decent, safe and sanitary housing of appropriate size, type, location and cost, and with adequate supporting public facilities to meet the current and future needs of all residents of the City." The eight objectives included in the Element focus on assisting the private sector and other public agencies in providing adequate and affordable housing, reduction and /or elimination of substandard housing, conserving standard condition housing, enforcing regulations to ensure adequate sites for low- and moderate - income families, ensuring adequate sites for group homes and foster care facilities, and establishing an advisory committee to evaluate the City's efforts in providing affordable housing. The Housing Element is based on the premise that initial programs promoting housing diversity, building code permitting /enforcement would be implemented by the land development regulations. The Unified Land Development Code has proven valuable in guiding the private sector in development and construction of housing. In 1998, the City had a deficit of affordable housing for very low- and low- income households. It is encouraging that recent private sector developments have included more affordable housing. However, in 1 -16 accordance with Chapter 163 and Rule 9J -5, the Plan needs to include provisions for very low - income households. Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwa- ter Aquifer Recharge (Infrastructure) Element This Element was formulated to guide the City in creating a strong blueprint for providing the necessary improvements to public facilities. The goal of the Element is to "conserve and protect its water sources and provide, or require others to provide, needed public facilities in a manner which protects investments in existing facilities and promotes orderly growth." The objectives of this element are as follows: • Ensuring that needed facilities are available or will be available concurrent with development; • Maintaining a 5 -year CIP for public facilities; • Ensuring that existing facilities are used in an efficient manner the nor promote urban sprawl; • Coordination with OUA and Okeechobee County in extending water and sewer services into unincorporated areas; • Providing efficient collection, disposal, and reduction of solid waste; • Protecting natural drainage features; • Obtaining data needed for correction of existing deficiencies in man -made drainage facilities; • Maintaining the City's existing water consumption rate of 1.82 MGD; and Community-wide Assessment • Protecting water quality and preserving the function of recharge areas and natural drainage features. Recent changes to Florida Statutes required the City to amend this Element through adoption of a 10- Year Water Supply Facilities Work Plan which will require adequate water supplies prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy; and provision of water quality standards for stormwater recharge. The State has reviewed the City's Water Supply Facilities Work Plan and has issued its Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report. The City is preparing its response to the ORC. Conservation Element The Conservation Element has proven to be a strong guide in establishing long -term development restrictions to promote resource conservation. The goal of the Conservation Element is to "conserve, protect, and appropriately manage the natural resources to promote the highest environmental quality possible." The Element has enabled the City to enhance its natural resources and provide protection for fish and wildlife habitats. The six objectives included in the Element concentrate on preserving air quality, conservation and protection of water quality, preservation and protection of environmentally sensitive areas, wildlife and wildlife habitats, managing hazardous wastes, and improving the water quality of Taylor Creek. The Element will be revised soon to reflect adoption of the water supply plan. Recreation and Open Space Element The goal of the Recreation and Open Space Element is to "provide a system of public recreation lands and facilities to serve all residents and visitors of the City while making the most efficient possible use of public resources." The six objectives supporting this goal focus on protecting lands designated for Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -17 recreational uses, coordination with County and state agencies to enhance recreational opportunities, providing a variety of recreational opportunities, and coordination with the School Board to ensure efficient and joint use of existing and future open space and recreational facilities. The City of Okeechobee has participated with the County in a joint planning approach to provide recreational facilities with equal access to all residents of the County through a combined recreational program. By developing and adopting joint level of service standards, recreational needs of both the incorporated and unincorporated population has been and will continue to be achieved. Provision of recreational facilities for future population will continue through Interlocal agreements. Intergovernmental Coordination Element All existing intergovernmental coordination mechanisms are effective. The Element has been updated and strengthened as cooperation has been important for such issues as water supply planning and school facility coordination. The goal of the Element is to "achieve greater governmental efficiency and resolve conflicts by coordinating development with activities between the City and the County, and relevant regional, state, and federal entities." The objectives which support this goal addresses the following: • Coordination and consistency of the Comprehensive Plan with adjacent municipalities; • Maintaining mechanisms to address development issues which affect adjacent municipalities; • Coordination with FDOT and OUA; • Coordination and consistency of the Comprehensive Plan with the Resource Draft: June 4, 2010 Community-wide Assessment Management Plan for the Lower Kissimmee River and Taylor Creek Drainage Basins; • Cooperation with the School Board in ensuring the activities of the School Board are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; • Coordinating planning efforts joint extra- territorial services, changes to service or corporate limits, any joint committees for review of locally unwanted land uses; • Coordinating the Comprehensive Plan with the School Board 5 -Year Facilities Plan The Element will be updated to include cooperation for water supply planning issues. Public School Facilities Element The goal of the Public School Facilities Element is "to provide a public school system that offers a high quality educational environment, provides accessi- bility for all of its students, and ensures adequate school capacity to accommodate enrollment de- mand within a financially feasible School District Capital Plan." The four objectives in this element focus on: • Providing adequate school facilities by adopting a concurrency management sys- tem to achieve and maintain the adopted LOS; • Performing a school concurrency evaluation to review projected residential develop- ment in order to accommodate new stu- dents at the adopted LOS for adequate school capacity; • Coordinating all new public schools which are to be built after 2008 to be consistent with the City's Future Land Use Map designation and be collocated with other appropriate public facilities when possible; and 1 -18 • Annually update the 5 -Year Schedule of Capital Improvements to include school capacity projects. Capital Improvements Element The goal of the Capital Improvements Element is to "ensure that public facilities and services are provided, on a fair -share cost basis, in a manner which maximizes the use of existing facilities and promotes orderly growth." This element has successfully outlined infrastructure improvements needed to guide the City in its attempts to provide needed public improvements. The Element has been updated consistent with new state legislation concerning viable Capital Improvement Schedules and assuring that future changes to the Comprehensive Plan will be financially feasible. Compliance with Growth Management Laws Section 163.3191(2)(f), Florida Statutes, requires the EAR to evaluate relevant changes in growth management laws since the adoption of the original plan for consistency with the State Comprehensive Plan. The summary of this evaluation is set forth below. Preserving Public Access to Florida's Waterways House Bill 955 (Chapter 2005 -157) addresses the preservation of public access to Florida's waterways. It is particularly directed at preserving recreational and working waterfronts. The only significant waterbody within the municipal limits is Taylor Creek which drains into Lake Okeechobee. Taylor Creek is bordered largely by private, residentially zoned lands. A small area of the Creek in the general vicinity of SR 70 is bordered by commercial lands. At the northern extremity of the Community -wide Assessment City, the City's industrial park borders the eastern bank of the Creek. However, there are no working waterfronts on Taylor Creek and recreational use is largely limited to private docks on bordering private residential property. School Concurrency Planning The Okeechobee County School District has only two schools in the City: Central Elementary and Okeechobee Freshman Campus. The City has previously adopted its Public School Facilities Element. Coastal High Hazard Areas While the City is close to Lake Okeechobee and, before the construction of the Herbert Hoover Dike, experienced damage from storm surges due to hurricanes, no portion of the City is within the Coastal High Hazard Area. Coordination of Land Use and Water Supply Planning The Okeechobee Utility Authority supplies water to residents within the City. By State law, all local governments within the South Florida Water Management District must prepare and adopt a 10- Year Water Supply Facilities Work Plan into their Comprehensive Plan's Potable Water Element. The City is currently coordinating with the OUA to complete its 10 -Year Water Supply Facilities Work Plan and ensure its consistency with the requirements of the South Florida Water Management District and the State of Florida. State Comprehensive Plan The State Comprehensive Plan has changed since the City adopted its Comprehensive Plan in 1989. The Plan, all amendments since its original adoption, and all amendments recommended herein are consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan. Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -19 Chapter 163, Florida Statutes A table detailing the manner in which the City is addressing the changes to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, is attached in Appendix A. The changes are summarized by year with appropriate citations. Each change is classified by relevance to the City's Comprehensive Plan. If no change is applicable, then no change is required. If the change is relevant, the Plan was reviewed and analysis about whether the change was addressed or not is included. In those instances in which an amendment is needed, the elements which need to be amended are identified in the last column. Based on this table, the City is addressing all applicable requirements of Chapter 163 in its Comprehensive Plan and recommended Plan Amendments. Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code Rule 91 -5 of the Florida Administrative Code establishes the minimum criteria for the preparation, review and determination of compliance of the Comprehensive Plan and Plan amendments pursuant to the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, F.S. A table detailing the manner in which the City is addressing the changes to Rule 9J -S, F.A.C., is attached as Appendix B. Based on this table, the City is addressing all applicable requirements of Rule 9J -5 in its Comprehensive Plan and recommended Plan Amendments. Strategic Regional Policy Plan for Southwest Florida The Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council's Strategic Regional Policy Plan ( "SRPP ") was last revised in 2002, long after the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. Since that time, the demographics sections of the SRPP have been continually updated though a complete update of the entire SRPP has not been scheduled. In 2000, the City's Comprehensive Plan was consistent with the SRPP. Prior to adoption of the Comprehensive Draft: June 4, 2010 Community-wide Assessment Plan Amendment, the City will review all changes to ensure that the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the SRPP. Other State - Mandated Requirements While there are no military sites in the City, the City will amend the Plan to include the provisions set forth in the Florida Statutes if a military installation is proposed in the City. 1 -20 Community wide Assessment Public Participation Summary The City formally began the evaluation of its Plan in June 2009, with staff discussions that covered the EAR process, timelines, and methodologies. At these meetings the purpose of the EAR and its implications for the community were outlined. Concerns and information were also gathered from the public that attended. An Interagency Scoping meeting was held on January 21, 2010 to help identify issues, to discuss various agencies' concerns, and to ascertain the information and resources agencies could provide the City to assist in evaluating and updating the Plan. All neighboring local governments and appropriate county, state, and regional agencies were invited to attend the scoping meeting. DCA agreed to the major issues and responded with a letter of agreement on February 4, 2010. On May 20, 2010 the Planning and Zoning Board held a public workshop to review the draft EAR and on June 17, 2010, the City of Okeechobee Planning and Zoning Board acting as the Local Planning Agency held a public hearing, reviewed the draft EAR and forwarded their recommendation of approval and the draft EAR to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. LaRue Planning & Management facilitated a City Council Workshop on related to vision /revenue options relevant to the EAR major issues. The Department of Community Affairs sent their review comments on the draft EAR on and the City responded and revised the draft to reflect the recommendations made. , 2010 was the adoption public hearing with the City Council. The hearing was a success, and the 2009 Evaluation and Appraisal Report was adopted by Resolution No. Draft: June 4, 2010 1 -21 Major Issues Identification of Major Issues This Section of the EAR will assess the potential social, economic and environmental impacts of the identified major issues pursuant to Florida Statutes, §163.3191(2)(e). Pursuant to §163.3191(2)(g), F.S., this section will also provide an assessment of whether Plan objectives and policies within each Element, as they relate to the major issues, have been achieved, and whether unforeseen and unanticipated changes in circumstances have resulted in problems and opportunities with respect to major issues. Assessment of Major Issues and Plan Objectives The City's EAR identifies five major issues that the City will address in the EAR -based Plan Amendments. Each issue and proposed actions are briefly summarized below. Major Issue 1: Need to provide for a transition from residential use to commercial use for certain areas of the City. Major Issue 2: The need to eliminate inconsistencies between the Official Zoning Map and the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Major Issue 3: The need to re- examine the Taylor Creek area and related Plan Policies in order to allow development that would not degrade its water quality. Major Issue 4: The need to establish compatible and consistent urban design. Major Issue 5: The need to emphasize pedestrian connectivity and establish streetscape standards within the City. Draft: June 4, 2010 11-1 Evaluation of Issues of Major Concerns Major Issue 1: The need to provide for a transition from residential use to commercial use in certain areas of the City. Issue Description and Analysis Distribution of commercial lands For the past few years, there have been an increasing number of requests for Small Scale Development Amendments to extend Commercial Future Land Use designations to encompass properties within two blocks of the major commercial arterials in the City, US 441 and SR 70. The City has recognized the need to provide a transition from heavy commercial along these arterial to light commercial and professional /office commercial uses as development pressures approach an interface with existing residential uses. The City's actions have clearly indicated that such a policy has been evolving. The EAR is the appropriate time to recognize the need for a more formal approach to provide additional and varied commercial opportunities while ensuring compatibility with residential uses within the City. In response to the above, the City is investigating expanding the amount of land designated commercial on the Future Land Use Map within two blocks of the City's major arterials - SR 70 and US 441. The expansion areas are primarily seen as those in the second tier blocks. Map II- 1.1 shows the current distribution of the Commercial future land use category throughout the City. It also shows the boundaries of the proposed commercial corridor, the current Draft: June 4, 2010 Maur Issues future land use categories of all lands within the corridor, and the boundaries of specific areas where expansion of commercial use could be expected in the future. There are 18 such areas outlined on the Map I1 -1.1. The initial concept is to create a new Commercial Transition Overlay future land use category to which these properties would belong. A variety of zoning districts (all the commercial districts, RSF1, RMF, Industrial, and Public) would be considered consistent with this future land use category and development of the lands would be permitted under current zoning. However, properties within these outlined areas will only be allowed to be rezoned to CLT, CPO or RMF. The new Transitional Commercial future land use category would also include provision for mixed use in the form of commercial use and residential use on the same parcel. Map 11 -1.2 shows the same geographic areas as shown on Map 11 -1.1, but portrays the current zoning of these properties. 11-2 OD MD MI MD 41111111.1101111•61111111111 Major Issues MAP 11-1.1 FUTURE LAND USE IN COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR 416-41110-4=-40$ 1111 mum mum 1 Olin in. Raii 11111111111111 MUM INK 1 11 111111 11111 MHO imam: ill: 11111 111111 WV gir 001F 11111 11111 1111 u — 1111 111111 ."."‘. wet 1111‘111 *74, arOi &I: 14 all X sal •114, • PO No7. NE Ai a. IA 111 111: ROI 11° .1 too = 4, FEE LI] 11111111 11111111111 111110 111101 A/ City Limits rn Proposed 1---1 Commercial Corridor * Indicates conflict being addressed under Major Issue #2 as um 6* 1110111.1 I" : . inE ..UiJ 111112 li1111 r w •I" Fianna e konwAllirl — MW no :NI MI" MIM• MI mow wit _ ow 11111111112 ll-t111111111111111111 an N um I wa visa fav au ;-- 1U • — mom :11111 FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE SiNGLL = FAMILY MULTI = FAMILY ICOMM4CIAL INDUSTRIAL -1 PUBLIC FACILITI5S WATER Draft: June 4, 2010 1000 0 1000 00 Peet Prdparod by: Lanus Planning & Mint Sorvicts, May; 2010 11-3 .../..4...,1 I-- - --4,1r,,6=-- 1 F---- --- =A I- 4 if ,,t,!,,- 1 111 -- •IIII 111•1 ----, . 0111- . • .. 6111-r -.... 1 r - : ii 11 1111 11111101 11 1111 minim mins 11 hill Min iii:_ 4•7110.: fv, Una 1111 li 1:1* EFFFIF = LI ' [1-1-= 1111111 IlIuj 1111 1111.. 1 mu Immo 11111: 11111 11111110 1 •I H , I 1 MOIR 11111_ 1111111 11111 11= 1 111 IHEE 11111 11111 FH L. ..177 Major Issues MAP 11-1.2 ZONING IN COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR in T. MC 11 arfroad I t at r- il.... int MO- IIMAIM AM IIM IMI MM-MII OM IMP AP 0 41111%111 I 1 11111111 '3 - ramrsirms. ••." 1. •-• .. • 1111 A/City Limits r—IPropotted 6-1Cornmprcital Corridor 1 * Indicatett conflict being addresood uridc§r Major how@ 02 ZONING DISTRICTS H RSF1 RMH Rsr2 ▪ RMF MN CPO CLT 11.11 CLIO al CHV IIIIII INC) ' PUB PUD-R PUD.M Draft: June 4, 2010 111 •• NM NM NM al • 1 • 11r. _Ii wan .•11 4- 4th Si NMI 11 Mir NW 11 1 1.— AD MD NI MIS* -- 1000 4ie 0 li mu 11111111 ofoom •lliwkii 1 1000 AEI 11 A1111 111 Eli MENNIMMONI PM, n Proparod by: LON; Planning 1 Management 2000 Foot 11-4 rmS UiL • • • • • • • 1 • ear aft. A.111 411 1%i i eV" r WA 4.****** 00* Effects of the proposal The data in Table 1.1, following, show that there are about 353 acres of land throughout the City designated Commercial on the FLUM. Of this total, 77 acres (22 %) are vacant. TABLE 1.1 LANDS DESIGNATED COMMERCIAL ON FLUM CITY -WIDE, 2009 STATUS ACRES PERCENT Developed 271 78% Vacant 77 22% TOTAL 353 100% Source: Okeechobee Property Appraiser's Database, September, 2009 LaRue Planning & Management Services, Inc. Draft: June 4, 2010 Moor Issues Within the boundaries of the proposed commercial corridor there are approximately 429 acres of land of which 299 are presently designated Commercial on the FLUM. Only 17% of the acreage in the corridor is vacant, and this is true for lands designated Commercial as well as those carrying other future land use designations. TABLE 1.2 COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR CHARACTERISTICS ACRES PERCENT COMMERCIAL FLUC 299 100% Developed 249 84% Vacant 50 17% ALL OTHER FLUCs 130 100% Developed 108 83% Vacant 22 17% TOTAL ALL FLUCs 429 100 %* Single - Family 69 16% Multi - Family 32 8% Commercial 299 70% Industrial 9 2% Public 20 5% * Parts do not add to 100% due to internal rounding Source: Okeechobee Property Appraiser's Database, September, 2009 LaRue Planning & Management Services, Inc. 11 -5 After applying the standard Commercial future and use category to geographic areas 7, 8, 11, 14, 16 and 18 and the new Transitional Commercial category to geographic areas 1 — 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15 and 17 as shown on Map 11 -1.1, the result is the distribution shown in Table 1.3. This represents an increase in 25 acres of standard Commercial and 76 acres of new Transitional Commercial land on the FLUM. TABLE 1.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR AFTER RECOMMENDED FLUM CHANGES TOTAL ALL FLUCs Single - Family Multi- Family Commercial Transitional Commercial Industrial Public ACRES 429 0 0 324 76 9 20 PERCENT 100 %* 0% 0% 76% 18% 2% 5% * Parts do not add to 100% due to internal rounding Source: Okeechobee Property Appraiser's Database, September, 2009 LaRue Planning & Management Services, Inc. Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts Piecemeal change to the FLUM and Zoning Maps generates uncertainty among residents in areas where there is pressure for transition to commercial use. This inhibits new residential development and investment in residential properties. However uncertainty regarding how applications for land use and zoning changes will be handled also inhibits new commercial development, leaving some residential areas bordering commercial corridors in a state of "limbo ", unsure as to which uses will likely be encouraged or allowed in the future. Resolving this quandary in a comprehensive and proactive manner will provide a greater degree of certainty to current owners of residential Draft: June 4, 2010 Major issues properties as well as those interested in transitioning to commercial or mixed use. Identification of Comprehensive Plan Elements Impacted and Assessment of Effects on Specific Objectives Future Land Use Element Objective 12: Objective 12: By the year 2002, the Unified Land Development Code shall be revised to specifically encourage redevelopment, infill development, compatibility with adjacent uses, and curtailment of uses inconsistent with the character and land uses of surrounding areas, and shall discourage urban sprawl, as provided in the following policy... (Refers to Policy 12.1 and sub -items a — g.) A considered, limited, and consistent approach to allow expansion of commercial and mixed -use opportunities gradually outward from established commercial corridors will eliminate uncertainty and foster infill and compatibility with existing development. Recommendations The following revisions are recommended to the Future Land Use Element to implement the City's desire to provide for additional flexibility and increased commercial development opportunities in close proximity to US 441 and SR 70, the major east -west and north -south arterials serving the City and surrounding unincorporated areas. Specific text incorporated into the EAR -based amendment, however, may differ from that presented herein. 11 -6 Add a new Policy 2.1 (g) to the Future Land Use Element creating a Transitional Commercial Future Land Use Category (FLUC) to read as follows: Policy 2.1 (e) Transitional Commercial Overlay. This category is intended to provide additional and varied commercial opportunities in locations in close proximity to the City's major arterials and adjacent to residential areas. Allowable uses include a wide variety of residential, commercial, industrial and public and semi- public uses as allowed within the RSF1, RMF, CPO, CLT, CHV CBD, IND and PUB zoning districts. However, any rezoning of lands within this Future Land Use Category subsequent to the adoption of this FLUC shall be only to the RMF, CLT or CPO zoning districts, thereby providing a transition from more intense development along the major arterials to lesser intensity closer to residential areas. Mixed residential and commercial uses may be allowed on the same parcel. Draft: June 4, 2010 Major Issues 11 -7 Major Issue 2: The need to eliminate inconsistencies between the Official Zoning Map and the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Issue Description and Analysis There are some 110 geographic areas in the City that have been identified as being zoned inconsistently with their designations on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Most of these areas are made up of multiple parcels and some contain quite a few parcels. The areas where the conflicts have been identified are shown on Maps 11 -2.1 and 11 -2.2 and the Future Land Use Category and Zoning classification of each area are shown in Table 2.1. Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts State law requires that the Zoning Map and its attendant regulations be consistent and implement the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan. At best, inconsistencies perpetuate confusion regarding how properties may be developed. At worst, they result in inadvertent approval and /or development that is inappropriate and thwart the community's achieving its desired pattern of development. Perpetuation of inconsistencies results in piecemeal and /or changes to the FLUM. This is inefficient and expensive to the individual property owner and /or the local government. Draft: June 4, 2010 Major Issues Identification of Comprehensive Plan Elements Impacted and Assessment of Effects on Specific Objectives Future Land Use Element Objective 2: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to ensure that all new development is consistent with the Future Land Use Element. The persistence of inconsistencies is in contravention to the intent of this objective and limits predictable development. Concentrated effort by the City to address this local issue will more fully implement this Objective. Objective 3: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to work toward the elimination or reduction in size or intensity of existing land uses and zoning designations which are not consistent with the Future Land Use Element. After more than a decade of piecemeal changes, many inconsistencies still remain. The City is taking this opportunity during the EAR process and subsequent EAR - based Amendments to undertake a concerted and coordinated approach to correcting the remaining inconsistencies. This will provide property owners others interested in living, working and doing business in the City with clear and predictable direction for development within the City. Objective 12: By the year 2002, the Unified Land Development Code shall be revised to specifically encourage redevelopment, infill development, compatibility with adjacent uses, and curtailment of uses inconsistent with the character and land uses of surrounding areas, and shall discourage urban sprawl, as provided in the following policies....(refers to Policy 12.1 and sub -items a — g. 11 -8 Recommendations The original FLUM was prepared based on what appears to have been mainly an effort to recognize existing land uses and which has resulted in a less than consistent future land use pattern. This causes uncertainty among property owners as to what one may likely expect as allowable uses on the property. Resolution of conflicts between the Future Land Use Map and the Zoning Map is a serious matter, but not one requiring a change to existing policies, or the addition of new policies. Current policies in the Plan are adequate. During formulation of the EAR -based Amendments, each of the conflicts should be evaluated leading either to a change in the Zoning to be consistent with the Plan or a change in the Future Land Use Map to more appropriately reflect the current City policy for development on the individual property with respect to its surrounding environment. Examples of factors that could be considered in evaluating the appropriate future land use category or zoning to be applied to the individual properties include: 1. The existing use on the property and surrounding properties and the potential impacts upon surrounding uses indicating the property's appropriateness for either residential or nonresidential uses; 2. The appropriateness of the property from the standpoint of accessibility, both vehicular and pedestrian, for future development in either residential or nonresidential use; 3. Whether or not the property may contribute to the increased availability of affordable housing; Major Issues 4. The property's proximity to public facilities including major roadways, recreation, or public and semi - public facilities. Draft: June 4, 2010 11 -9 Major Issues Table 2.1 City of Okeechobee FLUM and Zoning Conflicts MAP ID FLU ZONING MAP ID FLU ZONING MAP ID FLU ZONING 1 SF RMF 40 SF CPO 79 SF CHV 2 SF RMF 41 SF IND 80 COM H 3 COM RMF 42 SF RMF 81 COM RMF 4 COM RMF 43 SF RMF 82 RMF CHV 5 SF RMF 44 IND RMF 83 SF IND 6 COM RMF 45 SF RMF 84 SF IND 7 SF RMF 46 SF RMF 85 COM IND 8 COM RMF 47 COM RMF 86 COM RSF1 9 SF RMF 48 NONE, COM IND, CBD 87 COM RSF1 10 MF, SF C HV, RMF &CHV 49 SV CHV 88 MF CHV 11 SF MF 50 PUB RSF1 89 MF RSF1 12 SF PUB 51 IND CHV 90 COM RMF 13 SF PUB 52 SF IND 91 MF RSF1 14 SF RMF 53 SF RMF 92 COM PUL 15 SF IND 54 COM RMF 93 COM RMF 16 COM IND 55 COM RMF 94 COM RMF 17 SF IND 56 M CHV 95 COM RSF1 18 SF RMF 57 SF RMF 96 SF CHV 19 COM RSF1 58 COM RMF 97 SF CHV 20 IND CHV 59 SF RMF 98 SF CHV 21 SF IND 60 SF PUB 99 SF RMF 22 SF IND 61 SF CLT 100 SF RMF 23 SF RMF 62 COM RMF 101 COM RMF 24 SF IND 63 PUB RSF1 102 SF RMF 25 NONE, SF IND 64 SF PUB 103 SF, COM RMF 26 SF IND 65 COM RSF1 104 SF RMF 27 COM IND 66 COM RSF1 105 SF RMF 28 SF IND 67 COM RSF1 106 SF PUB 29 SF IND 68 COM RSF1 107 SF RMF 30 COM UBD 69 COM RSF1 108 COM RMF 31 SF RMF 70 MF CHV 109 MF CHV 32 SF RMF 71 PUB RSF1 110 COM RSF1 33 SF, COM RMF 72 PUB CHV 111 SF CPO 34 SF CPO 73 PUB CHV 35 SF CPO 74 COM RSF1 36 SF CPO 75 COM RSF1 37 COM RMF 76 COM RSF1 38 PUB CPO 77 SF RMF 39 MF CPO 78 IND H Draft: June 4, 2010 11 -10 1""" "71 - 1 Ii d,-4 1-4 ri I „ 1 1t1 —r.h. ====== 1/01111111= • Major Issues MAP 11-2.1 FUTURE LAND USE MAP Showing Zoning Conflicts min 111111111 III :3:13 flH 1 HUMS le 1 $ 1 1 1 :1111111 ,Ga 1 • in An Hill 11111 MIN 111111111 •11 'OM I IL ri 1111 WWI 1111 1 111111111 MD 1 0 1 1 ararall111111 Conflict NM Ni Conflict A/City Limits 1•1111MI. mt. as IIMAIPMP MP 1 1 Proposed Commercial Corridor PM MO at MI FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES SINGLE = FAMILY MI MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE I j COMMERCIAL r1 INDUSTRIAL 1 PUBLIC FACILITIES WATER Draft: June 4, 2010 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Praparaa by LaRtla Plaromg & Managarnant 6§tvlbe§ 11i6 May. 2010 ON IMP al • 1111441111 Major Issues MAP 11-2.2 ZONING MAP Showing Conflicts With FLUM 111 MI • ND MP 111.1111111 UP NO SO Eli 1101.1.41.1 12 20 24i 49 243 44 240 234 1 1 1 IM1 SR MR Olt III MD Ai IN Conflict No Conflict A/City Limits H RSFI RMH RSF2 RMF CPO CLT CBD CHV IND PUB PUD-R PUD-M ; I Water Draft: June 4, 2010 1 1 1 • 1111114•1 MI MI 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet ••••••••••%■...• Prepared by: LaRue Planning & Management Services, Inc. May, 2010 11-12 Major Issue 3: The need to re- examine the Taylor Creek area and related Plan Policies in order to allow development that would not degrade its water quality. Issue Description and Analysis Taylor Creek is the only significant water body within the City. It flows southward through the eastern half of the City to Lake Okeechobee. In the City's 1998 EAR, Taylor Creek was identified as a major contributor of phosphorus into Lake Okeechobee due to agricultural activities within its basin. Urban runoff carrying oil, fertilizers and various chemicals had a substantial effect on the Creek's water quality. Adding to the problem was the proliferation of septic tanks in the City, and a high water table, which impaired the ability of the wastewater treatment plant to dispose of effluent through spray irrigation. Development along Taylor Creek itself has been limited. To improve water quality in the area, the City protected the Creek from development of a type and intensity that would disrupt the Creek's natural functions. Land development regulations were strictly enforced and ensured that new development, regardless of its location, did not degrade water quality in the Creek. In 2006, the City adopted Amendments to its Comprehensive Plan to enhance the protection of water quality in Taylor Creek and Lake Okeechobee. The City allows only low- impact residential development along Taylor Creek. Over the years, however, and especially during the housing boom, the City received requests to develop land along the Creek. These could have had a substantial impact on the Creek and were eventually denied because of the City's strict protection measures. Draft: June 4, 2010 Major Issues Water quality in and around the City has improved significantly. The City is re- examining the policies which regulate development in the area to determine what kind of development, could be allowed along Taylor Creek without degrading its water quality. Recent efforts by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) to construct Stormwater Treatment Areas (STAs) have served as a catalyst for considering greater flexibility in allowing development in the area. However, if greater flexibility of development is allowed along the Creek, care must be taken to employ planning tools that will continue protecting Taylor Creek. Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts In Florida, untreated stormwater runoff contributes to the pollutants entering our rivers, lakes and streams. Untreated stormwater run off carries pet wastes, road residues, pesticides, fertilizers and other pollutants into our waterways. Natural processes that would otherwise retain, cleanse and filter stormwater have been reduced by the impervious surfaces (e.g. rooftops and roads) associated with traditional urban development. 11 -13 Florida is still growing and soon the demand for water by an increasing population may surpass the available water supply. Reducing stormwater runoff is one good way to help stretch the water supply. Water conservation, whether in the shower or on the lawn, must become an integral part of each individual's lifestyle and that of the community as a whole. To preserve the City's quality of life, we must consider ways to implement new ideas and different ways of developing. Identification of Comprehensive Plan Elements Impacted and Assessment of Effects on Specific Objectives Only three Elements of the Comprehensive Plan are impacted by this major issue: the Future Land Use, Infrastructure and Conservation Elements. Specific objectives and the impacts on these objectives are discussed below. Future Land Use Element Objective 7: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to protect significant natural and historic resources. Draft: June 4, 2010 Major Issues This objective is impacted because it requires the City to protect natural resources. There are several policies related to this objective which regulate development along Taylor Creek. Objective 9: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to ensure that proposed land use activities in the Taylor Creek area are not inconsistent with the Resource Management Plan for the Lower Kissimmee River and Taylor Creek Drainage Basis, prepared pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. This objective is impacted because it sets regulatory procedures for eliminating inconsistent land uses along Taylor Creek. Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element Objective 6: The City shall continue to include, as part of its land development revision, storm water drainage regulations providing for the protection of natural drainage features and provisions for ensuring that all future development utilizes appropriate stormwater techniques. This objective is impacted because it requires the City to adopt and enforce a stormwater management plan which provides protection measures for the Taylor Creek Drainage Basin area. Conservation Element Objective 2: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to implement programs and policies to conserve the supply and maintain the quality of current and projected potable water sources, as well as protect the quality of surface water. This objective is impacted because it requires the City to conserve and protect water sources and surface water quality. 11 -14 Objective 5: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to manage hazardous wastes, establish criteria for identification of environmentally sensitive areas, and regulate land uses so as to preserve natural resources. This objective is impacted because specific policies within it ensure that no development will be allowed in the City which could degrade the water quality of Taylor Creek. Objective 6: To improve the water quality of Taylor Creek by 2010, the City shall develop a program to set limits as to the amount of nitrogen and phosphorus that can be discharged into the Creek. This objective is impacted because it specifically discusses measures to protect the Creek. Implementing policies allow for transfer of development rights, cooperation with the SFWMD for suggestions of improving water quality, and adopting best management practices (BMPs) to ensure maximum potential treatment of stormwater. Recommendations Low impact development (LID) is an approach to land development that uses various land planning, design and construction practices to simultaneously conserve and protect natural resource systems while reducing infrastructure costs. Designing an individual site to replicate predevelopment hydrology can reduce a development's impact on the natural systems. LID strategies depart from the centralized method of collecting, conveying and discharging stormwater. The LID techniques minimize impervious areas and store and treat stormwater in a more distributed fashion. Some common LID practices include: vegetated swales, buffers and strips; end -of- island bioretention cells; green roofs; and tree or Draft: June 4, 2010 Major Issues natural preservation areas. The City may consider helping developers seek funding assist- ance for applying such practices and bonus densities. In addition, the City may consider fast tracking the permitting process for develop- ments which incorporate LID techniques. It is recommended that the City provide design standards for LID measures which would benefit, not just the Taylor Creek area, but the City as a whole. LID practices may also be useful in addressing development in the City's downtown area as discussed under Major Issue 4, following. A new policy, 10.4, should be added to the Future Land Use Element as follows: Policy By year -end 2013 the City will re are Low Im., ^ment (LID) guidelines for boo .• �+��� residential and non - residential develo ment. These guidelines should include a provision for a moderate density bonus for development alone Taylor Creek that meets the LID standards. act Develo 11 -15 Major Issue 4: The need to establish compatible and consistent urban design standards for the City's Downtown Area. Issue Description and Analysis Downtown Okeechobee, as outlined on Figure - 4.1, is the heart of the City of Okeechobee and its economic vitality is of great importance to its future health. The City has coordinated with Okeechobee Main Street and Okeechobee County and significant progress has been achieved in addressing the Downtown Area over the past ten years. However, these efforts have shown that more improvements are still needed to give the City's Downtown Area a unique look, improve pedestrian activity, and create a more pleasant shopping environment. Urban design standards provide a planning tool useful in achieving a more uniform downtown area and a public realm of attractive and com- fortable places in which residents and visitors will feel inclined to live and visit. These principles will help to define the community character by manipulating blocks and streets, building setbacks, landscape, building height and massing, and architectural articulation. If applied to site planning and architecture, urban design concepts can result in public spaces, including streets that adequately accommodate and enhance both pedestrian and automobile use. Urban design can produce development sympathetic to human scale and increased pedestrian participation. Successful urban design produces diversity, distinctiveness and a sense of place in a community. Draft: June 4, 2010 Mellor Issues As revealed at the Okeechobee Visioning Workshop, "the City is at the crossroads between the inevitable rural lifestyle transitioning to urban, as evidenced by ever - increasing traffic and new developments and efforts to maintain its unique quality of life. The City /County could chart their future by a vision to position themselves as the gateway to Lake Okeechobee and to capitalize on their location and potential as a major eco- tourism destination, or let others take the lead. Okeechobee Main Street is playing a major role in exploring and promoting those physical attributes that are most likely to transform the City as a gateway to Lake Okeechobee through the introduction of appropriate rural and urban design features." The Visioning Session showed that areas of opportunity exist within the City which opens the door for future master planning and corridor planning efforts. The opportunity areas were selected to introduce design feature treatments to generate the momentum necessary to incrementally transform the downtown area to a unique destination, with high design qualities. 11 -16 The rural and urban design measures in the opportunity areas include: • Gateway Treatments (Rural /Urban) o Lighting o Murals o Signage • Median Treatments (Rural /Urban) • Intersection Treatments /Traffic Calming /Roundabouts • Judicial Center • Adaptive Reuse of the Old Jail /Railroad Depot Urban design standards can encourage both private and public projects to recognize, preserve, and enhance the form, scale, and visual character that make downtown unique within the City and the region. These guidelines will be designed to: 1. Assure the long term economic vitality of the Downtown area; 2. Establish a pedestrian district; 3. Provide improved links along NE and SE Park Street between NW /SW 7th Avenue to NE /SE 5th Avenue; 4. Locate and build additional public places; 5. Design and construct streetscape improvements throughout the Downtown Area; 6. Maintain the historic character; 7. Expand the role of the arts and public events Downtown; 8. Encourage residential uses near to and in the Downtown area; 9. Provide better access to the downtown for alternative transportation modes; and 10. Improve parking. Draft: June 4, 2010 Major Issues 11 -17 Major Issues Figure 4.1 COMBINED MAIN STREET LPA AND DTA BOUNDARIES Future Lend Use Category r i ISINOLE - FAMILY MULTI = FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL i PUBLIC FACILITIES Draft: June 4, 2010 D expended DTA Area Original VITA Boundary 400 0 400 800 Feet 11 -18 Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts The development of urban design standards will have a profound impact on the economic, social and environmental growth of the City. From an economic standpoint, upholding design standards provides a more aesthetically pleasing environment and provides a more inviting atmosphere for prospective residents and businesses. Moreover, requiring all developments and substantial redevelopments to adhere to visual and architectural standards will help maintain property values and reduce the number of blighted structures. As stated earlier, Downtown Okeechobee is the heart of the City. Developing urban design guidelines will help the City to balance the need for economic vitality with the need to maintain and enhance Downtown's unique sense of place. The environmentally - oriented regulations such as the LID principles discussed in Major Issue 3 will allow the City to take advantage of its natural resources, both from a marketing standpoint and by maximizing recreational activities for residents and visitors. From a social perspective, the City will benefit from the "pride of ownership" its citizens feel as the result of being part of community that has an identifiable character and personality. This pride of ownership will enhance the strong sense of community that already exists in Okeechobee and may result in increased citizen participation and upkeep of land and structures. Identification of Comprehensive Plan Elements Impacted and Assessment of Effects on Specific Objectives The Future Land Use and Transportation Elements of the Comprehensive Plan are impacted by this major issue. Specific objectives Draft: June 4, 2010 and the impacts on these objectives are discussed below. Future Land Use Element Objective 7: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to protect significant natural and historic resources. This objective is impacted because it requires the City to protect historic resources. Objective 8: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to encourage the redevelopment and renewal of blighted areas. This objective is impacted because it requires the City to encourage redevelopment. Objective 10: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to promote the various and innovative land development techniques. This objective is impacted as it relates to land development regulations which protect the public and preserve natural features. Objective 12: By the year 2002, the Unified Land Development Code shall be revised to specifically encourage redevelopment, infill development, compatibility with adjacent uses, and curtailment of uses inconsistent with the character and land uses of surrounding areas, and shall discourage urban sprawl, as provided in the following policies. This objective is impacted because it requires the Unified Land Development Code to regulate the use, intensity and location of land development, ensure safe and convenient traffic flows, and encourages development consistent with the character of the surrounding area. 11-19 Traffic Circulation Element Objective 6: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to implement a program for providing roadway needs that integrates acceptable design standards. This objective is impacted because it requires the City to enforce regulations within its Land Development Code which protects and enhances roadways. Objective 8: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to coordinate development with the provision of adequate motorized and non - motorized transportation facilities. This objective is impacted because policies within it require the City to enforce regulations within its Land Development Code and provide for sidewalks and bikepaths. Recommendations The following revisions to the Comprehensive Plan are recommended to address this major issue although the specific text incorporated into the subsequent EAR -based amendment may differ. Future Land Use Element Objective: The City of Okeechobee shall improve the visual and aesthetic appearance of the City through the development and implementation of urban design, architectural and landscape guidelines for the Downtown Area. Policy: The City shall develop architectural design review standards for commercial structures located along Draft: June 4, 2010 NE Park Street, SE Park Street and U.S 441. Traffic Circulation Element Objective: The City shall improve the aesthetic qualities and appearance of roadways, and their adjacent land uses. Policy: By 2012, the City shall incorporate into its Unified Land Development Code architectural review and design guidelines for commercial development for properties within the Downtown Area along NE Park Street, SE Park Street and U.S. 441. Other considerations should include shared parking; parcel inter - connectivity; increased landscaping requirements; requirements for mechanical irrigation systems; and standards for Low Impact Development (LID) concepts. Policy: The City shall initiate development of a comprehensive "streetscape" plan for the Downtown Area which should include unifying landscape design for medians, street trees and urban design /LID considerations. Policy: Initial emphasis shall be given to improving the appearance and aesthetics of NE Park Street, SE Park Street, SR 70, and US 441, each of which are gateways to the City. 11 -20 Major Issue 5: The need to emphasize pedestrian connectivity and establish streetscape standards within the City. Issue Description and Analysis The public image created by the visual quality of the City's streets, sidewalks, and landscaping is important. People like attractive and well cared for environments within which to shop and work. The care and maintenance of the City's walkable areas adds value to the City and improves public safety. The City is promoting urban design guidelines within its Downtown Area to assure the long term economic vitality of the Downtown Area, establish a pedestrian district, and to design and construct streetscape improvements throughout the Downtown area. However, pedestrian connectivity and streetscape standards should be implemented throughout the City. A vital element for achieving sustainability is reducing the City's dependence on vehicular travel. The term "pedestrian connectivity" is introduced as a measure of both the directness of route and the route distance for the pedestrian for each home - destination trip. Pedestrian - friendly streets should be designed to be more accommodating to pedestrian traffic than are conventionally designed streets. Pedestrian - friendly streets are an increasingly popular design strategy for creating walkable neighborhoods. This trend is associated with smart growth. Reduced energy consumption, and therefore greater sustainability, may be achieved by having neighborhoods retrofitted in such a way as to allow people to walk for some of their needs. The City is working to establish a positive balance between vehicular and pedestrian use of the streets. Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts Sidewalks and walkability have long been synonymous with the small town, low- density residential feel that Okeechobee embraces. Efforts to calm traffic in walkable environments through street design have demonstrated a reduction in accident severity, accident frequency, and environmental impact. Well designed sidewalks provide the necessary comfort, safety, and sense of welcome to support walking. Draft: June 4, 2010 11-21 Identification of Comprehensive Plan Elements Impacted and Assessment of Effects on Specific Objectives The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan is impacted by this major issue. Specific objectives and the impacts on these objectives are discussed below. Traffic Circulation Element Objective 6: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to implement a program for providing roadway needs that integrates acceptable design standards. This objective is impacted because it requires the City to enforce regulations within its Land Development Code which protects and enhances roadways. Objective 8: The City of Okeechobee shall continue to coordinate development with the provision of adequate motorized and non - motorized transportation facilities. This objective is impacted because policies within it require the City to enforce regulations within its Land Development Code and provide for sidewalks and bikepaths. Recommendations The following revisions to the Comprehensive Plan are recommended to address this major issue although the specific text incorporated into the subsequent EAR -based amendment may differ. Traffic Circulation Element Policy 8.6: By year end 2012, the City of Okeechobee shall adopt a Streetscape and Landscaping Plan providing design guidelines that Draft: June 4, 2010 address pedestrian and bicycle accessibility, urban design and accepted traffic calming techniques. Policy 8.7: The City shall include in its Land Development Code, provisions to require construction of sidewalks along street frontages, as set forth in its Streetscape and Landscaping Plan, for all new construction of residential or nonresidential construction or conversion from residential to non residential use; except that new construction of an individual single- family or an individual duplex structure shall be exempt from this requirement. 11 -22 Pursuant to Florida Statutes, §163.3191(2)(j), this Section of the Report identifies any corrective measures, including whether Plan Amendments are anticipated to the major issues identified and analyzed in this Report. The following recommendations are categorized by: 1) issues of major concern; 2) changes due to state law; and 3) other changes. 1. Recommended Comprehensive Plan Amendments Based on Issues of Major Concern Major Issue 1: The need to provide for a transition from residential use to commercial use in certain areas of the City. Future Land Use Element The new Transitional Commercial Future Land Use category would also include provision for mixed use in the form of commercial use and residential use on the same parcel. The following revisions are recommended to the Future Land Use Element to implement the City's desire to provide for additional flexibility and increased commercial development opportunities in close proximity to US 441 and SR 70, the major east - west and north -south arterials serving the City and surrounding unincorporated areas. Specific text incorporated into the EAR -based amendment, however, may differ from that presented herein. Add a new Policy 2.1 (g) to the Future Land Use Element creating a Transitional Commercial Future Land Use Category (FLUC) to read as follows: Policy 2.1 (g) Transitional Commercial Overlay. This category is intended to provide additional and varied commercial opportunities in locations in close proximity to the City's major arterials and adjacent to residential areas. Allowable uses include a wide variety of residential, commercial, industrial and public and semi - public uses as allowed within the RSF1, RMF, CPO, CLT, CHV CBD, IND and PUB zoning districts. However, any rezoning of lands within this Future Land Use Category subsequent to the adoption of this FLUC shall be only to the RMF, CLT or CPO zoning districts, thereby providing a transition from more intense development along the major arterials to lesser intensity closer to residential areas. Mixed residential and commercial uses may be allowed on the same parcel. Major Issue 2: The need to eliminate inconsistencies between the Official Zoning Map and the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). There are no specific language changes, but identified conflicts will be eliminated during the EAR - based Amendments. Major Issue 3: The need to re- examine the Taylor Creek area and related Plan Policies in order to allow development that would not degrade its water quality. Future Land Use Element A new policy, 10.4, should be added to the Future Land Use Element as follows: Policy 10.4: By year -end 2013, the City will prepare Low Impact Development (LID) guidelines for both residential and non- residential development. These guidelines should include a provision for a moderate density bonus for development along Taylor Creek that meets the LID standards. Draft: June 7, 2010 111-1 Major Issue 4: The need to establish compatible and consistent urban design standards for the City's Downtown Area. Future Land Use Element Objective: The City of Okeechobee shall improve the visual and aesthetic appearance of the City through the development and implementation of urban design, architectural and landscape guidelines. Policy: The City shall develop architectural design review standards for commercial structures located along NE Park Street, SE Park Street and U.S 441. Traffic Circulation Element Objective: The City shall improve the aesthetic qualities and appearance of roadways, and their adjacent land uses. Policy: By 2012, the City shall incorporate into its Unified Land Development Code architectural review and design guidelines for commercial development for properties within the Downtown Area along NE Park Street, SE Park Street and U.S. 441. Other considerations should include shared parking; parcel inter - connectivity; increased landscaping requirements; requirements for mechanical irrigation systems; and standards for Low Impact Development (LID) concepts. Policy: The City shall initiate development of a comprehensive "streetscape" plan for the Downtown Area which should include unifying landscape design for medians, street trees and urban design /LID considerations. Policy: Initial emphasis shall be given to improving the appearance and aesthetics of NE Park Street, SE Park Street, SR 70, and US 441, each of which are gateways to the City. Major Issue 5: The need to emphasize pedestrian connectivity and establish streetscape standards within the City. Traffic Circulation Element Policy 8.6: By December 2012, the City of Okeechobee shall adopt a Streetscape and Landscaping Plan providing design guidelines that address pedestrian and bicycle se, urban design and accepted traffic calming techniques. Policy 8.7: The City shall include in its Land Development Code, provisions to require construction of sidewalks along street frontages, as set forth in its Streetscape and Landscaping Plan, for all new construction of residential or nonresidential construction or conversion from residential to non residential use; except that new construction of an individual single - family or an individual duplex structure shall be exempt from this requirement. Draft: June 7, 2010 111-2 2. Recommended Comprehensive Plan Amendments Based on Changes to State Law As per House Bill 697 Promotion of Energy Efficient Land Use Patterns and the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas, a new objective and policies for the Future Land Use Element is recommended to support this Bill. Future Land Use Element Objective : The City will conserve and properly manage energy consumption to the best of the City's abilities and encourage green design practices in new development and redevelopment to foster sustainable, energy efficient land use patterns. Policy : The City will support alternative modes of travel as called for in the Traffic Circulation Element to minimize fuel consumption, promote energy- efficient land use patterns, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Policy : The City will support energy conservation measures and practices in the administration, design, and construction of City buildings and facilities to reduce energy consumption and tax dollars allocated for power and fuel. Policy : The City will promote education of City employees in energy conservation measures and practices and promote certification for energy conservation practices. Policy : The City will support, as applicable, incentives and programs by state and federal governments to promote energy efficiency and conservation and the use of solar and other clean alternative energy sources. Draft: June 7, 2010 Policy : The City will support, as applicable, intergovernmental programs with adjacent jurisdictions to promote energy conservation and education. Policy : The City will support incentives and programs by the state and federal governments to promote green building programs and best management practices. Policy : The City will consider the provision of incentives to support developers interested in implementing green roof design and the construction of green roofs on appropriate public buildings as feasible. Traffic Circulation Element Policy : The Okeechobee City Council will continue to coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation, Okeechobee County, and the Okeechobee County School Board regarding roadway and multi - purpose walkway /bike paths needs. Policy : The City of Okeechobee is rural in nature and dense multi -modal projects are not anticipated in the near future. However, the City will encourage multi -modal projects that combine a number of transit options including walkways, bikeways, equestrian trails, and other means of transportation as practicable. 111-3 Housing Element Objective: In order to reduce maintenance and to promote affordability, the City will encourage green certified developments such as LEED, Audubon and State green certified projects. Policy: By the end of 2013, the City will adopt Land Development Code/ Regulations that encourage energy efficient development designs. Conservation Element Objective : The City will promote incentives that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support energy conservation initiatives. Policy The City will encourage green certified developments such as LEED, Audubon and State green certified projects. Policy By the end of 2013, the City will adopt Land Development Regulations that encourage energy efficient development designs that consider methods such as: a. Infill development b. Compact and clustered development close to transit and services c. Bicycle /pedestrian system connecting all land uses d. Provision of bicycle racks or storage facilities e. Cooperation in locating bus stops, shelters and other passenger transit systems Efficient stormwater design Preservation of environmentally sensitive lands h. Use of energy- efficient window design i. Use of operable windows and ceiling fans f. g• Recommendations Installation of energy efficient appliances and equipment k. Low —flow plumbing fixtures I. Energy- efficient street lighting, directed downward towards the street m. Selection of native plants, trees and other vegetation and design features that reduce watering requirements and reduce the need for fertilizers n. Encourage planting shade trees o. Provision for structural shading whenever practical when natural shading cannot be used effectively Orientation of structures, as possible, to reduce solar heat gain by walls and to utilize the natural cooling effects of the wind p. 111-4 Draft: June 7, 2010 3. Other Changes The horizon year of the current Comprehensive Plan will be extended to 2020 for the EAR -based Amendments. During the last round of Plan Amendments, only objectives and policies related to school concurrency and Taylor Creek were revised. There remain a number of objectives and policies in the current plan that need to be revised to reflect their current status of progress. These target dates will be specifically modified as appropriate during the EAR -based Amendments. Draft: June 7, 2010 111 -5 Appendix A: Changes to Chapter 163, F.S Appendices Changes to Chapter 163, F.S. 1986-2008 Chapter 163, F.S. Citations N /A* Addressed (where /how) Amendment Needed By Element 1992: [Ch. 92 -129, Laws of Florida, and Ch. 92 -279, S. 77, Laws of Florida] 13 Clarified that the procedures for approval of the original plans also applied to plan amendments. [Now: 163.3189(2)(a)] Procedural 14 Provided that the local planning agency should prepare plan amendments. 163.3174 163.3164(13)[Now: (14)] 163.3221(10)[Now: (11)] Procedural 15 Added "spoil disposal sites for maintenance dredging located in the intracoastal waterways, except for spoil disposal sites owned or used by ports" to the definition of "public facilities." 163.3164(24) No action needed. 16 Added requirement that independent special districts submit a public facilities report to the appropriate local government. 163.3177(6)(h)2. [Now: 163.3177(6)(h)3.] Procedural 17 Extended "shield" against challenges to the portion of Rule 9J -5 that was adopted before October 1, 1986, from July 1 1987 to April 1, 1993. 163.3177(10)(k) Procedural 18 (11)(a): Recognized the need for innovative planning and development strategies to address the anticipated continued urbanization of the coast and other environmentally sensitive areas. 163.3177 The EAR will recommend innovative planning and development strategies where needed. (11)(b): Stated that plans should allow land use efficiencies within existing urban areas, and should also allow for the conversion of rural lands to other uses. Future Land Use Element Objective 2 (11)(c): Provided that plans and land development regulations (LDRs) should maximize the use of existing facilities and services through redevelopment, urban infill, and other strategies for urban revitalization. Future Land Use Element Objective 1 19 Amended definition of "affected person" to clarify that the affected person's comments, recommendations, or objections have to be submitted to the local government after the 163.3184(1)(a) Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -1 Draft: June 3, 2010 A -2 transmittal hearing for the plan amendment and before the adoption of the amendment. 20 Required the local government to include such materials as DCA specifies by rule with each plan amendment transmittal. 163.3184(3)(b) Procedural Copies of the EAR and related amendments will be transmitted to all relevant parties as specified by this statute. 21 Gave the local government 120 days, rather than 60 days, after receipt of the objections, recommendations, and comments to adopt or adopt with changes the plan or amendment; and gives the local government 10 days, rather than 5 days, after adoption to transmit the adopted plan or amendment to DCA. Also requires that a copy of the adopted plan or amendment be transmitted to the regional planning council. 163.3184(7)(a) [Now: 163.3184(7)(c)1) Procedural The City will adopt or adopt with changes, the Comprehensive Plan within 120 days of receipt of the Objections, Recommendations, and Comments, and will transmit the adopted plan or amendments to DCA and the regional planning council in the time required. 22 Provided that the Secretary of DCA, as well as a "senior administrator other than the Secretary" can issue a notice of intent (NOI). 163.3184(8)(b) Procedural 23 Required that the Division of Administrative Hearings hearing must be held "in the county of and convenient to" the affected local jurisdiction. 163.3184(9)(b) & (10)(a) Procedural Any required hearings will be conducted in Okeechobee County and convenient to the City. 24 Provided that new issues cannot be raised concerning plan compliance more than 21 days after publication of the NOl. 163.3184(10)(a) Procedural 25 Added a procedure for Compliance Agreements. 163.3184(16) Procedural In the event the City enters into a compliance agreement, the applicable procedures will be followed. 26 Changed the requirements for small scale amendments: 163.3187(1)(c) Increased the geographic size from 5 to 10 acres of residential land use at a density of 10, rather than 5, units per acre; and for other land use, an Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -2 Appen an Draft: June 3, 2010 A-3 increase from 3 to 10 acres. Also increased the annual total from 30 to 60 acres. Allowed local governments to use a newspaper ad of less than a quarter page in size. Procedural Authorized DCA to adopt rules establishing an alternative process for public notice for small scale amendments. Procedural Provided that small scale amendments require only an adoption hearing. Procedural 27 Provided that a plan amendment required by a compliance agreement may be approved without regard to the twice -a -year limitation on plan amendments. 163.3187(1)(e) [Now: 163.3187(1)(d)] Procedural 28 Stated that nothing in the statute prevented a local government from requiring a person requesting an amendment to pay the cost of publication of notice. 163.3187(5) Procedural 29 Created an alternative process for amendment of adopted comprehensive plans 163.3189 Procedural 30 Provided that the first EAR report is due 6 years after the adoption of the comp plan, and subsequent EAR reports are due every 5 years thereafter. 163.3191(5) [Now: 163.3191(13)] Procedural 31 Amended the Development Agreement Act by providing: Procedural Development agreements are not effective unless the comp plan or plan amendments related to the agreement are found in compliance. 163.3235 Development agreements are not effective until properly recorded and until 30 days after received by DCA. 163.3239 1993: [Ch. 93 -206, Laws of Florida (aka the ELMS bill) and Ch. 93 -285, S. 12, Laws of Florida] 32 Amended the intent section to include that constitutionally protected property rights must be respected. 163.3161(9) Procedural 33 Added definitions for "coastal area ", "downtown revitalization ", "Urban redevelopment ", "urban 163.3164 Procedural These definitions will be considered in the preparation Draft: June 3, 2010 A-3 r Draft: June 3, 2010 A-4 infill ", "projects that promote public transportation ", and "existing urban service area." of the EAR. 34 Amended the scope of the act to provide for the articulation of state, regional, and local visions of the future physical appearance and qualities of a community. 163.3167(11) Procedural The EAR will include the state, regional, and local visions of the future physical appearance of the City. 35 Amended the requirements for the housing element by: 163.3177(6)(f)1. Having the element apply to the jurisdiction, rather than the area. The Housing Element applies to the entire City. Including very-low income housing in the types of housing to be considered. Housing Policy 1.9 Provided guidance that the creation or preservation of affordable housing should minimize the need for additional local services and avoid the concentration of affordable housing units only in specific areas. Housing Element Data and Analysis Required DCA to prepare an affordable housing needs assessment for all local jurisdictions, which will be used by each local government in preparing the EAR report and amendments, unless DCA allows the local government to prepare its own needs assessment. (f)2. Procedural 36. Amended the intergovernmental coordination element (ICE) by: 163.3177(6)(h)1. and 2. Requiring each ICE to include: A process to determine if development proposals will have significant impacts on state or regional facilities. [Note: Requirement deleted in 1996] No action needed. A process for mitigating extra jurisdictional impacts in the jurisdiction in which they occur. ICE Policy 2.4 A dispute resolution process. ICE Policy 2.1 A process for modification of DRI development orders without loss of recognized development rights No action needed. Procedures to identify and implement joint ICE Policy 7.5 Draft: June 3, 2010 A-4 Draft: June 3, 2010 A -5 planning areas Recognition of campus master plans. There are no campuses within the City's boundaries. ICE Policy 5.8 Requiring each county, all municipalities within that county, the school board, and other service providers to enter into formal agreements, and include in their plans, joint processes for collaborative planning and decision- making. ICE Objectives 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 Requiring DCA to: Adopt rules to establish minimum criteria for ICE. [Now: 163.3177(9)(h) Procedural Prepare a model ICE. 163.3177(9)(h) Procedural Establish a schedule for phased completion and transmittal of ICE plan amendments. 163.3177(6)(h)5] Procedural 37 Providing that amendments to implement the ICE must be adopted no later than December 31, 1997 [Now: 1999]. Now: 163.3177(6)(h)5. Procedural 38 Requiring a transportation element for urbanized areas. 163.3177(6)(h) [Now: 163.3177(6)(j)] The City is not an urbanized area. The City's Comprehensive Plan contains a Traffic Circulation Element. 39 Adding an optional hazard mitigation /post disaster redevelopment element for local governments that are not required to have a coastal management element. 163.3177(7)(1) Voluntary. No action required. 40 Requiring DCA to consider land use compatibility issues near airports. 163.3177(10)(1) No action needed. 41 Amended the coastal management element by: 163.3178 Defining "high hazard coastal areas" as category I evacuation zones, and stated that mitigation and redevelopment policies are at the discretion of the local government. (2)(h) No action needed. Affirming the state's commitment to deepwater ports, and required the Section 186.509 dispute (5) No action needed. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -5 Draft: June 3, 2010 A -6 resolution process to reconcile inconsistencies between port master plans and local comp plans. Encouraging local governments to adopt countywide marina siting plans. (6) No action needed. Requiring coastal local governments to identify spoil disposal sites in the future land use and port elements. (7) No action needed. Requiring each county to establish a process for identifying and prioritizing coastal properties for state acquisition. (8) No action needed. 42 Created a new section for concurrency which: 163.3180 [New] Provides concurrency on a statewide basis only for roads, sewers, solid waste, drainage, potable water, parks and recreation, and mass transit; a local government can extend concurrency to public schools if it first conducts a study to determine how the requirement would be met. Traffic Circulation Element Policy 2.1 Sanitary Sewer, Solid, Etc Element Policy 1.1 Recreation and Open Space Element Policy 7.1 Concurrency standards will be updated and clarified. Set timing standards for concurrency of: Procedural The Comprehensive Plan will be amended to provide timing standards. For sewer, solid waste, drainage and potable water facilities, in place no later than the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. For parks and recreation facilities, no later than 1 year after issuance of certificate of occupancy. For transportation facilities, in place or under actual construction no later than 3 years after issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Allowing exemptions from transportation concurrency for urban infill, urban redevelopment and downtown revitalization. Procedural Allowing a de minimis transportation impact of not more than 0.1% of the maximum volume of the adopted level of service as an exemption Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -6 Appendices Draft: June 3, 2010 A -7 from concurrency. Authorizing the designation of transportation management areas. Procedural Allowing urban redevelopment to create 110% of the actual transportation impact caused by existing development before complying with concurrency. Procedural Authorizing local governments to adopt long- range transportation concurrency management systems with planning periods of up to 10 years where significant backlogs exist. The EAR will analyze whether significant backlogs exist and if so, recommend a long -range transportation concurrency system. Requiring local governments to adopt the level- of- service standard established by the Department of Transportation for facilities on the Florida Intrastate Highway System. The City has adopted a LOS "C" for US 441 consistent with FDOT LOSS. Allows development that does not meet concurrency if the local government has failed to implement the Capital Improvements Element, and the developer makes a binding commitment to pay the fair share of the cost of the needed facility. Procedural 43 Provided a procedure to ensure public participation in the approval of a publicly financed capitol improvement. 163.3181(3) Procedural 44 Amended the procedure for the adoption of plans and plan amendments as follows: 163.3184 Proposed plans or amendments, and materials, must be transmitted to the regional planning councils, the water management districts, the Department of Environmental Protection, and the Department of Transportation as specified in DCA's rules. Procedural DCA reviews amendments only upon the request of the regional planning council, an affected person, or the local government, or those, which it wishes to review. Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -7 A Draft: June 3, 2010 A -8 The regional planning council's review of plan amendments is limited to effects on regional facilities or resources identified in the strategic regional policy plan and extra jurisdictional impacts. Procedural DCA may not require a local government to duplicate or exceed a permitting program of a state, federal, or regional agency. Procedural 45 Prohibited local governments from amending their comp plans after the date established for submittal of the EAR report unless the report has been submitted. 163.3187(5) [Now: 163.3187(6)(a)] Procedural 46 Changed the Alternative Process for the amendment of adopted comp plans to the Exclusive Process. 163.3189(1) Procedural 47 Provided that plan amendments do not become effective until DCA or the Administration Commission issues a final order determining that the amendment is in compliance. 163.3189(2)(a) Procedural 48 Provides that the sanctions assessed by the Administration Commission do not occur unless the local government elects to make the amendment effective despite the determination of noncompliance. 163.3189(2)(b) Procedural 49 Authorizing the local government to demand formal or informal mediation, or expeditious resolution of the amendment proceeding. 163.3189(3)(a) Procedural 50 Amended the Evaluation and Appraisal Report section to require additional statements of. 163.3191 [Note: 163.3191 was amended and reworded in 1998. Check statute for current wording.] The effect of change to the State Comprehensive Plan, ch. 163, part II, 9j -5 and the strategic regional policy pan This document reflects the City's analysis of changes in state law. The identification of any actions that need to be The EAR identifies any Draft: June 3, 2010 A -8 Appendices Draft: June 3, 2010 A -9 taken to address the planning issues identified in the report. actions necessary to address any planning issues identified. Proposed or anticipated changes. This EAR includes proposed /anticipated amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. A description of the public transportation process. This EAR describes the public participation process. Encourage local governments to use the EAR to develop a local vision. A vision statement will be considered. Allows DCA to grant 6 months extensions for the adoption of the plan amendments required by the EAR, Procedural Requires plan amendments to be consistent with the report Any plan amendments will be consistent with this EAR. Allows municipalities of less than 2,500 to submit the EAR no later than 12 years after initial plan, and every 10 years thereafter Procedural Authorized DCA to review EAR for sufficiency, but not for compliance. DCA authorized to delegate review to the regional planning council. Procedural Administration Commission is authorized to impose sanctions for failure to timely implement the EAR. Procedural DCA authorized to enter into interlocal agreement with municipalities of less than 5,000 and counties of less than 50,000 to focus planning efforts on selected issues when updating the plans. Procedural 1994 [Ch. 94 -273, S. 4, Laws of Florida] 51 A plan amendment for the location of a state correctional facility can be made at any time, and does not count toward the twice -a -year limitation. 163.3187(1)(f) [Now: 163.3187(1)(e)] No action needed. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -9 1995 [Ch. 95 -181, ss. 4 -5; Ch. 95 -257, ss. 2 -3; Ch. 95 -310, ss. 7 -12; Ch. 95 -322, ss. 1 -7; Ch. 95 -341, ss. 9, 10, and 12, Laws of Florida] 52 Required opportunities for mediation or alternative dispute resolution where a property owner's request for a comprehensive plan amendment is denied by a local government [Subsection • 163.3184(10)(c) Procedural 163.3181(4)] and prior to a hearing where a plan or plan amendment was determined by the DCA to be not in compliance. 53 Added a definition for "transportation corridor management" [Subsection 163.3164(30)] and allowed the designation of transportation corridors in the required traffic circulation and transportation elements and the adoption of transportation corridor management ordinances. 163.3177(6)(j)9. [New] No action needed. The Traffic Circulation Element does not designate transportation corridors. 54 Amended the definition of "public notice" and 163.3164(18), 163.3171(3), Procedural certain public notice and public hearing 163.3174(1) and (4), and requirements to conform to the public notice and 163.3181(3)(a), hearing requirements for counties and 163.3184(15)(a) -(c), municipalities in Sections 125.66 and 166.041, respectively. 163.3187(1)(c) 55 Prohibited any initiative or referendum process concerning any development order or comprehensive plan or map amendment that affects five or fewer parcels of land. 163.3167(12) Procedural 56 Reduced to 30 [Note: changed to 20] days the time for DCA to review comp plan amendments resulting from a compliance agreement. 163.3184(8)(a) Procedural 57 Amended the requirements for the advertisement of DCA's notice of intent. 163.3184(8)(b) Procedural 58 Required the administrative law judge to realign the parties in a Division of Administrative Hearings 163.3184(16)(f) Procedural (DOAH) proceeding where a local government adopts a plan amendment pursuant to a compliance agreement. 59 Added clarifying language relative to those small 163.3187(1)(c) and (3)(a)- Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -10 Appendices Draft: June 3, 2010 A -11 scale plan amendments that are exempt from the twice - per -year limitation and prohibited DCA review of those small scale amendments that meet the statutory criteria in Paragraph 163.3187(1)(c). (c) 60 Required DCA to consider an increase in the annual total acreage threshold for small scale amendments. (later repealed by s. 16, Ch. 2000- 163.3177(7) Procedural 158, Laws of Florida). 61 Required local planning agencies to provide opportunities for involvement by district school boards and community college boards. 163.3174(1) The ICE will need to be revised to be consistent with this statute. 62 Required that the future land use element clearly identify those and use categories where public schools are allowed. 163.3177(6)(a) Future Land Use Element Policy 6.5 63 Established certain criteria for local governments 163.3180(1)(b) No action Procedural wanting to extend concurrency to public schools. [Now: 163.3180(13)1 needed. (later amended by s. 5, Ch. 98 -176, Laws of Florida). 1996: [Ch. 96 -205, s. 1; Ch. 96 -320, ss. 10 -11; 96 -416, ss. 1 -6 15, Laws of Florida} 64 Substantially amended the criteria for small scale amendments that are exempt from the twice -per- year limitation. 163.3187(1)(c) Procedural 65 Revised the objectives in the coastal management element to include the maintenance of ports. 163.3177(6)(g)9. No action needed. 66 Provide that certain port related expansion projects are not DRIB under certain conditions. 163.3178(2), (3), and (5) No action needed. 67 Allowed a county to designate areas on the future and use plan for possible future municipal incorporation. 163.3177(6)(a) No action needed. 68 Required the ICE to include consideration of the plans of school boards and other units of local government providing services but not having regulatory authority over the use of land. 163.3177(6)(h) ICE Objectives 1 and 2 69 Revised the processes and procedures to be included in the ICE. 163.3177(6)(h) The EAR will ensure that all processes and procedures are included. 70 Required that within 1 year after adopting their {CE 163.3177(6)(h)2. Interlocal Agreement Draft: June 3, 2010 A -11 Draft: June 3, 2010 A -12 each county and all municipalities and school boards therein establish by interlocal agreement the joint processes consistent with their ICE. has been signed. 71 Required local governments who utilize school concurrency to satisfy intergovernmental coordination requirements of ss. 163.3177(6)(h)1. 163.3180(1)(b)2. [Now: 163.3180(13)(g)] No action needed. 72 Permitted a county to adopt a municipal overlay amendment to address future possible municipal incorporation of a specific geographic area. 163.3217 No action needed. 73 Authorized DCA to conduct a sustainable communities demonstration project. 163.3244 [Now: Repealed.] Procedural 1997: [Ch. 97 -253, ss. 1 -4, Laws of Florida] 74 Amended the definition of de minimis impact as it pertains to concurrency requirements. 163.3180(6) Procedural 75 Established that no plan or plan amendment in an area of critical state concern is effective until found in compliance by a final order. 163.3184(14) Procedural 76 Amended the criteria for the annual effect of Duval County (Jacksonville) small scale amendments to a maximum of 120 acres. 163.3187(1)(c)1.a.III No action needed 77 Prohibited amendments in areas of critical state concern from becoming effective if not in compliance. 163.3189(2)(b) Procedural 1998: [Ch. 98 -75, s. 14; Ch. 146, ss. 2 -5; Ch. 98 -176, ss. 2 -6 and 12 -15; Ch. 98 -258, ss. 4 -5, Laws of Florida] 78 Exempted brownfield area amendments from the twice -a -year limitation. 163.3187(1)(g) Procedural 79 Required that the capital improvements element set forth standards for the management of debt. 163.3177(3)(a)4. CIE Policy 4.2 80 Required inclusion of at least two planning periods — at least 5 years and at least 10 years. 163.3177(5)(a) Procedural 81 Allowed multiple individual plan amendments to be considered together as one amendment cycle. 163.3184(3)(d) Procedural 82 Defined "optional sector plan" and created Section 163.3245 allowing local governments to address DRI issues within certain identified geographic areas. 163.3164(31) and 163.3245 Procedural 83 Established the requirements for a public school 163.3177(12) The Public Schools Draft: June 3, 2010 A -12 Appendices Draft: June 3, 2010 A -13 facilities element. Facilities Element has been adopted. 84 Established the minimum requirements for imposing school concurrency. 163.3180(12) [Now: Section (13)] Public School Facilities Element 85 Required DCA adopt minimum criteria for the compliance determination of a public school facilities element imposing school concurrency. 163.3180(13) [Now: Sectionl4)] Public School Facilities Element 86 Required that evaluation and appraisal reports address coordination of the comp plan with existing public schools and the school district's 5- year work program. 163.3191(2)(i) [Now: 163.3191(2)(k)] This EAR addresses this issue. 87 Amended the definition of "in compliance" to include consistency with Sections 163.3180 and 163.3245. 163.3184(1)(b) Procedural 88 Required DCA to maintain a file with all documents received or generated by DCA relating to plan amendments and identify; limited DCA's review of proposed plan amendments to written comments, and required DCA to identify and list all written communications received within 30 days after transmittal of a proposed plan amendment. 163.3184(2), (4), and (6) Procedural 89 Allowed a local government to amend its plan for a period of up to one year after the initial determination of sufficiency of an adopted EAR even if the EAR is insufficient. 163.3187(6)(b) Procedural 90 Substantially reworded Section 163.3191, F.S., related to evaluation and appraisal reports. 163.3191 Procedural 91 Changed the population requirements for municipalities and counties which are required to submit otherwise optional elements. 163.3177(6)(i) No action needed, the population does not meet these thresholds. 1999: [Ch. 99 -251, ss. 65 -6, and 90; Ch. 99 -378, ss. 1, 3 -5, and 8 -9, Laws of Florida] 92 Required that ports and local governments in the coastal area, which has spoil disposal responsibilities, identify dredge disposal sites in the 163.3178(7) No action needed. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -13 Amen COS Draft: June 3, 2010 A -14 comp plan. 93 Exempted from the twice - per -year limitation certain port related amendments for port transportation facilities and projects eligible for funding by the Florida Seaport Transportation and 163.3187(1)(h) No action needed. Economic Development Council. 94 Required rural counties to base their future land use plans and the amount of land designated industrial on data regarding the need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development and the need to strengthen and diversity local economies. 163.3177(6)(a) No action needed. 95 Added the Growth Policy Act to Ch. 163, Part II to 163.2511,163.25,14,163.2 Procedural promote urban infill and redevelopment. 517,163.2520,163.2523, and 163.2526 [New] 96 Required that all comp plans comply with the school siting requirements by October 1, 1999. 163.3177(6)(a) Future Land Use Element Objective 6 97 Made transportation facilities subject to concurrency. 163.3180(1)(a) Traffic Circulation Element policy 7.1 98 Required use of professionally accepted techniques for measuring level of service for cars, trucks, transit, bikes and pedestrians. 163.3180(1)(b) The Traffic Circulation Element will be amended to reflect this standard. 99 Excludes public transit facilities from concurrency requirements. 163.3180(4)(b) Procedural 100 Allowed multiuse DRIs to satisfy the transportation concurrency requirements when authorized by a local comprehensive plan under limited circumstances. 163.3180(12) No designated districts. Procedural 101 Allowed multimodal transportation districts in areas where priorities for the pedestrian environment are assigned by the plan. 163.3180(15) No designated districts. Procedural 102 Exempted amendments for urban infill and 163.31879(1)(h) and (i) Procedural redevelopment areas, public school concurrency from the twice - per -year limitation. [Now: (i) and (j)] 103 Defined brownfield designation and added the assurance that a developer may proceed with development upon receipt of a brownfield 163.3220(2) Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -14 Appendices Draft: June 3, 2010 A -15 designation. [Also, see Section 163.3221(1) for "brownfield" definition.] 2000: [Ch. 2000 -158, ss. 15 -17, Ch. 2000 -284, s. 1, Ch. 2000 -317, s. 18, Laws of Florida] 104 Repealed Section 163.3184(11)(c), F.S., that required funds from sanction for non - compliant plans go into the Growth Management Trust Fund. 163.3184(11)(c) [Now: Repealed] Procedural 105 Repealed Section 163.3187(7), F.S. that required consideration of an increase in the annual total acreage threshold for small scale plan amendments and a report by DCA. 163.3187(7) [Now: Repealed] Procedural 106 Repealed Sections 163.3191(13) and (15), F.S. 163.3191(13) and (15) [Now: Repealed] Procedural 107 Allowed small scale amendments in areas of critical state concern to be exempt from the twice -per- year limitation only if they are for affordable housing. 163.3187(1)(c)1.e Procedural 108 Added exemption of sales from local option surtax imposed under Section 212.054, F.S., as examples of incentives for new development within urban infill and redevelopment areas. 163.2517(3)(j)2. Procedural 2001: [Ch. 2001 -279, s. 64, Laws of Florida] 109 Created the rural land stewardship area program. 163.3177(11)(d) Procedural Okeechobee may qualify for this program. 2002: [Ch. 2002 -296, ss. 1 - 11, Laws of Florida] 110 Required that all agencies that review comprehensive plan amendments and rezoning include a nonvoting representative of the district school board. 163.3174 CIE Objective 5 111 Required coordination of local comprehensive plan with the regional water supply plan. 163.3177(4)(a) Conservation Obj. 2 112 Plan amendments for school - siting maps are exempt from s. 163.3187(1)'s limitation on frequency. 163.3177(6)(a) Procedural 113 Required that by adoption of the EAR, the sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water and natural groundwater aquifer recharge element consider the regional water supply plan and 163.3177(6)(c) The Plan will need to be amended. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -15 A/ teS Draft: June 3, 2010 A -16 include a 10 -year work plan to build the identified water supply facilities. 114 Required consideration of the regional water supply plan in the preparation of the conservation dement. 163.3177(6)(d) The Plan will need to be amended. 115 Required that the intergovernmental coordination element (ICE) include relationships, principles and guidelines to be used in coordinating comp plan with regional water supply plans. 163.3177(6)(h) The Plan will need to be amended. 116 Required the local governments adopting a public educational facilities element execute an inter- local agreement with the district school board, the county, and non - exempting municipalities. 163.3177(6)(h)4. Public School Facilities Element 117 Required that counties larger than 100,000 population and their municipalities submit an inter- local service delivery agreements (existing and proposed, deficits or duplication in the provisions of service) report to DCA by January 1, 2004. Each local government is required to update its ICE based on the findings of the report. DCA will meet with affected parties to discuss and id strategies to remedy any deficiencies or duplications. 163.3177(6)(h)6., 7., & 8. Not applicable. 118 Required local governments and special districts to provide recommendations for statutory changes for annexation to the Legislature by February 1, 2003. NOTE: this requirement repealed by Ch. 2005 -290, s. 2, LOF. 163.3177(6)(h)9. [Now repealed] Procedural 119 Added a new Section 163.31776 that allows a county, to adopt an optional public educational facilities element in cooperation with the applicable school board. 163.31776 [New] Procedural 120 Added a new Section 163.31777 that requires local governments and school boards to enter into an inter -local agreement that addresses school siting, enrollment forecasting, school capacity, infrastructure and safety needs of schools, schools as emergency shelters, and sharing of facilities. 163.31777 [New] The City has adopted a Public School Facilities Element. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -16 Appetulices 121 Added a provision that the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities may be waived by plan amendment for urban infill and redevelopment areas. 163.3180(4)(c) No action needed. 122 Expanded the definition of "affected persons" to include property owners who own land abutting a change to a future land use map. 163.3184(1)(a) Procedural 123 Expanded the definition of "in compliance" to include consistency with Section 163.31776 (public educational facilities element). 163.3184(1)(b) Procedural 124 Streamlined the timing of comprehensive plan amendment review. 163.3184(3), (4), (6), (7), and (8) - Procedural 125 Required that local governments provide a sign -in form at the transmittal hearing and at the adoption hearing for persons to provide their names and addresses. 163.3184(15)(c) Procedural 126 Exempted amendments related to providing transportation improvements to enhance life safety on "controlled access major arterial highways" from the limitation on the frequency of plan amendments contained in s.163.3187(1). 163.3187(1)(k) Procedural 127 Required Evaluation and Appraisal Reports to include (1) consideration of the appropriate regional water supply plan, and (2) an evaluation of whether past reductions in land use densities in coastal high hazard areas have impaired property rights of current residents where redevelopment occurs. 163 - 3191(2)(1) There are no CHHA's in Okeechobee. This EAR addresses this issue. 128 Allowed local governments to establish a special master process to assist the local governments with challenges to local development orders for consistency with the comprehensive plan. 163.3215 Procedural 129 Created the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program to allow less state and regional oversight of comprehensive plan process if the local government meets certain criteria. 163.3246 Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -17 Appendices 130 Added a provision to Section 380.06(24), Statutory Exemptions, that exempts from the requirements for developments of regional impact, any water port or marina development if the relevant local government has adopted a "boating facility siting plan or policy" (which includes certain specified criteria) as part of the coastal management element or future land use element of its comprehensive plan. The adoption of the boating facility siting plan or policy is exempt from the limitation on the frequency of plan amendments contained in s.163.3187(1). 163.3187(1) The Future Land Use Element will be amended to be consistent with this statute. 131 Prohibited a local government, under certain conditions, from denying an application for development approval for a requested land use for certain proposed solid waste management facilities. 163.3194(6) Procedural 2003: [Ch. 03 -1, ss. 14 -15; Ch. 03 -162, s. 1; Ch. 03 -261, s. 158; Ch. 03 -286, s. 61, Laws of Florida.] 132 Creates the Agricultural Lands and Practices Act. 163.3162 [New] (2): Provides legislative findings and purpose with respect to agricultural activities and duplicative regulation. Procedural (3): Defines the terms "farm," "farm operation," and "farm product" for purposes of the act. Procedural (4): Prohibits a county from adopting any ordinance, resolution, regulation, rule, or policy to prohibit or otherwise limit a bona fide farm operation on land that is classified as agricultural land. Procedural (4)(a): Provides that the act does not limit the powers of a county under certain circumstances. Procedural (4)(b): Clarifies that a farm operation may not expand its operations under certain circumstances. Procedural (4)(c): Provides that the act does not limit the powers of certain counties. Procedural _ (4)(d): Provides that certain county ordinances are not deemed to be a duplication of regulation. Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -18 Appendices 133 Changes "State Comptroller" references to "Chief Financial Officer." 163.3167(6) Procedural 134 Provides for certain airports to abandon DRI orders. 163.3177(6)(k) Not applicable. 135 Throughout s.163.3177, F.S., citations for Ch. 235, F.S., are changed to cite the appropriate section of Ch. 1013, F.S. 163.31776 Procedural 136 Throughout 5.163.31777, F.S., citations for Ch. 235, F.S., are changed to cite the appropriate section of Ch. 1013, F.S. 163.31777 Procedural 2004: [Ch. 04 -5, s. 11; Ch. 04 -37, s. 1; Ch. 04 -230, ss. 1 -4; Ch. 04 -372, ss. 2 -5; Ch. 04 -381, ss. 1 -2; Ch. 04 -384, s. 2, Laws of Florida.) 137 (10): Amended to conform to the repeal of the Florida High -Speed Rail Transportation Act, and the creation of the Florida High -Speed Rail Authority Act. 163.3167 Procedural (13): Created to require local governments to identify adequate water supply sources to meet future demand for the established planning period. The City is in the process of developing a 10 -Year facilities water supply plan. (14): Created to limit the effect of judicial determinations issued subsequent to certain development orders pursuant to adopted land development regulations. Procedural 138 (1): Provides legislative findings on the compatibility of development with military installations. Creates 163.3175 Procedural . (2): Provides for the exchange of information relating to proposed land use decisions between counties and local governments and military installations. There are no military sites in the City. (3): Provides for responsive comments by the commanding officer or his /her designee. Procedural (4): Provides for the county or affected local government to take such comments into consideration. Procedural (5): Requires the representative of the military installation to be an ex- officio, nonvoting member of the county's or local government's land planning Not applicable. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -19 pees Draft: June 3, 2010 A -20 or zoning board. (6): Encourages the commanding officer to provide information on community planning assistance grants. Procedural 139 (6)(a): Changed to require local governments to amend the future land use element by June 30, 2006 to include criteria to achieve compatibility with military installations. 163.3177 The City will amend the Plan to include the provisions set forth in this statute if a military installation is proposed in the City. Changed to encourage rural land stewardship area designation as an overlay on the future land use map. This City shall consider whether the rural land stewardship program is beneficial to its residents. (6)(c): Extended the deadline adoption of the water supply facilities work plan amendment until December 1, 2006; provided for updating the work plan every five years; and exempts such amendment from the limitation on frequency of adoption of amendments. Procedural (10)(1): Provides for the coordination by the state land planning agency and the Department of Defense on compatibility issues for military installations. - Procedural (11)(d)1.: Requires DCA, in cooperation with other specified state agencies, to provide assistance to local governments in implementing provisions relating to rural land stewardship areas. Procedural (11)(d)2.: Provides for multi- county rural land stewardship areas. Procedural (11)(d)3. -4: Revises requirements, including the acreage threshold for designating a rural land stewardship area. Procedural (11)(d)6.j.: Provides that transferable rural land use credits may be assigned at different ratios according to the natural resource or other beneficial use characteristics of the land. Procedural (11)(e): Provides legislative findings regarding Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -20 dices Draft: June 3, 2010 A -21 mixed -use, high- density urban infill and redevelopment projects; requires DCA to provide technical assistance to local governments. (11)(f): Provides legislative findings regarding a program for the transfer of development rights and urban infill and redevelopment; requires DCA to provide technical assistance to local governments. Procedural 140 (1): Provides legislative findings with respect to the shortage of affordable rentals in the state. Creates 163.31771 Procedural (2): Provides definitions. Procedural (3): Authorizes local governments to permit accessory dwelling units in areas zoned for single family residential use based upon certain findings. Procedural (4) An application for a building permit to construct an accessory dwelling unit must include an affidavit from the applicant, which attests that the unit will be rented at an affordable rate to a very -low- income, low- income, or moderate - income person or persons. Procedural (5): Provides for certain accessory dwelling units to apply towards satisfying the affordable housing component of the housing element in a local government's comprehensive plan. Procedural (6): Requires the DCA to report to the Legislature. Procedural 141 Amends the definition of "in compliance" to add language referring to the Wekiva Parkway and Protection Act. 163.3184(1)(b) Procedural 142 (1)(m): Created to provide that amendments to address criteria or compatibility of and uses adjacent to or in close proximity to military installations do not count toward the limitation on frequency of amending comprehensive plans. 163.3187 Procedural (1)(n): Created to provide that amendments to establish or implement a rural and stewardship area do not count toward the limitation on frequency of amending comprehensive plans. Procedural 143 Created to provide that evaluation and appraisal 163.3191(2)(n) Not Draft: June 3, 2010 A -21 Appendices Draft: June 3, 2010 A -22 reports evaluate whether criteria in the land use element were successful in achieving land use compatibility with military installations. applicable. 2005 [Ch. 2005 -157, ss 1, 2 and 15; Ch. 2005 -290; and Ch. 2005 -291, ss. 10 -12, Laws of Florida] 144 Added the definition of "financial feasibility." 163.3164(32) [New] Procedural 145 (2): Required comprehensive plans to be "financially" rather than "economically" feasible. 163.3177 The Plan will be amended to ensure financial feasibility and this financial feasibility has been demonstrated in this EAR. (3)(a)5.: Required the comprehensive plan to include a 5 -year schedule of capital improvements. Outside funding (i.e., from developer, other government or funding pursuant to referendum) of these capital improvements must be guaranteed in the form of a development agreement or interlocal agreement. CIE Policy 1.4 (3)(a)6.b.1.: Required plan amendment for the annual update of the schedule of capital improvements. Deleted provision allowing updates and change in the date of construction to be accomplished by ordinance. CIE Policy 4.3 (3)(a)6.c.: Added oversight and penalty provision for failure to adhere to this section's capital improvements requirements. Procedural (3)(a)6.d.: Required a long -term capital improvement schedule if the local government has adopted a long -term concurrency management system. Not applicable, no long -term CMS. (6)(a): Deleted date (October 1, 1999) by which school sitting requirements must be adopted. Procedural (6)(a): Requires the future and use element to be based upon the availability of water supplies (in addition to public water facilities). FLUE Objective 1 (6)(a): Add requirement that future land use element of coastal counties must encourage the preservation of working waterfronts, as defined in Not applicable. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -22 r Draft: June 3, 2010 A -23 s.342.07, F.S. (6)(c): Required the potable water element to be updated within 18 months of an updated regional water supply plan to incorporate the alternative water supply projects and traditional water supply projects and conservation and reuse selected by the local government to meet its projected water supply needs. The ten -year water supply work plan must include public, private and regional water supply facilities, including development of alternative water supplies. Such amendments do not count toward the limitation on the frequency of adoption of amendments. The City is currently developing it water supply plan. The Element will need to be amended. (6)(e): Added waterways to the system of sites addressed by the recreation and open space element. The Recreation Open Space Element will need to be revised to include such provisions. (6)(h)1.: The intergovernmental coordination element must address coordination with regional water supply authorities. The ICE will need to be amended. (11)(d)4.c.: Required rural land stewardship areas to address affordable housing. Procedural (11)(d)5.: Required a listed species survey be performed on rural land stewardship receiving area. If any listed species present, must ensure adequate provisions to protect them. Procedural (11)(d)6.: Must enact an ordinance establishing a methodology for creation, conveyance, and use of stewardship credits within a rural land stewardship area. Procedural (11)(d)6.j.: Revised to allow open space and agricultural land to be just as important as environmentally sensitive land when assigning stewardship credits. Procedural (12): Must adopt public school facilities element. The City has completed a PSFE. (12)(a) and (b): A waiver from providing this Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -23 Draft: June 3, 2010 A -24 element will be allowed under certain circumstances. (12)(g): Expanded list of items to be to include collocation, location of schools proximate to residential areas, and use of schools as emergency shelters. ICE Policy 5.5 (12)(h): Required local governments to provide maps depicting the general location of new schools and school improvements within future conditions maps. Public School Facilities Element (12)(i): Required DCA to establish a schedule for adoption of the public school facilities element. Procedural (12)(j): Established penalty for failure to adopt a public school facility element. Procedural (13): (New section) Encourages local governments to develop a "community vision," which provides for sustainable growth, recognizes its fiscal constraints, and protects its natural resources. The City will consider developing a Community Vision. (14): (New section) Encourages local governments to develop an "urban service boundary," which ensures the area is served (or will be served) with adequate public facilities and services over the next 10 years. See s. 163.3184(17). The City will evaluate whether an urban service boundary is desirable. 146 163.31776 is repealed 163.31776 [Now: Repealed] Procedural 147 (2): Required the public schools interlocal agreement (if applicable) to address requirements for school concurrency. The opt -out provision at the end of Subsection (2) is deleted. 163.31777 Procedural. The City will review the Interlocal Agreement and amend it if necessary to address school concurrency. (5): Required Palm Beach County to identify, as part of its EAR, changes needed in its public school element necessary to conform to the new 2005 public school facilities element requirements. Not applicable. (7): Provided that counties exempted from public school facilities element shall undergo re- evaluation as part of its EAR to determine if they continue to meet exemption criteria. Not applicable. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -24 Appendices 148 (2)(g): Expands requirement of coastal element to include strategies that will be used to preserve recreational and commercial working waterfronts, as defined in s.342,07, F.S. 163.3178 Not applicable. 149 (1)(a): Added "schools" as a required concurrency item. 163.3180 Procedural (2)(a): Required consultation with water supplier prior to issuing building permit to ensure "adequate water supplies" to serve new development will be available by the date of issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Etc. Element will be amended to address this issue. (2)(c): Required all transportation facilities to be in place or under construction within 3 years (rather than 5 years) after approval of building permit. The Traffic Circulation Element will be amended to meet this requirement. (4)(c): The concurrency requirement, except as it relates to transportation and public schools, may be waived in urban infill and redevelopment areas. The waiver shall be adopted as a plan amendment . A local government may grant a concurrency exception pursuant to subsection Procedural (5) for transportation facilities located within an urban infill and redevelopment area. (5)(d): Required guidelines for granting concurrency exceptions to be included in the comprehensive plan. Procedural (5)(e) — (g): If local government has established transportation exceptions, the guidelines for implementing the exceptions must be "consistent with and support a comprehensive strategy, and promote the purpose of the exceptions." Exception areas must include mobility strategies, such as alternate modes of transportation, supported by data and analysis. FDOT must be consulted prior to designating a transportation concurrency exception area. Transportation concurrency exception areas existing prior to July 1, 2005 must meet these requirements by July 1, 2006, or when In the event that the City establishes exemptions, the guidelines will meet all the requirements set forth in this statute. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -25 Draft: June 3, 2010 A -26 the EAR -based amendment is adopted, whichever occurs last. (6): Required local government to maintain records to determine whether 110% de minimis transportation impact threshold is reached. A summary of these records must be submitted with the annual capital improvements element update. Exceeding the 110% threshold dissolves the de minimis exceptions. If the City determines that any impacts are de minimus, it will maintain and submit all the required documentation. (7): Required consultation with the Department of Transportation prior to designating a transportation concurrency management area (to promote infill development) to ensure adequate level -of- service standards are in place. The local government and the DOT should work together to mitigate any impacts to the Strategic Intermodal System. If the City implements a TCMA, the Plan will be amended to ensure compliance with this statute. (9)(a): Allowed adoption of a long -term concurrency management system for schools. Procedural (9)(c): (New section) Allowed local governments to issue approvals to commence construction notwithstanding s. 163.3180 in areas subject to a long -term concurrency management system. Procedural (9)(d): (New section) Required evaluation in Evaluation and Appraisal Report of progress in improving levels of service. This EAR will evaluate progress in improving LOS. (10): Added requirement that level of service standard for roadway facilities on the Strategic Intermodal System must be consistent with FDOT standards. Standards must consider compatibility with adjacent jurisdictions. Traffic Circulation Element Policy 7.1 (13): Required school concurrency (not optional). CIE Policy 2.1 (13)(c)1.: Requires school concurrency after five years to be applied on a "less than districtwide basis" (i.e., by using school attendance zones, etc). Public School Facilities Element (13)(c)2.: Eliminated exemption from plan amendment adoption limitation for changes to Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -26 Appendices Draft: June 3, 2010 A -27 service area boundaries. (13)(c)3.: No application for development approval may be denied if a less- than - districtwide measurement of school concurrency is used; however the development impacts must to shifted to contiguous service areas with school capacity. Procedural (13)(e): Allowed school concurrency to be satisfied if a developer executes a legally binding commitment to provide mitigation proportionate to the demand. Procedural (13)(e)1.: Enumerated mitigation options for achieving proportionate -share mitigation. Capital Improvements Element (13)(e)2.: If educational facilities funded in one of the two following ways, the local government must credit this amount toward any impact fee or exaction imposed on the community: contribution of land construction, expansion, or payment for land acquisition Public School Facilities Element (13)(g)2.: (Section deleted) — It is no longer required that a local government and school board base their plans on consistent population projection and share information regarding planned public school facilities, development and redevelopment and infrastructure needs of public school facilities. However, see (13) (g)6.a. for similar requirement. Procedural (13)(g)6.a.: [Formerly (13)(g)7.a.) Local governments must establish a uniform procedure for determining if development applications are in compliance with school concurrency Capital Improvements Element and Public School Facilities Element (13)(g)7. [Formerly (13)(g)8.] Deleted language that allowed local government to terminate or suspend an interlocal agreement with the school board. Procedural (13)(h): (New 2005 provision) The fact that school concurrency has not yet been implemented by a local government should not be the basis for either an approval or denial of a development permit Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -27 Appemdices Draft: June 3, 2010 A -28 (15): Prior to adopting Multimodal Transportation Districts, FDOT must be consulted to assess the impact on level of service standards. If impacts are found, the local government and the FDOT must work together to mitigate those impacts. Multimodal districts established prior to July 1, 2005 must meet this requirement by July 1, 2006 or at the time of the EAR -base amendment, whichever occurs last. Procedural (16): (New 2005 section) Required local governments to adopt by December 1, 2006 a method for assessing proportionate fair -share mitigation options. FDOT will develop a model ordinance by December 1, 2005. The CIE will need to be amended to address this issue. 150 (17): (New 2005 section) If local government has adopted a community vision and urban service boundary, state and regional agency review is eliminated for plan amendments affecting property within the urban service boundary. Such amendments are exempt from the limitation on the frequency of plan amendments. 163.3184 [New] Procedural (18): (New 2005 section) If a municipality has adopted an urban infill and redevelopment area, state and regional agency review is eliminated for plan amendments affecting property within the urban service boundary. Such amendments are exempt from the limitation on the frequency of plan amendments. Procedural 151 (1)(c)1.f.: Allowed approval of residential land use as a small -scale development amendment when the proposed density is equal to or less than the existing future land use category. Under certain circumstances, affordable housing units are exempt from this limitation. 163.3187 Procedural (1)(c)4.: (New 2005 provision) If the small -scale development amendment involves a rural area of critical economic concern, a 20 -acre limit applies. [New] Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -28 Appendim Draft: June 3, 2010 A -29 (1)(o): (New 2005 provision) An amendment to a rural area of critical economic concern may be approved without regard to the statutory limit on comprehensive plan amendments. [New] Procedural 152 (2)(k): Required local governments that do not have either a school interlocal agreement or a public school facilities element, to determine in the Evaluation and Appraisal Report whether the local government continues to meet the exemption criteria in s.163.3177(12). 163.3191 The City has an Interlocal Agreement with the Okeechobee County School Board and a PSFE . (2)(I): The Evaluation and Appraisal Report must determine whether the local government has been successful in identifying alternative water supply projects, including conservation and reuse, needed to meet projected demand. Also, the Report must identify the degree to which the local government has implemented its 10 -year water supply workplan. [New] This EAR evaluates this requirement and the City is in the process of developing its 10 -Year Water Supply Plan. (2)(o): (New 2005 provision) The Evaluation and Appraisal Report must evaluate whether any Multimodal Transportation District has achieved the purpose for which it was created. [New] No Multimodal Transportation District has been created. (2)(p): (New 2005 provision) The Evaluation and Appraisal Report must assess methodology for impacts on transportation facilities. This EAR addresses this statute. (10): The Evaluation and Appraisal Report -based amendment must be adopted within a single amendment cycle. Failure to adopt within this cycle results in penalties. Once updated, the comprehensive plan must be submitted to the DCA. The EAR -based Amendment will be adopted in accordance with the requirements of this statute. 153 (10) New section designating Freeport as a certified community. (11) New section exempting proposed DRIs within Freeport from review under s.380.06, F.S., unless review is requested by the local government. 163.3246 [New] Not applicable. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -29 2006 [Ch. 2006 -68, Ch. 2006 -69, Ch. 2006 -220, Ch. 2006 -252, Ch. 2006 -255, Ch. 2006 -268, Laws of Florida] 154 Establishes plan amendment procedures for agricultural enclaves as defined in s.163.3164(33), F.S. Ch. 2006 -255, LOF. 163.3162(5) [New] Procedural 155 Defines agricultural enclave. Ch. 2006 -255, LOF. 163.3164(33) [New] Procedural 156 (6)(g)2.: Adds new paragraph encouraging local governments with a coastal management element to adopt recreational surface water use policies; such adoption amendment is exempt from the twice per year limitation on the frequency of plan amendment adoptions. Ch. 2006 -220, LOF. 163.3177(6)(g)2. [New] Procedural 157 Allows the effect of a proposed receiving area to be considered when projecting the 25 -year or greater population with a rural land stewardship area. Ch. 2006 -220, LOF. 163.3177(11)(d)6. Procedural 158 Recognizes "extremely -low- income persons" as another income groups whose housing needs might be addressed by accessory dwelling units and defines such persons consistent with 5.420.0004(8), F.S. Ch. 2006 -69, LOF. 163.31771(1), (2) and (4) Procedural 159 Assigns to the Division of Emergency Management the responsibility of ensuring the preparation of updated regional hurricane evacuation plans. Ch. 2006 -68, LOF. 163.3178(2)(d) Procedural 160 Changes the definition of the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA) to be the area below the elevation of the category 1 storm surge line as established by the SLOSH model. Ch. 2006 -68, LOF. 163.3178(2)(h) Procedural 161 Adds a new section allowing a local government to comply with the requirement that its comprehensive plan direct population concentrations away from the CHHA and maintains or reduces hurricane evacuation times by maintaining an adopted LOS Standard for out -of- county hurricane evacuation for a category 5 storm, by maintaining a 12 -hour hurricane evacuation time or by providing mitigation that 163.3178(9)(a) [New] Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -30 Ap en s Draft: June 3, 2010 A -31 satisfies these two requirements. Ch. 2006 -68, LOF. 162 Adds a new section establishing a level of service for out -of- county hurricane evacuation of no greater than 16 hours for a category 5 storm for any local government that wishes to follow the process in s.163.3178(9)(a) but has not established such a level of service by July 1, 2008. Ch. 2006 -68, LO F. 163.3178(9)(b) [New] Procedural 163 Requires local governments to amend their Future Land Use Map and coastal management element to include the new definition of the CHHA, and to depict the CHHA on the FLUM by July 1, 2008. Ch. 2006 -68, LOF. 163.3178(2)(c) No action needed. Not applicable. 164 Allows the sanitary sewer concurrency requirement to be met by onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems approved by the Department of Health. Ch. 2006 -252, LOF. 163.3180(2)(a) Procedural 165 Changes s.380.0651(3)(i) to s.380.0651(3)(h) as the citation for the standards a multiuse DRI must meet or exceed. Ch. 2006 -220, LOF. 163.3180(12)(a) Procedural 166 Deletes use of extended use agreement as part of the definition of small scale amendment. Ch. 2006- 69, LOF. 163.3187(1)(c)1.f. Procedural 167 Creates a new section related to electric distribution substations; establishes criteria addressing land use compatibility of substations; requires local governments to permit substations in all FLUM categories (except preservation, conservation or historic preservation); establishes compatibility standards to be used if a local government has not established such standards; establishes procedures for the review of applications for the location of a new substation; allows local governments to enact reasonable setback and landscape buffer standards for substations. Ch. 2006 -268, LOF. 163.3208 [New] Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -31 Appendim 168 Creates a new section preventing a local government from requiring for a permit or other approval vegetation maintenance and tree pruning or trimming within an established electric transmission and distribution line right -of -way. Ch. 2006 -268, LOF. 163.3209 [New] Procedural 169 Community Workforce Housing Innovation Pilot Program; created by Ch. 2006 -69, LOF, section 27. Establishes a special, expedited adoption process for any plan amendment that implements a pilot program project. New Procedural 170 Affordable housing and donation density incentive bonus; created by Ch. 2006 -69, LOF, section 28. Allows a density bonus for land donated to a local government to provide affordable housing; requires adoption of a plan amendment for any such land; such amendment may be adopted as a small -scale amendment; such amendment is exempt from the twice per year limitation on the frequency of plan amendment adoptions. New Procedural 2007 Ch. 2007 -196, Ch. 2007 -198, Ch. 2007 -204, Laws of Florida] 171 (26) Expands the definition of "urban redevelopment" to include a community redevelopment area. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. 163.3164 Procedural (32) Revises the definition of "financial feasibility" by clarifying that the plan is financially feasibility for transportation and schools if level of service standards are achieved and maintained by the end of the planning period even if in a particular year such standards are not achieved. In addition, the provision that level of service standards need not be maintained if the proportionate fair share process in s.163.3180(12) and (16), F.S., is used is deleted. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. Procedural 172 2) Clarifies that financial feasibility is determined using a five -year period (except in the case of long- term transportation or school concurrency 163.3177 Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -32 Ap en cos Draft: June 3, 2010 A -33 management, in which case a 10 or 15 -year period applies). Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. (3)(a)6. Revises the citation to the MPO's TIP and long -range transportation plan. Ch. 2007 -196, LOF New Procedural (3)(b)1. Requires an annual update to the Five -Year Schedule of Capital Improvements to be submitted by December 1, 2008 and yearly thereafter. If this date is missed, no amendments are allowed until the update is adopted. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. Procedural. The City will comply with this requirement. (3)(c) Deletes the requirement that the Department must notify the Administration Commission if an annual update to the capital improvements element is found not in compliance (retained is the requirement that notification must take place is the annual update is not adopted). Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. Procedural (3)(e) Provides that a comprehensive plan as revised by an amendment to the future land use map is financially feasible if it is supported by (1) a condition in a development order for a development of regional impact or binding agreement that addresses proportionate share mitigation consistent with s.163.3180(12), F.S., or (2) a binding agreement addressing proportionate fair -share mitigation consistent,with s.163.3180(16)(f), F.S., and the property is located in an urban infill, urban redevelopment, downtown revitalization, urban infill and redevelopment or urban service area. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. Procedural (6)(f)1.d. Revises the housing element requirements to ensure adequate sites for affordable workforce housing within certain counties. Ch. 2007 -198, LOF. No action needed. (6)h. and i. Requires certain counties to adopt a plan for ensuring affordable workforce housing by July 1, 2008 and provides a penalty if this date is missed. Ch. 2007 -198, LOF. Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -33 Appendices 173 (4)(b) Expands transportation concurrency exceptions to include airport facilities. Ch. 2007- 204, LOF. 163.3180 Procedural (5)(b)5 Adds specifically designated urban service areas to the list of transportation concurrency exception areas. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. Procedural (5)(f) Requires consultation with the state land planning agency regarding mitigation of impacts on Strategic Intermodal System facilities prior to establishing a concurrency exception area. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. [New] Procedural (12) and (12)(a) Deletes the requirement that the comprehensive plan must authorize a development of regional impact to satisfy concurrency under certain conditions. Also, deletes the requirement that the development of regional impact must include a residential component to satisfy concurrency under the conditions listed. Ch. 2007- 204, LOF. Procedural (12)(d) Clarifies that any proportionate -share mitigation by development of regional impact, Florida Quality Development and specific area plan implementing an optional sector plan is not responsible for reducing or eliminating backlogs. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. Procedural (13)(e)4. A development precluded from commencing because of school concurrency may nevertheless commence if certain conditions are met. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. Procedural (16)(c) and (f) Allows proportionate fair -share mitigation to be directed to one or more specific transportation improvement. Clarifies that such mitigation is not to be used to address backlogs. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. [New] Procedural (17) Allows an exempt from concurrency for certain workforce housing developed consistent with s.380.061(9) and s.380.0651(3). Ch. 2007- [New] Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -34 Appendices Draft: June 3, 2010 A -35 198, LOF. 174 Allows a local government to establish a transportation concurrency backlog authority to address deficiencies where existing traffic volume exceeds the adopted level of service standard. Defines the powers of the authority to include tax increment financing and requires the preparation of transportation concurrency backlog plans. Ch. 2007 -196, LOF and Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. 163.3182 [New] Procedural 175 Allows plan amendments that address certain housing requirements to be expedited under certain circumstances. Ch. 2007 -198, LOF. 163.3184(19) [New] Procedural 176 Exempts from the twice per year limitation on the frequency of adoption of plan amendments any amendment that is consistent with the local housing incentive strategy consistent with s.420.9076. Ch. 2007 -198, LOF. 163.3187(1)(p) [New] Procedural 177 Add an amendment to integrate a port master plan into the coastal management element as an exemption to the prohibition in ss.163.3191(10). Ch. 2007 -196, LOF and Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. 163.3191(14) [New] Procedural 178 Extends the duration of a development agreement from 10 to 20 years. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. 163.3229 Procedural 179 Establishes an alternative state review process pilot program in Jacksonville /Duval, Miami, Tampa, Hialeah, Pinellas and Broward to encourage urban infill and redevelopment. Ch. 2007 -204, LOF. 163.32465 [New] Procedural 180 If a property owner contributes right -of -way and expands a state transportation facility, such contribution may be applied as a credit against any future transportation concurrency requirement. Ch. 2007 -196, LOF. 339.282 [New} Procedural 181 Establishes an expedited plan amendment adoption process for amendments that implement the Community Workforce Housing Innovation Pilot Program and exempts such amendments from the twice per year limitation on the frequency of 420.5095(9) Procedural Draft: June 3, 2010 A -35 Appen adoption of plan amendments. Ch. 2007 -198, LOF. 2008 Ch. 2008 -191 and Ch. 2008 -227, Laws of Florida] 182 The future land use plan must discourage urban sprawl. Ch. 2008 -191, LOF. 163.3177(6)(a) Future Land Use Element Objective 12 183 The future land use plan must be based upon energy- efficient and use patterns accounting for existing and future energy electric power generation and transmission systems. Ch. 2008- 191, LOF. 163.3177(6)(a) The Future Land Use Element will be amended to address this requirement. 184 The future and use plan must be based upon greenhouse gas reduction strategies. Ch. 2008- 191, LOF. 163.3177(6)(a) The Future Land Use Element will be amended to address this requirement. 185 The traffic circulation element must include transportation strategies to address reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Ch. 2008 -191, LOF. 163.3177(6)(b) The Traffic Circulation Element will be amended to address this requirement. 186 The conservation element must include factors that affect energy conservation. Ch. 2008 -191, LOF. 163.3177(6)(d) The Conservation Element will be amended to address this requirement. 187 The future land use map series must depict energy conservation. Ch. 2008 -191, LOF. 163.3177(6)(d) The Future Land Use Element will be amended to address this requirement. 188 The housing element must include standards, plans and principles to be followed in energy efficiency in the design and construction of new housing and in the use of renewable energy resources. Ch. 2008- 191, LOF. 163.3177(6)(f)1.h. and i. The Housing Element will be amended to reflect this requirement. 189 Local governments within an MPO area must revise their transportation element to include strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Ch. 2008- 191, LOF. 163.3177(6)(j) Not applicable. 190 Various changes were made in the State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, F.S.) that address low- carbon - emitting electric power plants. See Section 5 of Chapter 2008 -227, LOF. State Comprehensive Plan Procedural. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -36 Appendix B: Changes to Rule 9J -5 Appendices Changes to Rule 9J -5, F.A.C. 1989 -2003 9J -5, F.A.C. Citations NA Addressed (where /how) Amendment Needed By Element March 21, 1999 55 Defined public transit and stormwater management facilities 91 -5.003 Procedural. 56 Revised the definitions of affordable housing, coastal planning area, port facility, and wetlands. 91 -5.003 Procedural. 57 Repeal the definitions of adjusted for family size, adjusted gross income, development, high recharge area or prime recharge area, mass transit, paratransit, public facilities, very low - income family. 9J -5.003 Procedural. 58 Revised provisions relating to adoption by reference into the local comprehensive plan. 9J- 5.005(2)(g) and (8)(j) Procedural. 59 Repealed transmittal requirements for proposed evaluation and appraisal reports, submittal requirements for adopted evaluation and appraisal reports, criteria for determining the sufficiency of adopted evaluation and appraisal reports, procedures for adoption of evaluation and appraisal reports. Note: transmittal requirements for proposed evaluation and appraisal reports and submittal requirements for adopted evaluation and appraisal reports were incorporated Rule Chapter 9J -11, F.A.C. 91- 5.0053(2) through (5) Procedural. 60 Repealed conditions for de minimis impact and referenced conditions in subsection 163.3180(6), F.S. 9J- 5.0055(3)6 Procedural. 61 Required the future and use map to show the transportation concurrency exception area boundaries of such areas have been designated and areas for possible future municipal incorporation. 9J- 5.006(4) Not applicable, no TCMA. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -37 62 Required objectives of the Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Stormwater Management, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element to address protection of high recharge and prime recharge areas. 91- 5.011(2) Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Etc., Objective 9 63 Repealed the Intergovernmental Coordination Element process to determine if development proposals would have significant impacts on other local governments or state or regional resources or facilities, and provisions relating to resolution of disputes, modification of development orders, and the rendering of development orders to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) 9J- 5.015(4) Procedural. 64 Clarified that local governments not located within the urban area of a Metropolitan Planning Organization are required to adopt a Traffic Circulation Element and that local governments with a population of 50,000 or less are not required to prepare Mass Transit and Ports, Aviation and Related Facilities Elements. 9J- 5.019(1) The Comprehensive Plan contains a Traffic Circulation Element. 65 Required objectives of the Transportation Element to 9J- 5.019(4)(b) • Coordination the siting of new, or expansion of existing ports, airports, or related facilities with the Future Land Use, Coastal Management, and Conservation Elements; No action needed. • Coordination surface transportation access to ports, airports, and related facilities with the traffic circulation system; No action needed. • Coordination ports, airports, and related facilities plans with plans of other transportation providers; and No action needed. • Ensure that access routes to ports, airports and related facilities are properly integrated with other modes of transportation. No action needed. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -38 Appen tin 66 Required policies of the Transportation Element to: 91- 5.019(4)(c) • Provide for safe and convenient on -site traffic flow Traffic Circulation Objective 1 and corresponding policies. • Establish measures for the acquisition and preservation of public transit rights -of -way and corridors; Traffic Circulation Element Policy 2.3 • Promote ports, airports and related facilities development and expansion No action needed. • Mitigate adverse structural and non- structural impacts from ports, airports and related No ports within the City. • Protect and conserve natural resources within ports, airports and related facilities; No ports within the City. • Coordinate intermodal management of surface and water transportation within ports, airports and related facilities; and No ports within the City. • Protect ports, airports and related facilities from encroachment of incompatible land uses No.ports within the City. 67 Added standards for the review of land development regulations by the Department. 9J -5.022 Procedural. 68 Added criteria for determining consistency of land development regulations with the comprehensive plan. 9J -5.023 Procedural. February 25, 2001 69 Defined general lanes 9J -5.003 Procedural. 70 Revised the definition of "marine wetlands." 91 -5.003 Procedural. 71 Repeal the definition of "public facilities and services." 91 -5.003 Procedural. 72 Revised procedures for monitoring, evaluating and appraising implementation of local comprehensive plans. 91- 5.005(7) Procedural. 73 Repealed requirements for evaluation and appraisal reports and evaluation and appraisal 91- 5.0053 Procedural. Draft: June 3, 2010 A -39 Draft: June 3, 2010 A-40 amendments. 74 Revised concurrency management system requirements to include provisions for establishment of public school concurrency. 9J- 5.005(1) and (2) Concurrency Management System 75 Authorized local governments to establish multimodal transportation level of service standards and established requirements for multimodal transportation districts. 9J- 5.0055(2) (b) and (3)(c) N/A no districts in the City. Procedural 76 Authorized local governments to establish level of service standards for general lanes of the Florida Intrastate Highway System within urbanized areas, with the concurrence of the Department of Transportation. 9J- 5.0055(2)(c) Traffic Circulation Element Policy 7.1 77 Provide that public transit facilities are not subject to concurrency requirements. 9J- 5.0055(8) Procedural. 78 Authorized local comprehensive plans to permit multi -use developments of regional impact to satisfy the transportation concurrency requirements by payment of a proportionate share contribution. 9J- 5.0055(9) Procedural. 79 Required the future land use map to show multimodal transportation district boundaries, if established. 9J- 5.006(4) Voluntary, no district established. 80 Authorized local governments to establish multimodal transportation districts and, if established, required local governments to establish design standards for such districts. 9J- 5.006(6) Voluntary, no district established. 81 Required data for the Housing Element include a description of substandard dwelling units and repealed the requirement that the housing inventory include a locally determined definition of standard and substandard housing conditions. 91- 5.010(1)(c) Data and analysis will reflect an updated description of substandard dwelling units. 82 Authorized local governments to supplement the affordable housing needs assessment with locally generated data and repealed the authorization for local governments to conduct 9J- 5.10(2)(b) The City uses data generated from the affordable housing needs assessment in this Draft: June 3, 2010 A-40 Draft: June 3, 2010 A-41 their own assessment. EAR. 83 Required the Intergovernmental Coordination Element to include objectives that ensure adoption of interlocal agreements within one year of adoption of the amended Intergovernmental Coordination Element and ensure intergovernmental coordination between all affected local governments and the school board for the purpose of establishing requirements for public school concurrency. 9J- 5.015(3)(b) ICE Objective 5 and corresponding policies 84 Required the Intergovernmental Coordination Element to include: 9J- 5.015(3)(c) • Policies that provide procedures to identify and implement joint planning areas for purposes of annexation, municipal incorporation and joint infrastructure service areas; ICE Policy 6.6 • Recognize campus master plan and provide procedures for coordination of the campus master development agreement; ICE Policy 5.8 • Establish joint processes for collaborative planning and decision - making with other units of local government; ICE Objective 1 and corresponding policies • Establish joint processes for collaborative planning and decision making with the school board on population projections and siting of public school facilities; ICE Objective 1 and corresponding policies • Establish joint processes for the siting of facilities with county -wide significance; and ICE Objective 6 and corresponding policies. • Adoption of an interlocal agreement for school concurrenry. Interlocal Agreement has been signed. 85 Required the Capital Improvements Element to include implementation measures that provide a five -year financially feasible public school facilities program that demonstrates the adopted level of service standards will be achieved and maintained and a schedule of 9J- 5.016(4)(a) The City may be too small to justify a multimodal transportati The EAR will determine whether multimodal transportation systems are feasible. Draft: June 3, 2010 A-41 ............ App CeS Draft: June 3, 2010 A-42 capital improvements for multimodal transportation districts, if locally established. on system. 86 Required the Transportation Element analysis for multimodal transportation districts to demonstrate that community design elements will reduce vehicle miles of travel and support an integrated, multi -modal transportation system. 91- 5.019(3) The City may be too small to justify a multimodal transportati on system. The EAR will determine whether multimodal transportation systems are feasible. 87 Required Transportation Element objectives for multimodal transportation districts to address provision of a safe, comfortable and attractive pedestrian environment with convenient access to public transportation. 9J- 5.019(4) The City may be too small to justify a multimodal transportati on system. The EAR will determine whether multimodal transportation systems are feasible. 88 Authorized local governments to establish level of service standards for general lanes of the Florida Intrastate Highway System within urbanized areas, with the concurrence of the Department of Transportation. 9J- 5.019(4)(c) Traffic Circulation Element Policy 7.1 Draft: June 3, 2010 A-42 INDEPENDENT MINIES NEWSPAPERS OK FBA !GHEE MEWS J STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF OKEECHOBEE 10: S. )3 - 17th Street, Suite D, ?F.cecl Before the undersigned authority personally appeared Judy Kasten, who on oath says she is Advertising Director of the Okeechobee News, a three times a week Newspaper published at Okeechobee, in Okeechobee County, Flortida, that the attached copy of advertisement being a _ ; ? _sue (i ( L+�- (-E" In the matter of in the 19th Judicial District of the ircuit Court of Okeechobee County, Florida, was published in said newspaper in the issues of (I lt Affiant further says that the said Okeechobee News is a newspaper published at Okeechobee, in said Okeechobee County, Florida, and that said newspaper has heretofore been published continuously in said Okeechobee County, Florida each week and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Okeechobee, in said Okeechobee County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement, and affiant fur- ther says that she has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, com- mission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. f Judy Kasten Sworn to and subscribed before me this q �,Tt (- (.-_day of . t;� : l AD Notary Public, State of Florida at Large NOTARY PtmLIC -STATE OF FLORfr; _ Angie Bridges Commission #DD779713 Expires: APR. 20, 2012 BONDED THRU ATLANTIC BONDING CO., INC. b Fl 4 (863) 763 -3134 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT A PUBLIC HEARING w6 be held before the City of Okeechobee Planning Board as the Local Planning Agency on TharMay, June 17 2010 at 6 :00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, at City Hai, 55 SE 3rd Ave, Coundl Chambers, Rm 200, Okeechobee, Florida. The agenda Is available on the Wit, bdemenc t@dl�okedabee:wm, 863-763-3372 the 72 General 21.5ervkes Under consideration is the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the City's Comprehensive Plan to make a recommendab3n to the City Coundl AI members of the pubic are encouraged to attend and participate in said Hearing The entire petition may be Inspected during regular business hours, Mon -Fri, 8am-4:30pm, except for holidays. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE AND BE ADVISED that if any person desires to appeal anyy decision made by the Planning Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting, or hearing will need to ensure a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evi- dence upon whk:h the aaspepeal is to be based. General Services media are used for the sole wl h the Americans witty Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990npersrsons neer8ng spe- dal accommodation to participate in this proceeding should contad the General Services Office at 863-763-3372 for assistance. BY: Brian Whitehall, Zoning Administrator 356950 ON 6/9/10 AIDEPENDENT .441 ininiSi NEWSPAPERS oKCE('1IoBrr NG\Ns 107 5.61'. 17th Snort, Sulu D, 01.6 STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF OKEECHOBEE Before the undersigned authority personally appeared Judy Kasten, who on oath says she is Advertising Director of the Okeechobee News, a three times a week Newspaper published at Okeechobee, in Okeechobee County, Florida, that the attached copy of advertisement being a in the matter of in the 19th Judicial District of the Circuit Court of Okeechobee County, Florida, was published in said newspaper in the issues of 1 .__1...:� �1 _% • X 5.._...._. J.. _ 1.1 Affiant further says that the said Okeechobee News is a newspaper published at Okeechobee, in said Okeechobee County, Florida, and that said newspaper has heretofore been published continuously in said Okeechobee County, Florida each week and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Okeechobee, in said Okeechobee County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement, and affiant fur- ther says that she has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, com- mission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. r ? ( Judy Kasten Sworn to and subscribed before me this CI) _day of i - "� 1 `' AD Notary Public, State of Florida at Large - ACS / ' s NOTARY PIIBf.IC -STATE OF FLORIDA Angie Bridges Commission #DD779718 ,, Expires: APR. 20, 2012 BONUP 114141,1 ATLANTIC BONDING CO., INC. hubeu, FI (863) 763 -3134 PUBLIC NOTICE CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED SPECIAL EXCEPTION A PUBLIC HEARING will be held before the qty 01 Okeechobee Board of Adju Adjustment Appeals on Threaded, Luna 17 2010 at 6:00 p or as soon thereafter as possible, at City 14a1, 55 SE 3rd Ave, Coundi Chambers Rm 200, Okeechobee, Florida. The agenda is evadable on the City website www.dtyofdheediobee.cnm, or contact the General Services Department, aom 863 -763 -3372 x 218. Under consideration 5 Spedal Exception Petition No. 10- 003 -5E, submitted by Kevin McGinley for Sacred Heart Catholic holic Church, on behalf of property Bishop Gerald M. Ba bato, to allow a permtte d use to be in excess of ne feet height at 01 log (Ref. Property , located 9SW 6th Street. Legal: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Mod 250, First Addtbn to the Town of Okeecho- bee, according to the plat thereof on Men the once of the Clerk of Oranft Court along Okeechobee County, ryFlorida, for a point 01 beginning, thence run 1039.5 feet to the South right-of-way boundary�of Third a distance t thence West almig the South boundary of Third Street, extended, a distance of 502.86 feet, thence South on a line parallel m the Eastern boundary 00 said bad a distance of 1039.6 feet, thence East along North boundary of South Street a distance of 502.86 feet, to the point of beginning M mge�mbers of the public are a couraged to attend and participate n said hours, Mon The entire petition -Fri 8am4: m, rice t for holidays. during regular business The Board of Adjustment and Appeals serves as the dectslon mak' body judicial), on behalf 01 the Oily, to approve or deny Spedal Excep- PLEASE TAKE NOTICE AND BE ADVISED that 1 any person desires to appeal any dedsnn made by the Board of Adjustment and Appea ls with re- spect to any matter considered at this meeting, or hearnng will need to en- sure a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. General Services media are used for the sole purpose of back -up for the depart- ment, In accordance with the Americans with Diabetics Act (ADA) of 1990 persons needing special accommodation to participate In this proceeding should contact the General Services Office at 863. 763 -3372 for asslstancce. by: Brian Whftehat, Zoning Administrator Petition No. 10- 003 -SE 355772 ON 5/31;6/9/10